Jump to content
 

MRJ 276


micknich2003
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Premium

Thanks Queensquare. I too had really overestimated the size of the layout. It really manages to be spacious.

Thanks also to mdvle for the info on the Rails of Sheffield van. I obviously need to get up earlier if I want one!

And yes, the locoshed article is full of gems. I shall be rereading it before I start on any more buildings for Nantcwmdu.

However, each to his own. I took the magazine to the model railway club last night and one member was completely uninterested in the shed, just transfixed by the 9F. My thought had been that it was obscuring a better view of the shed!

Am still reading some of the other articles.

And I was caught out and didn't look for the issue until some time after it had arrived. Did iot actually get to Smiths on the published date?

Jonathan

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

But surely dominant is exactly what it ought to be?

 

Surely it depends on how you view things? Context is everything. The viaducts may dominate if you stand at the bottom and look at nothing else but if you put them against the land that surrounds them then they don't dominate at all, the land dominates and the railway looks almost little lost going through it. 

 

Justin

  • Agree 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

My comment was on the under-scale dimensions of the viaduct, rather than the number of arches, and was intended to be an observation on Settle & Carlisle viaduct models in general, not just this particular layout. Perhaps they're best done in 2 mm/ft scale...

 

I apologise for any offence I may have given in expressing a personal preference.

 

Certainly no offence taken, I just didn't agree with you!

 

As for placing the railway in the landscape being best done in 2mm, well that goes without saying......:-)

 

Jerry

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Railway modelling is about compromise.

.

There are those who compromise - and produce something.

.

There are those who don't - and produce nothing.

.

Having lit the blue touch paper, he withdraws to a place of safety.

.

Brian R

Edited by br2975
  • Like 5
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
7 hours ago, br2975 said:

Railway modelling is about compromise.

.

There are those who compromise - and produce something.

.

There are those who don't - and produce nothing.

.

Having lit the blue touch paper, he withdraws to a place of safety.

.

Brian R

Harsh but often the case.. Of course there are notable exceptions to the extent that this has been true and I’m sure even Guy Williams compromised on occasion..... Probably when he settled for one slice of toast rather than two for example ;)

 

Griff

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

This thread is a good illustration of why I seldom post photos of layouts or models. Somebody builds a super layout, full of atmosphere and with some great modelling.

 

The thing that gets talked about most on RMWeb is the arch he didn't put in the viaduct which nobody would have noticed if the author hadn't mentioned it in the article!

 

I can imagine the author checking RMWeb to see what people thought about the article and the layout and wishing they hadn't bothered writing it.

 

Which would be a shame as I thought it excellent and a worthy successor to the S & C modelling of David Jenkinson.

 

  • Like 10
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I have liberated a copy from the Titfield Thunderbolt stand at the Bristol '0' gauge show and had a quick flick through it and it looks to be an excellent edition, there seems to be a wide variety of subject matter to peruse.

 

PS, makes a change from Smiffs.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 26/01/2020 at 09:09, t-b-g said:

I can imagine the author checking RMWeb to see what people thought about the article and the layout and wishing they hadn't bothered writing it.

Well, some of us can ask him this evening at the club!

 

Edit - having said that, I doubt that he'd be particularly bothered, although I do appreciate what Compound was getting at (perhaps you are beginning to wish you'd not said anything now?! ;)).

 

I do think Ian's layout is one of the best evocations of the S&C that I've ever seen.

 

Having seen him regularly working on wagons at the club, I can testify to the lengths of detailing and accuracy he goes to in his work.

 

Edited by Captain Kernow
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
35 minutes ago, Captain Kernow said:

Well, some of us can ask him this evening at the club!

 

Edit - having said that, I doubt that he'd be particularly bothered, although I do appreciate what Compound was getting at (perhaps you are beginning to wish you'd not said anything now?! ;)).

 

I do think Ian's layout is one of the best evocations of the S&C that I've ever seen.

 

Having seen him regularly working on wagons at the club, I can testify to the lengths of detailing and accuracy he goes to in his work.

 

 

Please congratulate him on the layout and the article on my behalf. That photo with the signal box and the bothy is my favourite. Super attention to detail as you say.

 

i too can understand the situation over the viaduct. One layout I am involved with has a viaduct of similar length that has only 3 full arches and a part arch at each end where the ground comes up. The arches are scale size. A close up view of a train going over it looks better than the one on Dent but when you view it from a distance, 3 arches is not such an impressive structure to view as 9. Both are compromises to some extent if you want an impressive structure in a limited space but I find the one on Dent to be more visually appealing even if it is technically underscale. 

 

My comments were more aimed at the discussion about 9/10 arches than about the scale or span of the ones that are there.

 

And yes, I do sometimes regret posting on here! Not on this occasion though.

  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Jack Benson
On 23 January 2020 at 10:05, Enterprisingwestern said:

 

MRJ just arrived.

Yet again nothing of particular interest, but also yet again another great issue.

If you can't admire or learn something from MRJ you're in the wrong hobby IMHO.

 

Mike.

Or reading the wrong periodical, though the articles from Gerry Beale did stir some interest.

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
3 hours ago, Jack Benson said:

Or reading the wrong periodical, though the articles from Gerry Beale did stir some interest.

 

Cheers

 

I would disagree with that theory personally.

For me at least, I can learn something from most of the literature I read, be it railway related or not, although whether I remember it or not is an entirely different matter!, but each to their own.

 

Mike.

  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Jack Benson
40 minutes ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

 

I would disagree with that theory personally.

For me at least, I can learn something from most of the literature I read, be it railway related or not, although whether I remember it or not is an entirely different matter!, but each to their own.

 

Mike.

Mike,

 

Not a theory, simply a 'take it leave it' approach which applies all retail transactions. if the buyer does not enjoy the product, it is unlikely to be either purchased initially or subsequently and another periodical more suited to reader may/may not be purchased.

 

As you correctly stated "each to their own"

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

An interesting issue, all told, but...

On 23/01/2020 at 12:04, corneliuslundie said:

There are also rather too many typos,

Yes. It's a shame, but I am particularly looking forward to finding out more about the "55xx" pannier mentioned in the editorial...

  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
2 hours ago, Regularity said:

An interesting issue, all told, but...

Yes. It's a shame, but I am particularly looking forward to finding out more about the "55xx" pannier mentioned in the editorial...

Why not research it yourself, old chap, rather than waiting for someone to provide the information for you?

 

I'm certain the search for this loco will keep you out of trouble for a while.

 

  • Agree 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Captain Kernow said:

Why not research it yourself, old chap, rather than waiting for someone to provide the information for you?

 

I'm certain the search for this loco will keep you out of trouble for a while.

 

 

The mythical 55xx pannier tank...

 

https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/gwr/gwrw383.htm

 

it's on the internet, so it must be true :D

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 2
  • Funny 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Inn Anne eyedeal whirled wee wooden sea tiepoes, butt thongs aargh mist.

 

Rib. 

  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
5 hours ago, NHY 581 said:

Inn Anne eyedeal whirled wee wooden sea tiepoes, butt thongs aargh mist.

 

Rib. 

I misread the last words there:

”butt thongs are moist”.

 

Shame it wasn’t a typo!

Edited by Regularity
Butt thongs, not butt things.
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
3 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

See, Simon, you weren't quick enough. Someone else has gone and done the research for you! :P

 

 

And saved me the bother,too.

Sadly (for you) that means I will not be preoccupied with this search, and will be available to torment you.

Or not.

  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
3 hours ago, Regularity said:

I misread the last words there:

”butt things are moist”.

 

Shame it wasn’t a typo!

 

Should that have not read, 

 

' Shame it wasn't a typoo'

  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
2 hours ago, Regularity said:

And saved me the bother,too.

Sadly (for you) that means I will not be preoccupied with this search, and will be available to torment you.

Or not.

If you find yourself in Horrocksford tomorrow, you'll find that I am not there.

 

  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Captain Kernow said:

If you find yourself in Horrocksford tomorrow, you'll find that I am not there.

 

Saves me the trouble of trying to avoid the place. But I now need to find somewhere else not to go.

  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Funny 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...