Jump to content
 

Copenhagen Fields


CF MRC
 Share

Recommended Posts

My modelling skills are fairly modest and so I seldom make a contribution on RMWeb but I am an avid follower/reader for all the hints and tips I can glean. Inspiration also.

However I feel compelled to make a comment about Mr J Bennett’s letter in MRJ.
”Priggish self-righteousness” ? I did wonder if we had been reading the same article. I buy MRJ to be inspired to raise my own modelling standards and to be shown how to do it. I want to be set on the right track not mislead or allowed to bumble along in ignorance of the correct way. We, after all, go to school to learn from those more knowledgeable than us.

CF is a work in progress and matters maybe addressed but I can not see that the buildings are too uniform or the colouration too clean, to select just two of Mr Bennett’s further comments.
But what really made me make this post is the final paragraph “I hope my comments are seen as helpful and suggest ways to improve CF rather than simply criticising in a most insulting manner other modellers’ efforts”.  This was crass in the extreme. Indeed borderline insulting to a team of people whose best is very good indeed.

I debated long and hard about adding the following comment but I will. I await seeing Mr Bennett’s excellent models and hopefully layout. Photos on here or via MRJ will be most welcome. Then I can use his efforts to further inspire me to lift my modest efforts.

Sorry. Rant over. Carry on Mr Watson and CF team. 
 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 8
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

When I was editing the Gauge 0 Gazette if I received letters or articles with comments I considered rude or offensive I would simply remove any gratuitous comments but those expounding a different view I would re-word and tone down to make the point of the writer in a much less offensive way. In the four years or so I was editor no one ever complained at what I had done or even commented on it. 

How much better if the editor of MRJ had done the same. 

 

Don

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

The wide open prairies of Islington...or maybe not. Apart from a bit of extra grass near the Christian Mission this is the last green bit for CF. I have a little cat somewhere to place strategically. The area could be a repository for lots of old junk, but as the boundary fence is a good 9’ tall not much of any weight would have been lobbed over. 

F5CE41F3_39B7_49A5_8428_B1EF6A05B0DB.jpe

The dodgy brickwork is part of the joint between the removable basement and the main building. A bit of green weathering for mosses and algae will probably improve the scene, but I’ll do that when the ground floor roof is more advanced.

 

Tim

  • Like 5
  • Craftsmanship/clever 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, CF MRC said:

The dodgy brickwork is part of the joint between the removable basement and the main building.

Subsidence due to underground workings (or the working Underground)!  :D

 

Jim

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Donw said:

if I received letters or articles with comments I considered rude or offensive I would simply remove any gratuitous comments

How much better if the editor of MRJ had done the same. 

 

How do we know he didn't?  Who knows what the original letter said.

Edited by mike morley
Link to post
Share on other sites

Having been a member of the MRC since about 1964 I'm pleased to ay I've seen this project through from the early planning stage to what it is today. I was a very active member until about 20 years ago when domestic circumstances changed. Regrettably I've not been to Keen House for quite a few years now, but am pleased to see that progress is still being made on CF.

 

Good luck to Tim, Mike an all the others for making such a superb model. This one has certainly stood the test of time.

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
20 hours ago, Donw said:

When I was editing the Gauge 0 Gazette if I received letters or articles with comments I considered rude or offensive I would simply remove any gratuitous comments but those expounding a different view I would re-word and tone down to make the point of the writer in a much less offensive way. In the four years or so I was editor no one ever complained at what I had done or even commented on it. 

How much better if the editor of MRJ had done the same. 

 

Don

 

I would have to respectfully disagree with you here. Articles can be edited for clarity or brevity but letters, whilst they can be trimmed, can not be re-worded. Whether you agree or disagree with what is written (and in this case I strongly disagree), once the decision is made to publish, you cannot alter the words of the author. 

Letters are the views of the readers, not the editor, and it is up to other readers to respond how they see fit.

 

Jerry - guest editor of MRJ.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 16
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
3 hours ago, queensquare said:

 

I would have to respectfully disagree with you here. Articles can be edited for clarity or brevity but letters, whilst they can be trimmed, can not be re-worded. Whether you agree or disagree with what is written (and in this case I strongly disagree), once the decision is made to publish, you cannot alter the words of the author. 

Letters are the views of the readers, not the editor, and it is up to other readers to respond how they see fit.

 

Jerry - guest editor of MRJ.

 

I take your point Jerry, however I considered that it was edit it or send it back. I would not print something I considered offensive and as I say no one ever complained or even mentioned it to me. I took care that I did not impose my own feelings and kept to the sense just using less offensive words. I thought it best to have opposing views or differing information published but not at the expense of offending someone. It is quite fair to criticise the models or actions, but making personal remarks I consider going too far. In my view simply not publishing a letter or trimming so much that the sense is lost is no better.

I dont want you to answer but I wonder how you would feel if the letter was presented while it was your turn in the chair.

 

Don

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
8 hours ago, queensquare said:

 

I would have to respectfully disagree with you here. Articles can be edited for clarity or brevity but letters, whilst they can be trimmed, can not be re-worded. Whether you agree or disagree with what is written (and in this case I strongly disagree), once the decision is made to publish, you cannot alter the words of the author. 

Letters are the views of the readers, not the editor, and it is up to other readers to respond how they see fit.

 

Jerry - guest editor of MRJ.

As a Society magazine editor I broadly agree, a letter should be included as written provided it is not likely to result in legal actions! If it is too hot to publish a note stating additional material has been received is the best answer. Luckily in the three years I have been doing the job nothing, as yet, has approached the "I can't print that!" level although a few have been critical of either articles or the reported Society Board decisions.

 

Edited by john new
Typos corrected
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a sideways thought on the 14th October image of the station exit, poster panel and a stack of boxes.  I've worked out that it's an LTM image that they have dated as 1925.  

 

The Exit built into the original structure is closed off with rough and well-used gates, suggesting non-operational use for storage or access, which is not an unusual scenario.  It could be that the area is in use by private tenants, of course, in which case the possibilities are quite wide.  

 

Assuming non-operational use by the railway, there aren't any strong clues from the boxes themselves, other than appearing stout and made of wood with rope handles, so could be crates for moving items of equipment.  In the more easy-going times, long ago, it could be that the boxes are stacked either to be taken away, or they are a delivery to be taken in.  Night maintenance activities could be the reason why the boxes are there with associated daytime deliveries or collections.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some LTM images are accurately dated, some aren't. I, myself, have wondered if it dates from after the conclusion of the General Strike when the station remained closed, presumably with the intention on the part of the Underground Group of permanent closure (although, following pressure, it did reopen in October 1926). If so, the boxes could well contain the ledgers, ticket stocks, etc from the booking office. The fact that most of those were "locked stock" items would have probably weighed less heavily, security wise, than it might in later years - after all, one might expect anyone preferring a ticket from York Road after its closure would be apprehended immediately.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tim , in your 10th Oct post you talked  , sorry typed ( ! )  of work to be done , including " more operational capabilities" . Can you be more explicit please? 

 

and is there a track plan  for CF readily shareable? I have one from the 2017 Stevenage brochure ( ah , happy days ! ) but it doesn't look quite right. . . 

 

regards

 

Andy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

The KX Goods Yard is designed to have three operational loops in the Up & Down directions Andy, we are currently only running on one.  The sidings at the front, nominally supplying the potato warehouses, are also capable of working independently of the trains running through the yard throat. CF was always designed to keep trains moving.  The operator of Mrs W’s yard would probably also operate the front sidings of KX Goods.
The track plan of the Stevenage show was probably the one in RM from 2012.  It is quite accurate although, schematic. We have never had a proper track plan of the layout, as it is based on the prototype but adjusted where necessary (a hell of a lot actually) in the KX GY. 
 

Tim

Edited by CF MRC
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...