Tony Wright Posted August 24, 2019 Author Share Posted August 24, 2019 10 hours ago, Barry Ten said: Please keep on making those observations, Tony! Although it's not so clear in that photo, the front bogie is also set a bit too far forward, which isn't helping with bogie swing on curves. When I change the wheels, I'll aim to reset the bogie back a bit. Ultimately the motion will be toned down, the model given some light weathering and (ducks for cover) DCC. I know nothing about the loco's origin as the gentleman I bought it from wasn't the original builder. He'd traded up to 7mm and had a beautiful 7mm Duchess of Atholl which I admired. Al Thanks Al, A problem with the big Staniers (and several SR locos) is the position of the front steps. Most ER locos I've built have the front steps prototypically clear of the bogie's swing, thus not catching the leading wheels on tight curves. If you look closely at my CITY OF LONDON, I've had to put those front steps at a slight angle; otherwise they fouled the bogie wheels on the fiddle yard points (even large-radius Peco). A tolerable compromise? I think so. Much better than having to leave the steps off altogether. As an aside, though I have loads and loads of books, documents, drawings and photographs of the Stanier Pacifics, I've just come across a detail which I think might be unique, and I've never observed before. I know when THE PRINCESS ROYAL (and 6201?) was first built, it had round front buffers. Obviously, because of the pronounced overhang on these long locos, these must have locked with the buffers of stock on tight curves. Thus, oval buffers became the norm. Having just looked at my copy of the latest British Railways Illustrated, there, on page 514 is a shot of PRINCESS MARGARET ROSE (taken in August 1960) with round front buffers! Is this unique? I've never seen a 'Prinnie' or 'Semi' with round front buffers, other than when the 'Prinnies' were brand new. Perhaps experts on LMS matters will enlighten us. Regards, Tony. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted August 24, 2019 Author Share Posted August 24, 2019 13 hours ago, Chamby said: I see a single item like a turnout as only a part of the story, Tony. A Peco turnout or one built by Norman Solomon is a disappointment if it is not laid well, it forms a small part of a prototypical trackwork formation across the whole layout, hopefully with smooth flowing curves and the right sense of proportion... this assembly is an art form in itself that many modellers don’t get right, but takes skill to do correctly. How a whole layout is put together, the overall image portrayed and atmosphere created is so important. Within the whole, the detail of a Norman Solomon point or a Peco one is but a small component of a completed layout. Don’t get me wrong, I wholly agree with you about the skill and pride factor involved in making items yourself. But surely, the principle of using a purchased turnout as a component of a much greater constructed layout, is no different to using a purchased set of driving wheels or cast white metal dome as a component of a ‘personally built’ locomotive. It’s the assembly and the skill used in that process that defines the modellers art, be it a kit-built locomotive, or a whole layout. Of course, there are ‘layers’ of self-building... a layout, a locomotive, scratch building a component to go into a locomotive... and accordingly layers of skill. But the principles involved at each level are the same. Phil I'd agree with just about everything you've said, Phil, So, thanks for posting the above............ I'd just like to add a few things, if I may, please? Picking up on Tony Gee's point, I'm in exactly the same camp as him with regard to what interests me when I'm examining a model. I'd much sooner see something which someone has personally made (irrespective of whether it's inferior or not to something equivalent straight from a box) than seeing something just bought. The builder has a personal story to tell me, which doesn't contain the facts of who built it for him/her (whether that be a Chinese factory or some professional builder) nor, usually, how much it cost. Of course, one might (should?) expect a modern RTR item to be superior to the majority of kit-built (or even scratch-built) equivalents, and, certainly, a professionally-built item should be superior to the work of an 'average' modeller, but that's to the side of the point in my view. This hobby (at least to me) is all about personal creativity, whether that be as an individual (the most-laudable) or as part of a 'mob'. Those who commission everything (and, if they have the resources, that's their right) might well end up with a 'better' model railway (they should), but don't let any of them look down their noses at more humble creations. One visitor here pompously observed two things. For one, he'd got more locos than I had, and two, on observing a layout on RMweb he haughtily pronounced it to be 'Not very good!'. When I pointed out that most of 'his' locos were modified RTR, none of which was his work, and that the 'not very good' layout was all the owner's own work, yet nothing on his was his own work (or almost nothing), he rather shut up. He also claimed that his input was 'cerebral', rather than practical. Did he mean that the likes of me (who makes models) were dim, then? Pomposity should be pricked at all times! Of course, and in trying to be fair, not everyone has the skills nor the resources to produce high-quality layouts. And, also to be fair, some very fine ones have been created by the 'power of the pen'; the owner acting as 'project manager' so to speak, and there is merit in that, if it's done well. There are some good examples of these on RMweb. Regards, Tony. 2 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
grahame Posted August 24, 2019 Share Posted August 24, 2019 19 minutes ago, Tony Wright said: One visitor here pompously observed two things. For one, he'd got more locos than I had, and two, on observing a layout on RMweb he haughtily pronounced it to be 'Not very good!'. When I pointed out that most of 'his' locos were modified RTR, none of which was his work, and that the 'not very good' layout was all the owner's own work, yet nothing on his was his own work (or almost nothing), he rather shut up. He also claimed that his input was 'cerebral', rather than practical. Did he mean that the likes of me (who makes models) were dim, then? Pomposity should be pricked at all times! Great story. And amusing too. I certainly don't have more locos, particularly steam ones, than you do (or many others) but I probably have more EMUs. However, it's a pointless comparison; you don't run EMUs and I very rarely run steamers. And what does it matter how many people have? It's more a matter of enjoying what you do have and perhaps having sufficient to run a service. Cerebral eh? If only I could train my brain to make a model without having to use my dodgy eyes and incompetent hands. Unfortunately I tend to use most bits of my body for modelling. G 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted August 24, 2019 Author Share Posted August 24, 2019 (edited) Geoff Haynes asked me if I'd take some more shots of the DJH 9F he's weathered, so I did. And, here they are.................... His weathering has produced a most-natural, in-service loco. I'd be interested to know the actual builder of this model, because it's certainly well-made. Following up on a recent thought, is it 'better' than a Bachmann RTR equivalent? The answer, in the main, has to be no! Why not? Here's an original Bachmann 9F which I've detailed and weathered (Bachmann's factory-applied weathering is poor - just a squirt of dirty thinners!). Its driving wheels have the correct number of spokes and the cut-out at the rear of its tender is shallow (the DJH one's drivers have too many spokes and the rear cut-out to the tender rear is too deep). It also has the smoke defector stays. Why then would I barter something like the above for the DJH one? Even though I've detailed/weathered any LB RTR locos, they hardly ever get used. I much prefer the kit-built ones, because they have a much more-interesting story to tell. That's all. I'm just about to sit down and start making the valve gear for 60157. Before that, though, thorough testing must be undertaken................. Too many kit-built locos, in my experience, are all assembled, complete with motion before any thorough testing takes place. That's not good practice. Edited August 24, 2019 by Tony Wright typo error 17 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertcwp Posted August 24, 2019 Share Posted August 24, 2019 46 minutes ago, Tony Wright said: Geoff Haynes asked me if I'd take some more shots of the DJH 9F he's weathered, so I did. And, here they are.................... His weathering has produced a most-natural, in-service loco. I'd be interested to know the actual builder of this model, because it's certainly well-made. Following up on a recent thought, is it 'better' than a Bachmann RTR equivalent? The answer, in the main, has to be no! Why not? Here's an original Bachmann 9F which I've detailed and weathered (Bachmann's factory-applied weathering is poor - just a squirt of dirty thinners!). Its driving wheels have the correct number of spokes and the cut-out at the rear of its tender is shallow (the DJH one's drivers have too many spokes and the rear cut-out to the tender rear is too deep). It also has the smoke defector stays. Why then would I barter something like the above for the DJH one? Even though I've detailed/weathered any LB RTR locos, they hardly ever get used. I much prefer the kit-built ones, because they have a much more-interesting story to tell. That's all. I thought it was 92044 (with single chimney) that might be coming the other way. When I saw the photo of the DJH one, I thought something did not look quite right about the 1F tender. Bachmann did not do a very good job of that tender the first time (on a Standard 5MT) but I think their 9F effort is better. Two of my Bachmann 9Fs are double chimney WR ones (92220 and 92240) with 1G tenders and the other one is an LMR example with a 1C tender and single chimney. As for the builder of the DJH one, the identity is unknown. It came second hand from the long-defunct Cove Models in 1999. Brian Kirby improved the chassis - come to think of it, that might have been an extensive rebuild, which might explain why it runs well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted August 24, 2019 Author Share Posted August 24, 2019 35 minutes ago, robertcwp said: I thought it was 92044 (with single chimney) that might be coming the other way. When I saw the photo of the DJH one, I thought something did not look quite right about the 1F tender. Bachmann did not do a very good job of that tender the first time (on a Standard 5MT) but I think their 9F effort is better. Two of my Bachmann 9Fs are double chimney WR ones (92220 and 92240) with 1G tenders and the other one is an LMR example with a 1C tender and single chimney. As for the builder of the DJH one, the identity is unknown. It came second hand from the long-defunct Cove Models in 1999. Brian Kirby improved the chassis - come to think of it, that might have been an extensive rebuild, which might explain why it runs well. It is 92044, Robert. This is the one you'll get in exchange............................ This is the example originally weathered by Bachmann (the one with the cleaned cabside numbers). I thought the weathering was poor, so re-did it, also adding some extra pipework. All I did to the chassis of your DJH one was add a pick-up wire to the rear drivers. Odd that one had been omitted. Regards, Tony. 13 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
APOLLO Posted August 24, 2019 Share Posted August 24, 2019 Nine Two'ers (as we called them), probably THE best freight (and occasionally passenger) steam locomotive Britain has ever made. Used to be tons of them around Wigan until late 67, when, like the Brits, they just disappeared. Unidentified 9F about to cross over the WCML at fir Tree House Jcn (just south of Springs Branch) on a Long Meg to Widnes Anhydryte train, around 1966/7. She's coming off the Whelley loop (Wigan avoiding line) and heading for St Helens. Ancient and modern. Leeds 1967, again unidentified 9F & a blue Sulzer type 2 double headed oil train - note the Midland water column. 1 July 1967 - loads of the dirty bu88ers on Birkenhead shed. Spotting mates surrounded by steam !! Again at Birkenhead same day with a clean readable number (a rarity). Ugly sod ain't she ? Thundering north through a tatty Wigan North western on an oil train (undated) Wonderful, powerful locos. I have a superb Bachman one and several Hornby loco powered railroad ones which pull well with extra weight in the boiler. Brit15 19 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jol Wilkinson Posted August 24, 2019 Share Posted August 24, 2019 On 23/08/2019 at 09:46, PJT said: You're right, but I'd put it a little more strongly than that. When you look closely at photos of Maindee East, changing the gauge is absolutely a non-starter. I'd end up with half destroyed baseboards and a collection of very beautiful buildings to find new homes for and that's the very last outcome I'd want for something that I set out to save. Contacting the Scalefour Society is a very good idea and once I have everything back here and I've found out exactly what I have bought I think I'll be in touch with them. Lying in bed last night, I had one of those head vs. heart conversations with myself. Much as I'd love to, I really can't keep it long term. I have too many other commitments for my time and for me to leave it languishing untouched for years is definitely another outcome I wouldn't want for it. If ultimately I can pass it on to an individual, an organisation or museum that will give it the future it deserves, then I'll be happy with that. In the meantime I just need to get it back here before the auction house start charging storage... Pete T. While the Scalefour Society does not, AFAIK as a member, have any facility in which to store or display layouts, it is possible that one of the membership might be able to help. Reflecting that maintaining a sophisticated and complex model such as Maindee East might be too difficult for most museums or or similar institutions (viz. Heckmondwyke and the NRM), it might be better offered as a diorama. In which case a location with strong GWR connections could offer the best opportunity to find a suitable home, such as Didcot or Pendon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jamie92208 Posted August 24, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 24, 2019 (edited) 5 hours ago, APOLLO said: modern. Leeds 1967, again unidentified 9F & a blue Sulzer type 2 double headed oil train - note the Midland water column. What a lovely crop of photos of one of my favourite classes as you can probably deduce from my moniker. That shot of the oil tank train at Leeds sparks some grest memories. The working was Heysham to Hunslet East. I could just see the Line near Giggleswick station from my brothers bedroom. The train used to be 2 9F's then the mix as shown above. Occaisionally the all steam combination survived till quite late. It was one of the last steam freight workings through Leeds City station and from memory came through in late afternoon. I can well remember the startled near panic on passengers faces as the two 9F's came bellowing through the east end of the station trying to get as good a run as they could up Marsh Lane bank to Neville Hill. This was great fun for me while waiting for a train home. By then the train was routed via Carnforth and Wennington after the closure of the direct route through Green Ayre. Please forgive my descent into nostalgia. Jamie Edited August 24, 2019 by jamie92208 4 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted August 24, 2019 Author Share Posted August 24, 2019 6 hours ago, APOLLO said: Nine Two'ers (as we called them), probably THE best freight (and occasionally passenger) steam locomotive Britain has ever made. Used to be tons of them around Wigan until late 67, when, like the Brits, they just disappeared. Unidentified 9F about to cross over the WCML at fir Tree House Jcn (just south of Springs Branch) on a Long Meg to Widnes Anhydryte train, around 1966/7. She's coming off the Whelley loop (Wigan avoiding line) and heading for St Helens. Ancient and modern. Leeds 1967, again unidentified 9F & a blue Sulzer type 2 double headed oil train - note the Midland water column. 1 July 1967 - loads of the dirty bu88ers on Birkenhead shed. Spotting mates surrounded by steam !! Again at Birkenhead same day with a clean readable number (a rarity). Ugly sod ain't she ? Thundering north through a tatty Wigan North western on an oil train (undated) Wonderful, powerful locos. I have a superb Bachman one and several Hornby loco powered railroad ones which pull well with extra weight in the boiler. Brit15 Thanks for posting these great pictures. My first year at teacher training college coincided with the last full year of steam operations from Birkenhead. On my twice-monthly commute by train from Chester (my home) to Ormskirk (where I trained), I used to pass filthy dirty 9Fs on the four track sections of the Wirral main line. Why did I not take any pictures? Regards, Tony. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
APOLLO Posted August 25, 2019 Share Posted August 25, 2019 (edited) Great memories above. yes the 9F's were always very mucky, the only clean one I ever saw was Evening Star herself in Crewe works on 11 June 1967 just repainted for museum preservation. They always looked like "proper" locomotives to me, probably due to their smoke deflectors. Most of the ex Crosti locos (a fine Hornby model also) ended there days at either Birkenhead or Speke Junction across the Mersey. To me nowhere near as handsome as all the rest. Incidentally when we moved house back in 1972 I decided my worn out Tri-ang TT days were over - I went "OO". My first loco was the then new Triang-Hornby Silver Seal "Evening Star". This model for running quality has never been bettered in my opinion. Tender drive yes but with traction tyres on all powered wheels, pick up from all ten loco wheels and two fine wires to the permanently coupled tender. The ringfield motor is powerful, smooth & quiet, and she will haul anything. I still have (and run) her - 47 years old and still as good as when I bought her. Brit15 Edited August 25, 2019 by APOLLO 10 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Tony Wright Posted August 25, 2019 Author Popular Post Share Posted August 25, 2019 In between watching yesterday's cricket, I finished off the DJH A1 recently-featured. I always leave the motion to the last! Perfect, high-speed (and slow) running from the new DJH motor/gearbox combo. Why build an A1 when Bachmann makes one RTR? I wonder why that question keeps being asked of me................................... 15 4 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnarcher Posted August 25, 2019 Share Posted August 25, 2019 9 minutes ago, Tony Wright said: In between watching yesterday's cricket, I finished off the DJH A1 recently-featured. Why build an A1 when Bachmann makes one RTR? Because you find model-making more satisfying than shopping? Anyway, must go and have that brief surge of optimism about England's batting disappointed again (though I stubbornly hope not). 1 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidw Posted August 25, 2019 Share Posted August 25, 2019 3 hours ago, Tony Wright said: In between watching yesterday's cricket, I finished off the DJH A1 recently-featured. I always leave the motion to the last! Perfect, high-speed (and slow) running from the new DJH motor/gearbox combo. Why build an A1 when Bachmann makes one RTR? I wonder why that question keeps being asked of me................................... Looks quite excellent. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leander Posted August 25, 2019 Share Posted August 25, 2019 (edited) On 24/08/2019 at 16:15, APOLLO said: Ancient and modern. Leeds 1967, again unidentified 9F & a blue Sulzer type 2 double headed oil train - note the Midland water column. The water column is of North Eastern Railway origins. That part of Leeds City was originally LNWR/NER joint. Edited August 25, 2019 by Leander 1 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
APOLLO Posted August 25, 2019 Share Posted August 25, 2019 39 minutes ago, Leander said: The water column is of North Eastern Railway origins. That part of Leeds City was originally LNWR/NER joint. Thanks - I stand corrected - and should have known better as I have a "Mikes Models" model of the very same. I'll make up for that for posting a going away shot of the previous 9F at Fir Tree House junction, rolling down the very steep (due to mining subsidence over the years )short gradient to join the St Helens line a tInce Moss jcn Carnforth shed - last day of steam 4th August 1968 and soon off to the scrapyard (or preservation ? - I don't know) Sad day Brit15. 11 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium 4069 Posted August 25, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 25, 2019 22 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said: Reflecting that maintaining a sophisticated and complex model such as Maindee East might be too difficult for most museums or or similar institutions (viz. Heckmondwyke and the NRM), it might be better offered as a diorama. In which case a location with strong GWR connections could offer the best opportunity to find a suitable home, such as Didcot or Pendon. Pendon does not want or have space for any additional layouts, and I suspect that Didcot would not be interested, especially in a model that is not of a real place. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clearwater Posted August 25, 2019 Share Posted August 25, 2019 8 hours ago, johnarcher said: Because you find model-making more satisfying than shopping? Anyway, must go and have that brief surge of optimism about England's batting disappointed again (though I stubbornly hope not). Quite a finish! Some player that Stokes. All I can hope is Headingley has collected the gate fees off all 250,000 people who will claim to have been there and seen it today! 1 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnarcher Posted August 25, 2019 Share Posted August 25, 2019 2 hours ago, Clearwater said: Quite a finish! Some player that Stokes. All I can hope is Headingley has collected the gate fees off all 250,000 people who will claim to have been there and seen it today! Following it on TMS while sitting in a sunny garden was tense enough, it must indeed have been some experience at the ground. I did love the transition from 'smash - another six' to 'hold on a minute, Leach is cleaning his glasses again'. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Jesse Sim Posted August 26, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted August 26, 2019 Thought I would share this here, I have been mucking about with my camera the last few days now that the stocks back on the layout, Please let me know what you all think, I'm not as qualified in photography as Sir is, but I think I've done an alright job of it. More on my thread. 21 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted August 26, 2019 Author Share Posted August 26, 2019 2 hours ago, Jesse Sim said: Thought I would share this here, I have been mucking about with my camera the last few days now that the stocks back on the layout, Please let me know what you all think, I'm not as qualified in photography as Sir is, but I think I've done an alright job of it. More on my thread. You learn very quickly my young friend. Don't worry about not being as 'qualified' as I am with regard to photography, especially model railway photography. At your age, any pictures I took of model railways were rubbish! Indeed, as was my modelling. Like for like (age-wise), I'd say you're infinitely more qualified in both disciplines than I was. As an aside (though it's not your interest), my commiserations on the Aussies being beaten in the Headingley Test. Not too many, though! Regards, Tony. 4 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse Sim Posted August 26, 2019 Share Posted August 26, 2019 2 minutes ago, Tony Wright said: You learn very quickly my young friend. Don't worry about not being as 'qualified' as I am with regard to photography, especially model railway photography. At your age, any pictures I took of model railways were rubbish! Indeed, as was my modelling. Like for like (age-wise), I'd say you're infinitely more qualified in both disciplines than I was. As an aside (though it's not your interest), my commiserations on the Aussies being beaten in the Headingley Test. Not too many, though! Regards, Tony. Many thanks Tony, I just uploaded the full set of photos on my thread, your kind words, help and criticisms are always welcome, please let me know what you think. Is that cricket? The only time I watch cricket is at your place Tony. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clem Posted August 26, 2019 Share Posted August 26, 2019 Just a little post in praise of the humble Parkside kits (and a follow up to Tony's 7mm Parkside posting a few pages back). Such a joy building these well thought out and easy to put together kits - I've been building them for years. Here's the latest - a diagram 116 ventilated van (with a diagram 102 behind). Talking of cricket we went to the T20 Notts v Yorkshire yesterday at Trent Bridge. Notts somehow rescued victory from what seemed like a lost cause to go through to the quarter finals. But the biggest cheer by all fans, including those form Yorkshire) was when Stokes hit those winning runs - all communicated by the thousands there listening on the radio. It capped a perfect sporting weekend for me. Forest winning at Fulham, Notts in the T20 and of course England against Australia. Just a note about Notts. They're a very good one-day and T20 side but the poorest of the poor this season when it comes to the 4day game. Relegation beckons this season. Jesse, I am really surprised that you're not into cricket. I have to say I've never met an Aussie who wasn't nuts about cricket (and didn't try to rub it in about 5-0 ashes defeats of the past) . 15 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted August 26, 2019 Author Share Posted August 26, 2019 How can an Aussie not be mad-keen on cricket? In the same way, how can any Yorkshireman not be interested? Years ago, when I was effectively staff social secretary at my school, I used to organise teachers-v-teachers football/cricket/rugby games in the evenings. Always on the look-out for good players, I was delighted when a young chap from God's own country joined the staff. Looking at him, young and slim, I thought him more likely to be a batsman rather than a bowler. 'Opener or middle order? I asked. 'Or, spin bowler, or perhaps wicket-keeper? He asked what I was talking about. 'Good gag' I responded, 'what do you excel at in cricket?' 'I don't play cricket' was his answer. 'Another good gag' I laughed. 'No, it's true, I don't play cricket, in fact I'm useless at sports'. He was also useless at teaching, and didn't last long, being effectively 'eaten alive'! My dad was still alive at the time, and I never told him of this. He'd have exploded! Being 'useless' is the opposite of the Ballyconnell Road trio who visited yesterday. Mick Rawlings brought the following three items he'd made along.................. The three items of rolling stock are all scratch-built, and the Metro-Vic Bo-Bo is a 3D-printed body (much-detailed) on a scratch-built set of frames. These are all 3mm Scale, 15.2mm Gauge, and are all beautifully-made. This is 'real' modelling to me. With almost no RTR support in this scale/gauge (is there any?), it's self-reliant model-making of the highest order. Thanks for bringing these, Mick, and thanks to you, Steve and Alastair for such a great day and most-generous contributions to CRUK. Oh, and that dud point motor has been replaced this morning. Yet another SEEP failure! Am I unlucky with these solenoids failing? That's a dozen gone in as many years........................ 17 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Dave Hunt Posted August 26, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 26, 2019 Tony, Going back to your post about 6203 and round-head buffers, that is something I have never seen (except for 6200 and 6201 in their very early days) and I can't offer any definite reason for it in 1960. However, since the oval plates were just riveted onto round buffer heads and 6203 was within a few months of being stored out of use, maybe the oval plates had been removed for some reason during repairs and since in the usual course of events the engines weren't piloted, it wasn't seen as necessary to refit them at that late stage. The fact that the locomotive was later taken out of storage for a while to substitute for failing diesels and was then (as far as I am aware, although I would welcome being corrected if anyone has the evidence) fitted with oval plates could be significant as someone wanted to cover all eventualities? Just a few thoughts. Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now