Jump to content
 

Please use M,M&M only for topics that do not fit within other forum areas. All topics posted here await admin team approval to ensure they don't belong elsewhere.

Wright writes.....


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Premium
4 hours ago, Geep7 said:

Is anyone else this obessive on their fictional layout?

Yep!

 

My layout is entirely fictional but the timetable is based on Hatfield in 1958. I allow a timeframe of 1948 to early ‘60s and nothing else runs. However, I will allow friends to test stock they bring with them....provided it doesn’t have a copper clad chimney!

 

Andy

  • Like 2
  • Funny 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Geep7 said:

I had this happen at the club I belong to, and one member was running his 4-TC set with the centre coaches the wrong way round as well, and it bothered my OCD so much I had to tell them..... Fortunately it was all taken in good spirits, although I do seem to have gotten a reputation for being a bit obsessive about such details since.

 

Doesn't help when I build an SR-based layout and insist that only plausable locomotives and stock appear on my fictional branchline. If there isn't photographic evidence that they appeared on the Coastway West route, then they don't appear on my layout. Is anyone else this obessive on their fictional layout?

I have seen footage from the early days of the Bournemouth electrification showing a 4TC with the middle carriages in the wrong order so the brake van was next to a driving trailer second, so that was possible. However, if I recall correctly, as with CEP trailers, the wiring was such that they could only go one way round. On a CEP, the corridors were on opposite sides but I have seen numerous exhibition layouts where they have been on the same side.

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

44 minutes ago, PMP said:

Genuine Q., What articles do you actually want to read?
Please try and be specific and give an example of one that would make you part with a fiver for that one article.


This is a fortuitous conversation, as I've just spent the day in Mr Wright's (literary) company: my copy of "Modelling the ECML in the British Railways era" arrived. And very good it is too: I thoroughly enjoyed it. I would have said that the content is timeless, but 2020/21 has thrown something of a googlie at that. You see, Tony refers to trimming the hanging-basket-liner embankment grass with "a cheap self-haircutting set", and after repeated lockdowns I can assure you that there is no longer any such thing as a *cheap* self-haircutting set...!

As for articles I would like to read, and for which I would pay money for that specific purpose, I did this recently, hunting down an old magazine on ebay for the purpose. I want to read articles on prototypical operation. The article I just paid for was on offloading oil at a branchline goods yard. For those of us modelling earlier eras (I'm an LNER man myself), articles that teach you how things worked, so that you can replicate them in model form, are worth their weight in gold. 

  • Like 3
  • Agree 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
12 minutes ago, robertcwp said:

I have seen footage from the early days of the Bournemouth electrification showing a 4TC with the middle carriages in the wrong order so the brake van was next to a driving trailer second, so that was possible. However, if I recall correctly, as with CEP trailers, the wiring was such that they could only go one way round. On a CEP, the corridors were on opposite sides but I have seen numerous exhibition layouts where they have been on the same side.

I saw that footage not long after I'd told the member of their "wrong" formation, and on the next club night, I 'fessed up and ate humble pie. Just goes to show that there is always a prototype for everything, no matter how accurate we try to be.

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

2 hours ago, Barry O said:

Problem is that some of the reviews published seem to be a bit less than factual.. back to the old days in the toddler of saying "this Winston Churchill captures the shape of the real thing " but was it the right length? was the wheelbase anywhere near?

 

I only occasionally read the railway modelling magazines but they are all getting very samey ( with the exception of MRJ)  - too many layouts - the odd "how to do "X" which is good if you are starting off in the model railway world.  Some of this doesn't go far enough.. I read an article not that long ago about 3D CAD and printing.. seemed very easy  but from my Engineers viewpoint it was strong in self gratification and very limited in knowledge transfer.

 

Luckily for me I have enough people in the Leeds MRS who have the knowledge (and are willing to freely offer their support) to fill in my knowledge gaps.  

 

Baz

 

 

 

 

Good evening Baz,

 

Your mentioning of Winston Churchill reminded me of a review in the erstwhile Model Railway Constructor in which (if memory serves, for I no longer have the copy) mention was made that the slidebars were merely plastic bits below the body, and didn't actually do anything. As far as I can recall, no mention was made of the lack of brakes (very prominent on a Bulleid, but also omitted by Hornby-Dublo), but the conclusion seemed to be that it was not a bad model. And the MRC had a reputation for 'critical' reviews.  

 

I mention this to contrast how much more 'critical' reviews have become in the more recent model railway press. At least that's a positive difference from those days of yore. In my recent review of Heljan's GWR 2-6-0, I mentioned that the slidebars' ends were incorrect. Yet, they still did their job.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 4
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, MikeTrice said:

It is not just magazines that have suffered this "dumbing down" (I think Your Model Railway started the trend). One of my pet hates is TV documentaries which start the episode telling you what is going to be covered for the rest of the program then when ad breaks occur have a "coming up" segment before the break, then a recap after the break and finally a "next time" at the end.

Thereby obeying the golden rule of presentation:

Tell 'em what you're going to tell 'em;

Tell 'em what telling 'em;

Tell 'em what you've just told 'em.

 

Apparently, if you tell people something three times then they remember it?

 

6 hours ago, t-b-g said:

Don't forget the obligatory "I started modelling with a Hornby Trainset" opening!

 

You forgot the second half of that sentence: '... and then I discovered beer and women' (<-- ha! ha!  Aren't I hilarious? .... yawn zzzzzzz)

 

For what it's worth:

 

I like a decent layout article which tells something of the background / research and 'raison d'etre' of the layout (not so much the 'I used 9mm ply and static grass' approach)

I like loco construction articles (particularly the one where Tony burns his fingers or solders something on back-to-front because he couldn't be bothered to read the instructions)

I have no time for articles about 'how to build a petrol station in two hours'

Edited by LNER4479
  • Like 10
  • Funny 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

I have only bought MRJ regularly for the last twenty or more years. Modelling the LNWR  in P4, there is rarely anything of interest in the "mainstream" magazines. I find them too RTR centred, even through they often still feature very fine layouts.

 

I haven't bought any RTR since I was a teenager, finding that making models (including R/C boats and aircraft at a time) was much more rewarding. As Tony points out, the latest RTR models are very good, better than most of us can make/paint/line. That shouldn't be a surprise as the latest sophisticated manufacturing techniques have been used to create them.  Despite the quality/accuracy or RTR I still prefer to make my own models and probably any enjoyment I might get from buying the forthcoming LNWR Precedent wouldn't last long. Perhaps that is where the RTR manufacturers benefit, as customers need to come back for repeated "fixes".

 

Nowadays people tend to value themselves and other by what they buy/own, rather than what they actually do. Looking at some of the RTR new product topics shows an amount of "me too", "I've ordered one of each", etc. presumably from people deriving satisfaction from displaying their ability to own the latest models.

 

 

 

Good evening Jol,

 

Haven't some people always tended to value themselves and others by what they buy/own, rather than what they actually do?

 

I'm sure I've mentioned this before, but my elder son always gets a bit fed up when he takes his scabby, 50 year old E-Type Jag to rallies (or did), only to have it stand alongside a mint example. And what has the owner of the prize specimen done? Paid someone else to restore it, yet Tom is rebuilding his from the ground up, by himself. 

 

I've come across the same thing in railway modelling. One visitor one day proudly announced he had 'more locos' than I had. I didn't dispute it, but every one, whether it be kit/scratch-built or modified RTR, was the work of others. My response was 'So what, I've made all mine!'. He didn't answer. More recently, he's expressed 'regret' that soon anyone will be able to have a BR W1, with Hornby's just on the horizon. Yet his has nothing of his work in it; it's just paid for. 

 

I accept that not all can build models to the standard they insist upon, and they're free to spend their money as they wish (in fairness, keeping professionals in business), but it came across as being boastful. Something I abhor. 

 

And, please don't get me going on golf (which I also abhor) or photographers......................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 5
  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, robertcwp said:

I have posted this image before:

 

8313262519_c36b7bc008_c.jpg45569_Harrow_1952_crop by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

It shows the differing profiles and the lower sides of the brake third. The one with the really non-standard profile was the CK. Nothing much about it matched any other LMS design. The roof cross-section was the same as used on BR Standard (Mark 1) stock.

 

Thanks Robert,

 

Its been a while since I looked at the West coast scene, its the romance of the Northern fells. The West coast in the early fifties still holds a great deal of potential to the builder. I was pondering the parts I have in storage for the early afternoon combined Liverpool Manchester express. It looked rather funky with last of the underbuilt Scots at the head. One of he porty compos was present alongside the PI WC/LNWR style RC, a PI BCK, PIII TO and Porty BTK. I have all the bits for the carriages above and the unrebuilt Scot is looking for a train.

 

This is a porty BTK conversion of a Hornby LM thing. You may recall that the first batch were terrible, bent like a banana and with glue all over the glazing. They were well worth brass siding if only to straighten them out. Unfortunately, the conversion was no longer required so it was never finished. Now its out of the box, it will be still worth completing during lockdown.

 

1582283167_PortholeBTK.jpg.1cb46de810cb6dcf4f88db13a47a9430.jpg

 

It's strange how the RTR manufactures are increasingly turning back to the 70s and 80s, to big prestige locomotives and wagons and carriages that never actually existed! I'm not clear how your CWN's could be used to marshal a non existent carriage! 

Edited by Headstock
completing replaces doing, move errant word.
  • Like 5
  • Craftsmanship/clever 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, LNER4479 said:

Thereby obeying the golden rule of presentation:

Tell 'em what you're going to tell 'em;

Tell 'em what telling 'em;

Tell 'em what you've just told 'em.

 

Apparently, if you tell people something three times then they remember it?

 

You forgot the second half of that sentence: '... and then I discovered beer and women' (<-- ha! ha!  Aren't I hilarious? .... yawn zzzzzzz)

 

For what it's worth:

 

I like a decent layout article which tells something of the background / research and 'raison d'etre' of the layout (not so much the 'I used 9mm ply and static grass' approach)

I like loco construction articles (particularly the one where Tony burns his fingers or solders something on back-to-front because he couldn't be bothered to read the instructions)

I have no time for articles about 'how to build a petrol station in two hours'

I'm glad you like loco construction articles, Graham.

 

An account of how I built those Trice/Comet/SEF/Bachmann V2s will appear soon in BRM. I'm delighted, especially as how my account of building a DJH 'Semi' was turned down some little time ago because 'There's an excellent RTR one available'. 

 

41297515_TriceV225.jpg.9994b128042a1487a30fc0d53ff67dd0.jpg

 

 

 

Clearly, there's been a review of policy. And, to be fair, the magazine does contain 'constructional' articles each month; granted, not all of interest to all, but showing how to build things nonetheless...............

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 11
Link to post
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, LNER4479 said:

Thereby obeying the golden rule of presentation:

Tell 'em what you're going to tell 'em;

Tell 'em what telling 'em;

Tell 'em what you've just told 'em.

 

Apparently, if you tell people something three times then they remember it'

That's fine if you're presenting something which has to be remembered, like beating training into people by Powerpoint, but not for something intended as entertainment. It's lazy documentary making, if you're telling them the same thing three times you only need a third of the content. Feature films don't repeat all the lines three times. 

 

My favourite example of proper documentary making is "Sailor". Half a dozen lines of commentary explaining why half the Royal Navy is watching a bored stripper gyrating around a crowded pub then virtually nothing for the rest of the hour except observation and the occasional sailor talking to the cameraman to explain what's going on. 

 

Magazines - I prefer layout articles about quality layouts (not identikit cliches of layouts), specially if it explains why the builder did it like that rather than just how,  anything which shows me how to do something complex, and well researched prototype explanations. Consequently I don't buy many magazines apart from MRJ and RM. I occasionally buy the others for holiday reading or if there's a good prototype article, but not very often. 

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

A new lockdown, so a new loco to start...................

 

568382704_LRMJ301.jpg.a79f208d60ca54c8e7198478caa94b9d.jpg

 

I have a vague memory of having reviewed this LRM kit for BRM when it first appeared. The model ended up on Peterborough North, whatever its type. 

 

This one (which I won't write about, but post odd pictures on here) will run on the M&GNR bit of LB. 

 

 

  • Like 12
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
10 hours ago, MikeTrice said:

It is not just magazines that have suffered this "dumbing down" (I think Your Model Railway started the trend). One of my pet hates is TV documentaries which start the episode telling you what is going to be covered for the rest of the program then when ad breaks occur have a "coming up" segment before the break, then a recap after the break and finally a "next time" at the end.

It's not just documentaries: what about sitcoms and dramas whose 60 minutes actually contain about 40 minutes of action, alongside the advance spoiler 'coming up' sections, adverts, recaps after the adverts and trailers for the next episode...

  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

A new lockdown, so a new loco to start...................

 

568382704_LRMJ301.jpg.a79f208d60ca54c8e7198478caa94b9d.jpg

 

I have a vague memory of having reviewed this LRM kit for BRM when it first appeared. The model ended up on Peterborough North, whatever its type. 

 

This one (which I won't write about, but post odd pictures on here) will run on the M&GNR bit of LB. 

 

 

Hi Tony,

On the whole I found this an enjoyable kit to build but I recall I had  a problem with the smokebox saddle being too tall by almost 1mm (if my memory serves me correctly).  I'll be interested to see if you have the same problem?

Frank

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

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, LNER4479 said:

Thereby obeying the golden rule of presentation:

Tell 'em what you're going to tell 'em;

Tell 'em what telling 'em;

Tell 'em what you've just told 'em.

 

Apparently, if you tell people something three times then they remember it?

 

You forgot the second half of that sentence: '... and then I discovered beer and women' (<-- ha! ha!  Aren't I hilarious? .... yawn zzzzzzz)

 

For what it's worth:

 

I like a decent layout article which tells something of the background / research and 'raison d'etre' of the layout (not so much the 'I used 9mm ply and static grass' approach)

I like loco construction articles (particularly the one where Tony burns his fingers or solders something on back-to-front because he couldn't be bothered to read the instructions)

I have no time for articles about 'how to build a petrol station in two hours'

Hahaha - best post of 2021 so far! (If I were my daughter's age I'd have 'tweeted' "LOL"!)

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

The debate about mags may have moved or even finished, but I couldn't help comparing Jan 1970 issue [an issue dear to my heart as it was the layout of the month "Harlyn Junction" which inspired me to have a go at Railway modelling] with Jan 2021 issue, 51 years apart.

 

Total pages in 1970 issue 67 of which 35 (52%)were adverts, 24 (35%)articles and 8 (13%) readers letters and reviews etc

 

Total pages in 2021 issue 153 of which 73 (48%) were adverts, 66 (43%) were articles and14 (9%) were readers letters and reviews etc

 

I had forgotten how thin old mags were. Perhaps those who said we look back through rose coloured glasses were right.

 

Make of those figures what you wish

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 4
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

With regard to magazine articles I would read them on model constructin where innovates means had been used to model the item correctly rather than just folloing the instructions. Articles on how locos and coaches were diagrammed so that correct operation and formations can be modelled.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
2 hours ago, PMP said:


I’d suggest that’s based on lack of knowledge in terms of not actually taking time to read or inspect enough of the publications, and coming to a faulty conclusion.

 

I’ve no problem with the ‘nothing in it for me’ response , I too rarely buy regularly apart from MRJ. But what is wrong is to suggest that the mainstream media is not covering model building. It does offer significant coverage, and the fact there’s four major newsstand with monthly issues, means that a good number of readers are buying them, and the content therein appeals to those readers.

 

Genuine Q., What articles do you actually want to read?
Please try and be specific and give an example of one that would make you part with a fiver for that one article.

 

 

I find - as I'm sure others do - that I look for articles that reflect my current interests... When I was spending a lot of time on the electrics and scenery of my layout, that's what I wanted to read about; I now spend most modelling time building kits so that's what I look for and again like others MRJ is the only mag I subscribe to (excluding society journals), though I buy others occasionally too.

Beautifully photographed finished builds can be very inspiring and sometimes very informative, but blow by blow accounts of builds are probably what I find most interesting and most informative, for obvious reasons.

As others have mentioned, I will seek particular back numbers of a variety of titles on Ebay for specific articles and the ability to locate and buy such specific and long unavailable items is for me one of the things that makes Ebay, on balance, a Good Thing (though I realise that may not be very popular opinion...).

Edited by Chas Levin
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

 

And, please don't get me going on golf (which I also abhor) or photographers......................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Hello Tony,

 

Well, as you mentioned it, I would love to get you started on golf given that ‘abhor’ is a very strong word to describe something that I enjoy and play regularly (or at least I would if I were permitted to at the moment). You really must dislike golf to suggest it is abhorrent. 

 

Admittedly there are still probably some nasty old boys who frequent some stuffy ‘old school tie’ establishments, but not all golf clubs are like that. At least none of the golf clubs that allow the likes of me in are like that. Perhaps the game has a reputation which, in the main, is no longer accurate, just like magazines dating from before I was born?

 

My other main interest is of course scratchbuilding 4mm scale ex-Hull and Barnsley Railway locomotives from bits of brass. Is this any less odd than hitting a small ball around a big field into 18 holes? As far as I am concerned both activities are rather strange and eccentric when you strip them down to their component parts, but I also view them as being as harmless as each other to wider society.  Each to their own and all that….

 

All the best,

 

Chris

 

 

  • Like 6
  • Agree 2
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, Black Marlin said:


As for articles I would like to read, and for which I would pay money for that specific purpose, I did this recently, hunting down an old magazine on ebay for the purpose. I want to read articles on prototypical operation. The article I just paid for was on offloading oil at a branchline goods yard. For those of us modelling earlier eras (I'm an LNER man myself), articles that teach you how things worked, so that you can replicate them in model form, are worth their weight in gold. 

I totally agree with that. The articles I value most are the Steve Banks ones in Model Rail in the ‘noughties’ entitled Eastern Region secondary services in Transition. There was a series of these with prototype info one month and then how to build a model of the coach in question the following month. I’ve hunted these all down in piles of dusty mags at shows and I refer back to them often. He did other similar articles as well and there were other authors doing similar excellent reference material at the time including our very own @robertcwp

 

These days all we get are pathetic attempts to replicate a train using RTR coaches often twisting the facts to achieve it.

 

I also enjoy layout articles on large layouts especially those with a GNR/ LNER/ BR(E) flavour. I don’t read the numerous ‘shunting plank’ layout descriptions. Contrary to what someone said earlier, I particularly enjoy a fleet list when it’s made available, particularly when the source of the model is explained and it’s not all RTR.

 

Finally I love rolling stock kit building articles but I have limited interest in all the buildings and scenery constructional stuff. Anyone who’s seen my layout will know that, as far as I’m concerned, Superquick/ Metcalfe is good enough as a backdrop - it’s the trains that matter!

 

Andy

  • Like 8
  • Agree 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 06/01/2021 at 19:10, Tony Wright said:

I don't know whether it's cause and effect with magazine articles. The cause being the rise of digital imagery; the effect, more pictures and (much) fewer words.

 

The result is a series of step-by-step pictures, often running over a score (and more), with a short caption under each one. I plead guilty to the charge of doing that now. 

 

Time was, in the days of film (in my case medium-format) then an article I submitted might have no more than half a dozen shots (used bigger, if necessary), with the majority of the piece, the written word. 

 

It's just the way of the world now.

 

 

Now, in terms of constructional articles, I do find the modern picture-heavy style easier to follow than the text-heavy approach, in the sense that it is much easier to see what the words are meant to be describing - especially if there's a big helpful arrow pointing at the part being mentioned.  A nearly-all-words article that says "position the sprocket wangler carefully behind the widget futtock" is not much help to a modeller who doesn't explicitly know what either looks like, let alone what they do.  So some change is undoubtedly for the better!

  • Like 4
  • Agree 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
9 hours ago, Beechnut said:


Dewsbury Midland, and I assume we’re talking about the Manchester MRS model, was/is 00.

 

Brendan

Of course! So was the Leeds MRS version, by the way.

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

  • RMweb Premium
8 hours ago, robertcwp said:

one layout that was running  2 Hal coupled to a 2 EPB.  

I know what you're getting at, Robert, but that would be possible if one were towing the other - not in passenger service though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
7 hours ago, Tony Teague said:

 

 

The truth is, however, that not many exhibition go-ers or magazine readers, even amongst SR fans, would notice this sort of detailed fault.

True enough, Tony, but I think there's a difference between the viewer not knowing and the exhibitor not knowing/not caring. Discuss.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

I know what you're getting at, Robert, but that would be possible if one were towing the other - not in passenger service though.

I know and someone did point that out to me at the time when I commented on it but that wasn't what those exhibiting the layout were showing. They simply didn't have a clue about Southern Electrics.:banghead:

  • Like 2
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Good evening all - wow I neglect to pop on for a day and I think WW has increased by 5 pages!

 

I have to agree with a lot of what has been said about dumbing down of TV programs. I think it was the last series of the program recorded at the NYMR that the narrator repeatedly stated that the 9F that was being steamed was the last survivor. This puzzled me as I know there are several 9Fs preserved. I eventually turned to the internet and found it is the only remaining single chimney variant. Maybe that was worth mentioning once in passing - certainly not serveral times without actually saying why.

 

One thing I have noticed on Netflix and Amazon video streaming - the ability to skip the recap from the previous episode. Very useful! Now if they could just add skip "coming up" as well?

 

Several pages back it was suggested a TV program about Grumpy Old Gits (aka Railway Modellers) - if the Gauge O Guild did complain perhaps Ready To Rant may work?

  • Like 5
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 1
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...