Wright writes.....

[queensquare]

Just to clarify;

My reference to models being signed was simply that I don't bother and nor do many other loco builders I know. I have nothing against it and, if asked to, I would  but I've never been asked.

 

The ego comment was aimed at those that think they are a 'name' in the hobby whatever that means, it had nothing to do with whether builders do or don't sign their work.

 

Jerry

[Pacific231G]

7 hours ago, D.Platt said:

Bit like loco nameplates , if you bought these items as a long term investment well , I think their value peaked a few years back ,  and like our collections it’s all down hill in their valuations  , I’am not bothered with that , I’ve had my money’s worth out of them with the pleasure  gained from building them and running them .

Dennis 

 

I remember something similar about comics and other ephemera as "collectables" to the effect that their value peaks at the time when those who enjoyed them as children reach the age of maximum disposable income- generally lateish middle age. Far rarer pre-war or even Edwardian or Victorian examples, while still having an antique rarity value, go for far lower prices.  I'm not sure if that theory was confirmed by the $1.5M that a Super Mario 64 cartridge from 1996 went for a couple of weeks ago. Twenty five years seems a short time for kids to become that  wealthy but perhaps not when we're talking about tech. millionaires.

Buying somethnig because it gives you pleasure is fine and, if it happens to increase in value, that may provide extra pleasure. Buying something whose value depends on sentiment purely as an investment really requires access to a paradox-free time machine. In fifty years time a restored BofB Spitfire may not be anyhing like as valuable as it is now. 

 

A few years ago I bought a nicely finished DJH Etat 231D (A French Pacific) that had been built for its owner by a professional model maker and then sat in  a display cabinet. It cost me what seemed  rather a lot at the time but now realise was probably no more (allowing for inflation) than Hornby-Jouef now charge for RTR Chinese plastic.  It's a lovely model of a favourite and for me regionally appropriate prototype that nobody produces or is ever likely to as RTR and I'm glad to have it. (Though not the "American" pick up method of loco one polarity, tender the other that I learnt to loathe when modelling a steam era N. American "short line")

When I finally shuffle off I can't actually see this model nor the "colllectable" France Trains OCEM coaches it sometimes pulls fetching anything like what they cost (even though I certainly didn't pay "collectable" prices for any of them) especially as "Continental" modelling seems to have declined in popularity here, I don't actually care though as I'll have enjoyed having them.  

 

Edited July 23, 2021 by Pacific231G

[john new]

5 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning Jerry,

 

I don't think it's necessarily a question of paying for something twice. In the case of my selling the recently-shown locos on behalf of a widow, my aim has been to get the highest possible prices for her. Her late husband paid for everything in the first place, and surely there's a residual value greater than its component parts in a finely-built model, beautifully-painted? 

 

As for ignorance and inaccuracies, I always asked for a comprehensive brief from a commissioner in my days as a professional builder, Naturally, I specialised in LNER/ER locomotives (locos from 'lesser' lines took more research, and were, thus, more expensive, and I built far fewer as a consequence). If the brief was 'just build the kit', I was very twitchy, and put it right if necessary - chimneys, domes, tenders, etc, etc...... 

 

Some I've known don't do this on commission, and then are disappointed when the finished models are 'inaccurate'. I've been asked to 'put them right' in the past. 

 

Most kit-built locos which pass through my hands (for whatever reason) 'fail' in terms of their performance. They might look very 'pretty', but they don't 'run'. Not 'run' as I insist upon. As has been alluded too, chassis with absolutely no sideplay, the wrong choice of drive, jerky/stuttering running, poor pick-ups and any other maladies. I'm convinced many are destined for a glass case-existence. It took me a whole weekend to get the locos I've recently sold to run 'properly'. Those I couldn't, have been sold for considerably less than their component parts. 

 

I always sign my work, which makes me an ego-tripper. My customers expected it. Believe it or not, because a loco I'd built was signed, it made more money at an auction on resale! 

 

As for Buckingham - everything on it is truly 'priceless'.

 

And, now for everyone's information - I'm posting three cheques this morning. One is only for less than £150.00 (the un-built kits' sales have dried up). However, the widow is getting a cheque for well over £2,000.00 (to go with the one last week for near £5,000.00) and CRUK is getting one for well over £1,000.00! 

 

My most grateful thanks to all those who've made this possible.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Given the apparent failure rate in getting kits to work what these recent posts actually suggest is that many kits are complex and unbuildable for the non-expert, despite the cost. Add to that the hassle of sorting components from different sources because the kits aren’t complete with wheels and motors and you begin to realise why many people (me included I admit) don’t do loco kits.
 

The learning curve appears time consuming and too expensive so we don’t. I have tried a simple brass chassis, was very dissatisfied with the outcome and gave up. When I have time I will try again to get it to run properly but I am not hopeful.
 

The above may sound defeatist but it is realistic.

[Chas Levin]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Lovely work Chas,

 

It's the equal of many 'professionally-built' locos I've seen (if not better).

 

Thanks for showing us.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Thanks Tony, very nice of you to say so!

 

I'm still at the stage with this one where the faults stand out to my eye, almost to the exclusion of those things that have come out well, but that means the end result should be better, doesn't it?

 

I have become very enamoured of the look of the C2/C12 in the course of building the kit, much more so than when I started - I think it has very elegant lines. Having the cab roof on helps the look of it immensely; I'm not used to that yet .

[Headstock]

3 hours ago, john new said:

Given the apparent failure rate in getting kits to work what these recent posts actually suggest is that many kits are complex and unbuildable for the non-expert, despite the cost. Add to that the hassle of sorting components from different sources because the kits aren’t complete with wheels and motors and you begin to realise why many people (me included I admit) don’t do loco kits.
 

The learning curve appears time consuming and too expensive so we don’t. I have tried a simple brass chassis, was very dissatisfied with the outcome and gave up. When I have time I will try again to get it to run properly but I am not hopeful.
 

The above may sound defeatist but it is realistic.

 

Good afternoon John new,

 

It rather depends on your motive for building kits. If you are a creative type that enjoys learning and the making of things, your chance of success will be high. If you only see the making of things as an inconvenient way of possessing  objects of desire, or as nostalgia fix, you are more likely to fail.

 

 

Edited July 23, 2021 by Headstock

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, queensquare said:

Just to clarify;

My reference to models being signed was simply that I don't bother and nor do many other loco builders I know. I have nothing against it and, if asked to, I would  but I've never been asked.

 

The ego comment was aimed at those that think they are a 'name' in the hobby whatever that means, it had nothing to do with whether builders do or don't sign their work.

 

Jerry

Thanks Jerry,

 

I wonder what constitutes a 'name' in the hobby? 

 

I recall the great fun we had, side-by-side at the Southampton Show. I suppose we were invited to be demonstrators because we're both 'reasonably well-known' in the hobby. Does that mean folk know our names, and might even attend because the likes of us are there? I know when David and Alison (my best wishes to her) produced the show guide, we, and the other demonstrators, were mentioned. Perhaps it might not have been quite so encouraging if the guide had merely stated 'The demonstrators are all blokes (and blokettes) nobody has ever heard of'. 

 

So, how does one get a 'name' in this hobby? Could it be in my case by my writing hundreds of articles, several books (both on model and prototype subjects), taking thousands of photographs, constructing hundreds of models (many forming the basis of articles), test-building for manufacturers, writing the instructions for the same, assisting RTR manufacturers with new models (and being sworn to prior secrecy), attending hundreds of exhibitions as a layout operator (though I didn't do much of that), demonstrator/loco doctor/organiser/judge, attending scores of seminars/tutorials and giving loads of after-dinner speeches (one to come is after the Diamond Jubilee dinner of your Society - that should clear the hall!). 

 

I state the above as a fact, not to 'boast'. I'd suggest you're also a 'name' in the hobby. 

 

I think we might both agree that we've done the 'hard yards' over several decades, along with other 'names' (none of whom are on ego trips). Our work, both written/visual and in the flesh, has been subjected to scrutiny, criticism and assessment. That comes 'with the territory'. 

 

Where I take issue (after all, I'm a grumpy old man) is with some, more-modern 'names' in railway modelling. The so-called 'influencers' who, thanks to social media, set themselves up as self-proclaimed experts and film themselves giving a review of this or that model. Frequently, that model runs on track laid on to the floor (in a most-dodgy manner) and the comments on its accuracy show remarkable ignorance (in the truest sense of the word). Heh-ho, such is progress..................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Barry O]

20 hours ago, Woodcock29 said:

A lot of NuCast kits got brass chassis in their later days. Half of the NuCast kits I've got came with brass chassis. The w/m chassis with my Q6 purchased in the late 70s was a piece of rubbish. I actually mounted it on a modified Ks O4 chassis, which were available as spares for 2 quid at the time. The wheel base wasn't perfect but didn't look too bad. It ran quite well with a Portescap 4C in it.

Andrew

Strangely enough my first complete loco kit I assembled was a NuCast Q6. Bought in Bill Stotts shop (which was a good shop to go to) It has Ks wheels and an MW005 motor and is still as powerful as it was when I built it. Its whitemetal chassis is still going Ok .. this is after it had been dropped through a loft hatch, mistreated by some one who borrowed it ( paint removed showed how low his bridges were) and being built by me(!). 

 

It is the wrong length but I was proud of it .. and still am.. for haulage it shows the Hornby Q6 a clean pair of wheels.

 

Baz

Edited July 24, 2021 by Barry O

[cb900f]

5 hours ago, Chas Levin said:

Hello Tony and everyone, amidst the talk of professional builders, I offer progress shots of my current, non-professional work!

 

This is the London Road Models GNR C2 I've been working on - the chassis is basically finished, while the body has been taken up to the start of lining and bordering:

 

 

 

 

 

Running (a Mashima into a High Level RoadRunner+) is very good, though - typically - slightly smoother in reverse than forwards, which some pickup tweaking and running-in should hopefully cure.

The slightly scruffy borders in places between green, brown and black will be taken care of in the course of lining and applying the dark green borders, as will the unpainted tank and bunker beading, while the bunker floor will be underneath a coal load.

The roof is just clipped into place at the moment - it'll be properly secured, once all the lining's done, by two 14BA bolts into captive nuts. The conn rods are also just temporarily secured by washers cut from plastic electrical wire insulation.

 

If anyone can see anything wrong - I've just noticed that I need to remove the paint from the cab roof grabrail, for one thing - please do let me know...

 

Next, it's bow pens at fifty paces!

Chas ,

The buffers on the c12 look parallel to me . I'm no expert on eastern motive power but I think they were fitted with tapered buffers when built. Greater experts than I will confirm or deny.

 

Pete

[john new]

1 minute ago, Headstock said:

 

Good afternoon John new,

 

It rather depends on your motive for building kits. If you are a creative type that enjoys learning and the making of things, your chance of success will be high. If you only see the making of things as an inconvenient way of processing objects of desire, or as nostalgia fix, you are more likely to fail.

 

 

The issue for me is the kits are complex and costly, valve gear in particular looks daunting and there are not that many non r-t-r types I would want. Example of something I would like is a DJH B16, preorder only and circa £320 plus paint and transfers over and above. That is a lot of £ to risk making a c*** up of. Yes there are some simple kits I am sure but I wouldn’t buy one just to build it if it is something not of interest. IF I get the one I have to work acceptably there are some affordable re-chassis kits I will try; it isn’t that I can’t solder brass.

[MJI]

I am not a name but met quite a few.

 

All were happy to share their knowleage and enthusiasm.

[Tony Teague]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Where I take issue (after all, I'm a grumpy old man) is with some, more-modern 'names' in railway modelling. The so-called 'influencers' who, thanks to social media, set themselves up as self-proclaimed experts and film themselves giving a review of this or that model. Frequently, that model runs on track laid on to the floor (in a most-dodgy manner) and the comments on its accuracy show remarkable ignorance (in the truest sense of the word). Heh-ho, such is progress..................

 

 

There have always been influencers, but in the past they gained kudos and credibility through demosntrating their skills  and abilities, whereas now the internet means that they just have to have, sometimess rather too much, confidence and a very loud voice. Actual achievement seems to count for very little.

 

4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

With regard to taking on the job of finding new homes for railway models on behalf of bereaved/worried families, I'm stepping down. Why? For several reasons.

 

As no-one else has said it, may I commend and congratulate you for what you have done on behalf both of bereaved families and of Cancer UK; I am certain that many hours of thankless work will have been involved for both you and Mo, although the outcomes must certainly have felt very rewarding.

 

Tony

[Tony Wright]

13 minutes ago, Tony Teague said:

 

There have always been influencers, but in the past they gained kudos and credibility through demosntrating their skills  and abilities, whereas now the internet means that they just have to have, sometimess rather too much, confidence and a very loud voice. Actual achievement seems to count for very little.

 

 

As no-one else has said it, may I commend and congratulate you for what you have done on behalf both of bereaved families and of Cancer UK; I am certain that many hours of thankless work will have been involved for both you and Mo, although the outcomes must certainly have felt very rewarding.

 

Tony

Many thanks Tony,

 

You're very kind. 

 

I have a very loud voice as well!

 

As I've stated, the expressions of thanks have been very rewarding.

 

You must pop over again soon.

 

Best regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, john new said:

The issue for me is the kits are complex and costly, valve gear in particular looks daunting and there are not that many non r-t-r types I would want. Example of something I would like is a DJH B16, preorder only and circa £320 plus paint and transfers over and above. That is a lot of £ to risk making a c*** up of. Yes there are some simple kits I am sure but I wouldn’t buy one just to build it if it is something not of interest. IF I get the one I have to work acceptably there are some affordable re-chassis kits I will try; it isn’t that I can’t solder brass.

Good evening John,

 

B16s (of all three types) seem to score highly on RTR polls (as far as I know, though the 'wish-lists' hold no interest to me). Despite this, none seems to be on any RTR radar as far as I'm aware.

 

Your mention on the cost of a DJH B16 is very revealing. It is, indeed, a lot of money for the potential to cock-up. A B16/1, of course, needs no outside valve gear, but clearances behind the cylinders are incredibly tight. 

 

I had two B16s to sell from the collection - a B16/1 and B16/3. The former made more than the cost of its component parts (it was very nice) and the latter rather less (not quite so nice, and a real beggar to get to go properly, once I'd found its chassis). I got the best I could.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited July 23, 2021 by Tony Wright
typo error

[Chas Levin]

2 hours ago, cb900f said:

Chas ,

The buffers on the c12 look parallel to me . I'm no expert on eastern motive power but I think they were fitted with tapered buffers when built. Greater experts than I will confirm or deny.

 

Pete

Hello Pete, thanks for the feedback. Initially, I just used the (Gibson) parallel buffers that were supplied with the LRM kit - at the start, I'd intended finishing it as an LNER loco in plain black. Then, when I decided to do it in GNR livery I too thought they might be wrong, as I'd found photos of GNR period prototypes with tapered ones... but, as I continued collecting photos (to assist me with detailing and livery) I also found ones with parallel buffers too, and still in GNR livery.

You may well be right that when first built they were tapered, but some definitely had parallel buffers fitted while still in GNR livery. There are quite a few such examples in the Photos section of the GNRS site but I'm not sure whether it's OK to post those on here so, with apologies for the poor quality, here's an example from a book:

 

Edited July 23, 2021 by Chas Levin

[queensquare]

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Jerry,

 

I wonder what constitutes a 'name' in the hobby? 

 

I recall the great fun we had, side-by-side at the Southampton Show. I suppose we were invited to be demonstrators because we're both 'reasonably well-known' in the hobby. Does that mean folk know our names, and might even attend because the likes of us are there? I know when David and Alison (my best wishes to her) produced the show guide, we, and the other demonstrators, were mentioned. Perhaps it might not have been quite so encouraging if the guide had merely stated 'The demonstrators are all blokes (and blokettes) nobody has ever heard of'. 

 

So, how does one get a 'name' in this hobby? Could it be in my case by my writing hundreds of articles, several books (both on model and prototype subjects), taking thousands of photographs, constructing hundreds of models (many forming the basis of articles), test-building for manufacturers, writing the instructions for the same, assisting RTR manufacturers with new models (and being sworn to prior secrecy), attending hundreds of exhibitions as a layout operator (though I didn't do much of that), demonstrator/loco doctor/organiser/judge, attending scores of seminars/tutorials and giving loads of after-dinner speeches (one to come is after the Diamond Jubilee dinner of your Society - that should clear the hall!). 

 

I state the above as a fact, not to 'boast'. I'd suggest you're also a 'name' in the hobby. 

 

I think we might both agree that we've done the 'hard yards' over several decades, along with other 'names' (none of whom are on ego trips). Our work, both written/visual and in the flesh, has been subjected to scrutiny, criticism and assessment. That comes 'with the territory'. 

 

Where I take issue (after all, I'm a grumpy old man) is with some, more-modern 'names' in railway modelling. The so-called 'influencers' who, thanks to social media, set themselves up as self-proclaimed experts and film themselves giving a review of this or that model. Frequently, that model runs on track laid on to the floor (in a most-dodgy manner) and the comments on its accuracy show remarkable ignorance (in the truest sense of the word). Heh-ho, such is progress..................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Thanks Tony. I've never really given it much thought, I model pre-grouping in a minority scale with very little use of RTR so I'm certainly not in the mainstream.

 

Regarding  Southampton, we had a lot of fun there (and at other shows come to that), I miss the banter, hopefully we can get back to something like it at some point.

 

Returning to modelling, my Kirtley now has a coat of paint and some transfers. If it hadn't  been so hot this week I would have got it weathered and finished. Next week maybe.

 

Jerry

 

 

 

 

Edited July 23, 2021 by queensquare

[cb900f]

10 minutes ago, Chas Levin said:

Hello Pete, thanks for the feedback. Initially, I just used the (Gibson) parallel buffers that were supplied with the LRM kit - at the start, I'd intended finishing it as an LNER loco in plain black. Then, when I decided to do it in GNR livery I too thought they might be wrong, as I'd found photos of GNR period prototypes with tapered ones... but, as I continued collecting photos (to assist me with detailing and livery) I also found ones with parallel buffers too, and still in GNR livery.

You may well be right that when first built they were tapered, but some definitely had parallel buffers fitted while still in GNR livery. There are quite a few such examples in the Photos section of the GNRS site but I'm not sure whether it's OK to post those on here so, with apologies for the poor quality, here's an example from a book:

 

Chas,

 

I stand corrected (I knew I would) however your photo is of a round bunkered/tank C12 as opposed to your model which is squarebunker/ tank. That's my excuse.

[Chas Levin]

1 minute ago, cb900f said:

Chas,

 

I stand corrected (I knew I would) however your photo is of a round bunkered/tank C12 as opposed to your model which is squarebunker/ tank. That's my excuse.

Pete, good point! Looking through the photos I have on this laptop (and therefore more easily to hand than those in books), it does look like the ones with parallel buffers are round tank versions. I'll have a look through some books tomorrow too, to see if that seems to be the rule... I'm not too sure about changing them at this point though - think of the paintwork that would have to be re-done after de-soldering and re-soldering !

[dibateg]

On 21/07/2021 at 18:25, Roger Sunderland said:

Tony

You may remember Horfield, an exhibition layout set on the outskirts of Bristol, now, sadly, retired from the circuit. Steve Knight, who helped build and exhibit the layout, with his father Chris, now runs a very fine model shop in Poole, Model Railway Solutions. I recently told him I was looking to build a B1 using a Comet chassis. A couple of hours later he came up with the following

The loco was purchased for Horfield to haul a heavy inter regional goods, 61063 was a Leicester engine. I am assured that it was built by one Tony Geary.

The body and tender body are Bachmann, the loco and tender chassis are Comet, all powered by a Portescap motor.

After some years in store it needed a bit of TLC but is now running beautifully on my layout. I have to say I was amazed by the weight. Every spare millimetre was filled with lead, so much so I had to remove a small amount to fit a decoder. Needless to say it romps away with a 10 coach train

I've been away from the computer for a bit - but I still have my old list and indeed, I had a trio - 61063, 61078 and 61206... I recall even installing a lead crew in one and that lead lined cab roof would be good protection from any nuclear incidents... Its heart warming to see them still in action and being enjoyed.

 

Regards

Tony

[dibateg]

Apologies if I have posted this before, I honestly can't remember. I'm a lot more suspicious these days when building locos and never assume that anything is right, so refer to photos in preference to drawings. Had I still got my 4mm B1s, I would have had to do something about that motion bracket... Anyway I think I got this DJH/Piercy B1 right. Don't say anything now as it is away being painted by Paul Moore!

 

Regards

Tony

[96701]

6 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

Good afternoon John new,

 

It rather depends on your motive for building kits. If you are a creative type that enjoys learning and the making of things, your chance of success will be high. If you only see the making of things as an inconvenient way of possessing  objects of desire, or as nostalgia fix, you are more likely to fail.

 

 

I trust that you are referring only to the building of locomotive kits. I have seen many model railways that show people demonstrating their creative abilities and show that they obviously thoroughly enjoy the making of things (including handbuilt track), but still choose to use rtr locos and stock. 

[Headstock]

1 hour ago, 96701 said:

I trust that you are referring only to the building of locomotive kits. I have seen many model railways that show people demonstrating their creative abilities and show that they obviously thoroughly enjoy the making of things (including handbuilt track), but still choose to use rtr locos and stock. 

 

Good evening/morning 96701,

 

you would have to ask John new, he said kits but he didn't specify locomotives. I believe he was referring to the recent batch of locomotives shown by Tony, so locomotives is a reasonable assumption. However, he may have meant all kits.

 

I wouldn't segregate locomotives from any of the other 'making of things' that you mention. To repeat and expand, If you get intrinsic enjoyment from the making of track, trees, locomotives or paper aeroplanes, you are more likely to be successful in your endeavours.  if you see any of the above as an expensive and not very enjoyable over complicated chore, you are more likely to fail. If you don't enjoy it, don't do it.

 

 

[BMacdermott]

12 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good evening John,

B16s (of all three types) seem to score highly on RTR polls (as far as I know, though the 'wish-lists' hold no interest to me). Despite this, none seems to be on any RTR radar as far as I'm aware.

 

Hello Tony

 

Below is how the B16s have fared in our 00 Wishlist Polls...

 

2013: All three were Middle Polling

2014-2016: The B16/1 was High Polling; the others Middle

2017: Poll didn't run

2018: As 2014-2016

2019: All were High Polling. The B16/1 was in overall equal position 70 (of about 800 items)

 

Brian (on behalf of the The 00 Poll Team)

[Tony Wright]

3 minutes ago, BMacdermott said:

 

Hello Tony

 

Below is how the B16s have fared in our 00 Wishlist Polls...

 

2013: All three were Middle Polling

2014-2016: The B16/1 was High Polling; the others Middle

2017: Poll didn't run

2018: As 2014-2016

2019: All were High Polling. The B16/1 was in overall equal position 70 (of about 800 items)

 

Brian (on behalf of the The 00 Poll Team)

Good morning Brian,

 

Thanks for that. The B16s seemed to have gained some popularity down the years of the polls.

 

Please don't think I'm being disparaging with regards to your wishlists/polls by stating I have no interest in them, though I would have been had I still been in full-time employment as a model railway journalist/photographer. 

 

I believe they provide a useful barometer for what railway modellers want, particularly locomotives - is it safe to assume that the majority of railway modellers cannot build locos? This is an observation, not a criticism. Most, I would hope, could build a simple wagon and/or kits for buildings. Does trackwork feature in the polls? Or, signals? 

 

What must disappoint manufacturers, and not just RTR ones, is that when something new is brought out there are the usual comments such as 'I would have bought it but it's the wrong livery/number/name/detail for me'. In the office one day, I was phoned up by someone 'complaining' that the latest Hornby Class 50 I'd just reviewed wasn't exactly the one he desired (out of 50 to choose from), because it had the wrong name/number and wasn't exactly in the NSE livery-style he wanted. I pointed out to him a list of paint/transfer/nameplate manufacturers, only to be told 'They're no good, I'll mess it up if I try that sort of thing!'. I then gave him a list of professionals who'd undertake such work, only to be dismissed with 'They're no good, I can't afford their prices!'. After telling him he couldn't have what he wanted, then, he accused me of being rude and would report me to my MD. I honestly couldn't have given a toss, and nothing more came of it. 

 

How common is it out there? 'Railway modellers' who are incapable of doing any 'modelling' for themselves?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

12 hours ago, queensquare said:

 

Thanks Tony. I've never really given it much thought, I model pre-grouping in a minority scale with very little use of RTR so I'm certainly not in the mainstream.

 

Regarding  Southampton, we had a lot of fun there (and at other shows come to that), I miss the banter, hopefully we can get back to something like it at some point.

 

Returning to modelling, my Kirtley now has a coat of paint and some transfers. If it hadn't  been so hot this week I would have got it weathered and finished. Next week maybe.

 

Jerry

 

 

 

 

Good morning Jerry,

 

Lovely work on the Kirtley; thanks for showing us.

 

I doubt if any demonstrators are what might be called 'mainstream'. If they were, then all they'd be demonstrating is how to open boxes, put things on the (Set) track and turn a knob (or, if modern, tap away at some tablet). I'm not being disparaging to those who derive pleasure from that, but they far, far outweigh the numbers of guys/girls who do the sort of things you and I do. 

 

I suppose your part-editorship of the MRJ gets you better-known, in a similar way to what happened to me during my time at BRM. 

 

Being 'better-known' doesn't mean, however, 'better-liked', at least in my case, but that 'comes with the territory'......................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[cctransuk]

20 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

How common is it out there? 'Railway modellers' who are incapable of doing any 'modelling' for themselves?

 

Judging by what I read on this website - the vast majority!

 

CJI.