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.

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Black Marlin said:

Modellers of the ECML, a question: 

 

I've been reading Brookbanks's "Triumph & Beyond: The ECML 1939 - 1959" and he mentions that in WW2 there was a daily train of whale oil that ran in the winter of 1940-1 from Merseyside to King's Cross. Does anyone know what tankers belonging to what company would have conveyed whale oil? I have never seen such a thing modelled, and it would be an intriguing thing to send rolling round a layout...

 

I'm not a modeller of the ECML but: what evidence have you that the whale oil was conveyed in tankers rather than in barrels? Barrels could be transported in ordinary opens and would presumably have been much easier to handle and distribute at the London end.

  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The subject of 'criticism' keeps on recurring, as does the issue of 'likes' and 'dislikes'.

 

It does nobody any good to justify what they're doing by denigrating the work of others; has anyone ever listened to an electrician/plumber/builder/mechanic when they're asked to inspect or fix the work of others? Or railway modellers? 

 

My views are widely known. As long as any criticism is given in a way that encourages (rather than crushes) the person whose work it is, then that person should benefit. His/her next model should be better. 

 

It works both ways, of course. Anyone prepared to offer criticism, should (indeed must) be prepared to accept it as well. 

 

Regarding all the various kits, I'd have thought it useful to hear the experiences of others (as long as what's said is a reflection of the quality of the kit, not the quality - or lack of it - of the builder's work, nor his/her prejudices). 

 

And, a majority is never going to agree as to which was the best/most interesting period in our railways' history. I think the period I model is the 'best' because it's the time I remember with fondness in my 'formative years'. I well recall tiddler fishing by the Chesterfield Canal near Kiveton Park when a BR green B17 went by on the adjacent line. My brother and I were delighted by its appearance, but our uncle (who was in charge of us) loudly proclaimed 'That's not reet green, and it should've LNER on t'tender!'. Apologies for my poor Yorkshire accent. 

 

As should always be said, 'Each to their own'........................

  • Like 11
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, pete55 said:

 

Tony is quite right, the footbridge is the work of Buccaneer John, who designed, drew, and had the one off etches made. The supporting columns were cast resin I believe, again John's work, and the column tops were turned brass fittings also by John, and was really only finished to the state of Tony's picture shortly before Roy passed away.

Thanks Pete,

 

I first took the footbridge's picture during that 'final' Retford running session which we all attended in October 2019. I never thought I'd get the opportunity again.

 

Thankfully, I have been able to take more shots, including the one I've recently posted. Fittingly, with one of Sandra's locos present.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
33 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Tony,

 

No, as long as any criticisms/observations/comments are objective and constructive, we should embrace them in my opinion.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

I have to say I agree with Tony G, I rarely post photos on here because it feels like many are just waiting to pounce to highlight any errors or ommissions. Constructive criticism has its place but only if invited. I realise that in most cases it's meant well and is meant to be constructive and supportive but for many it has the opposite effect. It doesn't particularly bother me, I'm big enough and ugly enough to take it on the chin but that's not the case for everyone.

 

Jerry

  • Like 5
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Tony,

 

I respect your decision regarding models you make, though you and I differ in many respects. 

 

Though it might be seen as pomposity on my part by my posting so many pictures of what I've made, it's actually to invite 'critical' observation. I certainly don't do it for 'likes' (though I won't deny it's pleasant to receive them, and I do always acknowledge to whom any likes should be directed).

 

Take the 'Fireboxgate' J17 incident from last year. I could have left it, but you were highly-critical of my fudging a cast metal GWR firebox in place of the correct GE-style one. The fact is my (final) 'satisfaction' with the model was greatly increased (not diminished) because I'd put it right; because of what you'd said. 

 

No, as long as any criticisms/observations/comments are objective and constructive, we should embrace them in my opinion.

 

It's just as well (for your sensitivity) that you've never been a member of Wolverhampton MRC. Ask Tony Geary and Richard Irven as to why.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

I am not sensitive at all Tony. I have a close circle of friends and I will take ribbing, ridiculing and leg pulling from them all day long.

 

They will look at what I am working on and if I have made a mess of something they will let me know and I am happy to listen.

 

A clubroom or a bunch of friends is a totally different situation to a public forum for me.

 

I see many models, including lots on Wright Writes, that I could pick fault with if I was that way inclined. I just like to wait until somebody asks for comments, as you have done many times.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, queensquare said:

 

I have to say I agree with Tony G, I rarely post photos on here because it feels like many are just waiting to pounce to highlight any errors or ommissions. Constructive criticism has its place but only if invited. I realise that in most cases it's meant well and is meant to be constructive and supportive but for many it has the opposite effect. It doesn't particularly bother me, I'm big enough and ugly enough to take it on the chin but that's not the case for everyone.

 

Jerry

Thanks Jerry,

 

I wonder how many will disagree with your comments about yourself? Not me - you're much bigger than I am, though not as ugly! 

 

I have to say I think you're being a little unfair to readers of this thread. I've personally found it an incredible resource, and many have commented how useful it's been to them. Many (most?) of my models have been made better by my listening to criticisms. 

 

I accept the fact that 'criticisms' should be 'invited', but isn't that axiomatic on an open forum? It's just a different form of communication/media. Surely, in your role as one of the editors of MRJ, if anything is published in that, don't you expect criticisms/comments/observations following what's printed? 

 

If people are really sensitive about what others might say about what they've made, then, as you've indicated, the answer is simple. Don't post pictures. 

 

I'm delighted with the number of pictures of models made by others which have been posted on here. It's what makes Wright writes......................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited by Tony Wright
tautology
  • Like 3
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
3 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Jerry,

 

I wonder how many will disagree with your comments about yourself? Not me - you're much bigger than I am, though not as ugly! 

 

I have to say I think you're being a little unfair to readers of this thread. I've personally found it an incredible resource, and many have commented how useful it's been to them. Many (most?) of my models have been made better by my listening to criticisms. 

 

I accept the fact that 'criticisms' should be 'invited', but isn't that axiomatic on an open forum? It's just a different form of communication/media. Surely, in your role as one of the editors of MRJ, if anything is published in that, don't you expect criticisms/comments/observations following what's published? 

 

If people are really sensitive about what others might say about what they've made, then, as you've indicated, the answer is simple. Don't post pictures. 

 

I'm delighted with the number of pictures of models made by others which have been posted on here. It's what makes Wright writes......................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Thanks Tony, 

 

I would broadly agree that the the overwhelming majority of responses here are constructive and supportive but at times that's down to interpretation and knowing the author.. I don't think it's anything to do with being sensitive, as you know I can justifiably be called many things but sensitive certainly isn't one of them. As Tony G said, face to face comments in a club room with mates is very different to an open forum where I think we need to be a bit more careful. 

 

As for criticism of anything published in MRJ or any other mag come to that. Yes, they are fair game but, unlike on an open forum, not every comment is published. MRJ has the great advantage that you can't just fire off an email. If anybody really has something to say they have to commit it to paper and post it in the traditional manner which is very effective at filtering out the worst of the keyboard warriors. Anyone who has been following the letters page in the last couple of MRJs will know that we certainly don't shy away from criticism and robust views!

 

Jerry

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

 

It's just as well (for your sensitivity) that you've never been a member of Wolverhampton MRC. Ask Tony Geary and Richard Irven as to why.

It’s true, many an honest feedback given. 
I had the brake gear pulled off my o4 because I had glued it on and was told to go away and solder it on properly. In fairness if it had been left super glued on it might not still be with the loco today. With two elder brothers and a boarding school education I was going to develop a fairly thick skin which came in handy. Under it all I knew it came from the right place no matter how it might have been phrased. 
richard

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Where is all this criticism of personal modelling?

 

I've just read back through the last ten pages of Wright Writes in an attempt to find it. Apart from t-g-b, who is always moaning at Tony, in that moany friend sort of way, all I could find was Tony W noted some missing lamps on Shap, Tony criticised his own modelling, Sandra criticised there modelling and I criticised my own modelling. There was a lot of talk about criticism with many getting upset at the prospect but not much on display. On the other hand, compliments of peoples modelling was running at and average of three of four posts a page.

Edited by Headstock
Restore missing letter.
  • Like 7
  • Agree 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, grahame said:

 

Appreciating doesn't mean one has to make a modelling effort for everything. It's quite possible to admire and appreciate the range, history and scope of railways without modelling it all, and it all can provide inspiration, ideas and increased understanding and knowledge. 

 

Unfortunately, one issue I see is that a lack of understanding and appreciation is often supported and coupled with negative comments such as criticism, denigration and running down of eras, genres, even individual railway companies, scales, gauges, etc., that are not the preferred choice of the individual. I'd much rather hear/read about the positives, why someone likes something rather that why they don't like an alternative. All to offen people resort to saying that a particular livery is rubbish, or modern railways are boring, or narrow gauge is pointless, or freight trains shouldn't be seen.

 

 

 

 

OK I am one the worst for taking the micky about certain railways, and non 4mm 00 hopefully it is seen that way. If not sorry.

 

I don't take much interest in modern trains but if I get caught at the level crossing at Lincoln High Street there is still an excitement in me as to what is going to go past.

 

If I am at a show and I see something that is not in my usual sphere of interest I will politely walk by not utter " Another F'ing Diesel Depot".

 

There is a lot in model railway land that does not interest me, including some really well made models. The most important thing is if those who own and operate these layouts, build and buy the stock  are enjoying their part of the hobby, who am I to criticize.

Edited by Clive Mortimore
  • Like 11
  • Agree 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Headstock said:

Were is all this criticism of personal modelling?

 

I've just read back through the last ten pages of Wright Writes in an attempt to find it. Apart from t-g-b, who is always moaning at Tony, in that moany friend sort of way, all I could find was Tony W noted some missing lamps on Shap, Tony criticised his own modelling, Sandra criticised there modelling and I criticised my own modelling. There was a lot of talk about criticism with many getting upset at the prospect but not much on display. On the other hand, compliments of peoples modelling was running at and average of three of four posts a page.

 

There has been less unsolicited criticism recently. Probably since the last major discussion on the matter. Certainly since I stopped posting any photos of what I am working on. Remember my signalbox with no closure bricks at the corners and windows and with round cornered bricks? I do!

 

That was the last straw for me as far as posting any photos of what I am building on here. Such comments go beyond "constructive, helpful criticism" and were more "extreme nit picking" in my opinion.

 

Somebody even suggested I would have been better building it with Stretcher Bond brick, which would be completely wrong for the building modelled. To receive constructive criticism suggesting that I make a model worse than it is was just not something that sat well with me.

 

Anyway, I will say no more on the matter. It has been talked about enough and if I am coming across as being moany, it is best that I shut up and say nothing.

 

 

 

  • Friendly/supportive 13
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

There has been less unsolicited criticism recently. Probably since the last major discussion on the matter. Certainly since I stopped posting any photos of what I am working on. Remember my signalbox with no closure bricks at the corners and windows and with round cornered bricks? I do!

 

That was the last straw for me as far as posting any photos of what I am building on here. Such comments go beyond "constructive, helpful criticism" and were more "extreme nit picking" in my opinion.

 

Somebody even suggested I would have been better building it with Stretcher Bond brick, which would be completely wrong for the building modelled. To receive constructive criticism suggesting that I make a model worse than it is was just not something that sat well with me.

 

Anyway, I will say no more on the matter. It has been talked about enough and if I am coming across as being moany, it is best that I shut up and say nothing.

 

 

 

 

Good evening Tony,

 

I quite enjoy your moaning, it has personality and a point of view. I would hate to see a scrubbed clean version of this thread, watched over by the happiness patrol. I hope you reconsider your decision not to post your work. I remember your signal box and the criticism. From my view point, it made about as much impact as a pea crashing into the Moon.

Edited by Headstock
restored missing letter.
  • Like 2
  • Agree 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, queensquare said:

 

Thanks Tony, 

 

I would broadly agree that the the overwhelming majority of responses here are constructive and supportive but at times that's down to interpretation and knowing the author.. I don't think it's anything to do with being sensitive, as you know I can justifiably be called many things but sensitive certainly isn't one of them. As Tony G said, face to face comments in a club room with mates is very different to an open forum where I think we need to be a bit more careful. 

 

As for criticism of anything published in MRJ or any other mag come to that. Yes, they are fair game but, unlike on an open forum, not every comment is published. MRJ has the great advantage that you can't just fire off an email. If anybody really has something to say they have to commit it to paper and post it in the traditional manner which is very effective at filtering out the worst of the keyboard warriors. Anyone who has been following the letters page in the last couple of MRJs will know that we certainly don't shy away from criticism and robust views!

 

Jerry

Thanks Jerry,

 

I've been in the same chair with regard to 'filtering' out letters. 

 

I used to get one in the office every month from someone who I can only describe as 'odd' (can I write that here?). The letters usually began with 'I greet you in the Holy Name of Jesus'. Thereafter followed a series of rants, usually concluding with 'The hand of Beelzebub is apparent in the latest Bachorhelacc....model and anyone buying it is to be forever damned!'. Or words to that effect. They were written on school exercise book paper, with lines, and by the time the writer had finished, the pen was being used as a weapon, not as a writing instrument! I have to say, however, that the writing/grammar/spelling was very good. Better-educated oddities are often very dangerous................

 

I think, to be fair to the moderators on RMweb, if any post is considered to be really unfair or vindictive, it will be removed. The equivalent of my sending the Holy Jesus guy's letter straight in the bin! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 4
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
  • Funny 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

There has been less unsolicited criticism recently. Probably since the last major discussion on the matter. Certainly since I stopped posting any photos of what I am working on. Remember my signalbox with no closure bricks at the corners and windows and with round cornered bricks? I do!

 

That was the last straw for me as far as posting any photos of what I am building on here. Such comments go beyond "constructive, helpful criticism" and were more "extreme nit picking" in my opinion.

 

Somebody even suggested I would have been better building it with Stretcher Bond brick, which would be completely wrong for the building modelled. To receive constructive criticism suggesting that I make a model worse than it is was just not something that sat well with me.

 

Anyway, I will say no more on the matter. It has been talked about enough and if I am coming across as being moany, it is best that I shut up and say nothing.

 

 

 

Much to my shame, Tony, I don't remember your signal box on here. When was it? I think the reason is it didn't have wheels, didn't have a number beginning with '6' and wasn't soldered together (or was it?). 

 

Not knowing the model, I don't know the critic(s). Did he/she/them post models of their work afterwards?

 

My usual response to 'destructive' critics is to request that they show me their work. Would you believe, it usually results in my not being able to see their @rses for dust?

 

I for one would love to see what you're doing...................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 6
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

Good morning Rob,

 

I have a soft spot for the pre Stanier LMS locomotives, in particular the Patriots. In some alternative history, I would liked to have seen a Fowler Pacific. Both modelers and RTR manufactures have this unfortunate obsession with fitting them with Stanier pattern valve spindle guides, it's pure evil. I think that you should send your adjusted artwork to those cads at Bachmann.

 

Pre-Stanier LMS?   That's about as bad as liking the NER.  Ye shall be cast into the outer darkness, towed by a brass B16 or Q7....

 

At least for the Fowler 5XP 4-6-0  Bachmann gave them metal smoke deflectors... and they come with endless accessory parts,almost enough for me to consider actual modelling....

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Clive Mortimore said:

OK I am one the worst for taking the micky about certain railways, and non 4mm 00 hopefully it is seen that way. If not sorry.

 

I don't take much interest in modern trains but if I get caught at the level crossing at Lincoln High Street there is still an excitement in me as to what is going to go past.

 

If I am at a show and I see something that is not in my usual sphere of interest I will politely walk by not utter " Another F'ing Diesel Depot".

 

There is a lot in model railway land that does not interest me, including some really well made models. The most important thing is if those who own and operate these layouts, build and buy the stock  are enjoying their part of the hobby, who am I to criticize.

I'm 100% with Clive here; the modern railway doesn't interest me like the railways of my youth (1980s) and before, but I still love to watch a train roar past.  I cannot drive across a railway bridge or crossing without looking both ways.

 

At exhibitions - they will return, don't worry, they will - there are many types of layouts that I have no desire to build myself but don't EVER walk past.  I have seen some fascinating and original features on US short line layouts that have really inspired me, or something new on the 15th small diesel depot.  Plus I'm too much of a tightwad to miss anything at a show that I've paid to enter!  However, even layouts where I lose count of all the "faults" (for me, they usually relate to geographic nonsenses), I would never, NEVER voice my negative opinion to the builders/operators.  I have many faults of my own, but hope that being monumentally rude to complete strangers, isn't one of them.

  • Like 9
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

I'm not a modeller of the ECML but: what evidence have you that the whale oil was conveyed in tankers rather than in barrels? Barrels could be transported in ordinary opens and would presumably have been much easier to handle and distribute at the London end.

Hector Whaling had whale oil tankers, I think. I know that the Hector Heron ended up being operated/manned by British & Commonwealth in the conventional oil trades after commercial whaling ceased. Had it come from the Antarctic by ship, loading it into rail tankers would have been a lot easier than discharging it ashore, then having it decanted into 45 gallon drums (For youngsters, the modern equivalent is 209 litre drums...)

 

Mark

  • Informative/Useful 5
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, APOLLO said:

 

...

 

Just back from a walk over Boars Head bridge, the railway looks quite nice in the snow, pity no Super D's passed !!! 

 

Brit15

 

 

 

I could create a picture of one using a lovely RTR weathered G2a...     smoke included. :)

 

49064_G2a_shed_3abc_r1200.jpg.6b7a3ffe490558e74fe47ea26ee61c1d.jpg

 

Not exactly Boars Head, more like deepest Wales.

Edited by robmcg
added comment and pic
  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, robmcg said:

 

Pre-Stanier LMS?   That's about as bad as liking the NER.  Ye shall be cast into the outer darkness, towed by a brass B16 or Q7....

 

At least for the Fowler 5XP 4-6-0  Bachmann gave them metal smoke deflectors... and they come with endless accessory parts,almost enough for me to consider actual modelling....

 

Evening Rob,

 

actual modelling! what about your digital recreation of that Fowler Pacific, or are you afraid of the outer darkness?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Headstock said:

 

Evening Rob,

 

actual modelling! what about your digital recreation of that Fowler Pacific, or are you afraid of the outer darkness?

 

It is an intriguing idea , a Fowler Pacific, but no, the hens would stop laying....    look what happened to Churchward.    Only Gresley managed success in this area before 1930.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ScRSG said:

In the spirit of showing things we have done during lockdown, my latest effort is a K4 from a Dave Alexander kit.

 

IMGP1146.JPG.3de9b599b3a79cd51b6059d58baa1c5d.JPG

 

Chas

Lovely stuff, Chas,

 

Thanks for showing us.

 

Is 61995 the one with the oddly-shaped outside steampipe, but only on this side?

 

I assume Dave's kits are no longer available?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Chamby said:

 

Tony, I think the question perhaps should be... why does it matter?   Anything other than absolute accuracy down to the point of counting individual rivets, takes you into the slippery subject of what level of accuracy is acceptable.  That, as we have discussed before, is different for different people, and can vary considerably across different aspects of modelling, from lamps to crests to shades of green, subtleties in the profile of tumblehomes or roof profiles... the list is endless! 

 

The reality is is that joe public and the majority of railway modellers for that matter, have no idea whether a tender should have an extra strip across the bottom of it, or not.  They probably haven’t even noticed that some tenders have them, and others don’t.  The fact that different styles of tenders were swapped between locomotives at different times in their lifespan makes it a very specialised and minority subject such that few would be able to criticise from retained knowledge, whilst observing a model in the exhibition hall.  Even on this forum, we have to constantly refer to photographic sources to check up on such details. 

 

So, playing devils advocate here... what are people’s thoughts on why it does matter?   I don’t think I will ever get a model 100% correct... so why do we beat ourselves up so much about these historical minutiae?

I think this has to be a purely personal question and based on one's own interests and enjoyment: if it matters to you, or to me, that a particular detail is right and it gives you or me pleasure to research that detail and replicate it accurately on a model, then for us, it does matter, but only to us and only because we care about it. As long as the process gives us enjoyment it's a Good Thing, though if it causes us stress then I would question it: a new diagnosis of 'Finescale Anxiety Syndrome' (FAS), perhaps? :D

Equally, if you or I run a model on our layouts that is incredibly inaccurate but which we enjoy running (perhaps for sentimental reasons - I have quite a few old RTR items that my dad used to run when I was a kid that definitely fall into this category) then I don't think it does matter at all that they are not to the same standards of fidelity.

Problems occur when one person judges another's activities according to his own criteria ('did you see the width of the splashers on that XYZ7 he was running?!'), but that's another story.

Pursuing perfection is a very widespread human activity and can be very therapeutic. Woody Allen defends the tacked-on happy ending he adds to the play-within-a-film at the end of Annie Hall, by saying that we try to get things to come out perfectly in art because it's so difficult to do so in real life...

  • Like 8
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
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.