Ingleford Wharf: 1870s canalside inglenook on the "M&WJR" in 00, and Victoria Quay: a 1900s WIP in 0

[magmouse]

10 minutes ago, drduncan said:

you’re going to EM which, in my book is always a good idea.

 

Agreed - or P4, of course. And always assuming you aren't going to fully commit to 7mm scale, as you know you really should...

 

Nick.

[drduncan]

5 minutes ago, magmouse said:

 

Agreed - or P4, of course. And always assuming you aren't going to fully commit to 7mm scale, as you know you really should...

 

Nick.

We will have to agree to disagree on the wisdom of P4…😁

[magmouse]

Just now, drduncan said:

We will have to agree to disagree on the wisdom of P4…😁

 

Fair enough - all a question of which compromises to choose, and at what cost. In modelling as in life!

 

Nick.

[Schooner]

Was hoping to get this done by now, but the curly rails to a while to get even and fair, so gonna take advantage of the pause to ask a question: any reason not to solder the rail joins between these three sections?

 

 

Looking to guarentee (ha!) conductivity and aid strength/smooth curves from the entry/exit line right to the stops.

 

 

 

Thanks!

[longchap]

1 hour ago, Schooner said:

Was hoping to get this done by now, but the curly rails to a while to get even and fair, so gonna take advantage of the pause to ask a question: any reason not to solder the rail joins between these three sections?

 

 

Looking to guarentee (ha!) conductivity and aid strength/smooth curves from the entry/exit line right to the stops.

 

 

 

Thanks!

No reason not to solder, although if you need to alter the track plan again, it's more work. I always add power droppers to each piece of track to try to ensure power continuity, but we all tend to have our particular methods.

 

Good luck whichever way you go.

 

Edited January 7 by longchap

[MrWolf]

Although I have used good old Peco 100 (Hail Satan etc.) I ran solder into the joiners and joints themselves as well as running dropper wires in the spirit of belt and braces.

I managed to break one of the long radius points, but as it was scrap anyway, cut through the rails, pulled up the faulty point then desoldered the rail stubs. 

It was a bit of a fiddle to get the new points in, but that was mostly down to getting everything aligned properly before fixing and resoldering.

[Pete Haitch]

20 hours ago, Schooner said:

Still on the hunt for a decent early carriage truck [Ed!] and a brace of bolsters btw, if anyone has a recommendation to share.

 

So my nostalgia for the early 1960s approach of taking a RTR wagon, two cocktail sticks, a piece of string and some card, to create a fairish representation of another vehicle; meant that on Thursday I paid £3.00 for these two beauties.

 

 

Then you just have to mention carriage trucks 😀

 

 

[Annie]

7 hours ago, magmouse said:

Agreed - or P4, of course. And always assuming you aren't going to fully commit to 7mm scale, as you know you really should...

When I was much younger than i am today I tried P4 and while I did make some very nice finescale models in the end I ran screaming away from it and took up with old fashioned coarse scale 'O' Gauge instead which was much more fun and didn't threaten either my eyesight or my sanity.

[Miss Prism]

On 08/04/2023 at 11:51, Schooner said:

Please can gwr.org do whatever they need to to get a https:// so that I can embed and share the fantastic pics and info here...thaaanks!

 

I don't understand what you want.

[Harlequin]

1 hour ago, Miss Prism said:

 

I don't understand what you want.

 

I think the suggestion is to get a security certificate, attach it to the website and use it to serve end-to-end encrypted data through the https protocol rather than plain old http.

 

Search engines rank https sites higher than http because they are more trustworthy and browsers won't warn the reader that the site might be "unsafe" to visit.

 

https://www.cloudflare.com/en-gb/learning/ssl/what-is-an-ssl-certificate/

 

There's some more info here but it's a bit over the top for gwr.org,uk: https://www.cloudflare.com/en-gb/learning/security/how-to-secure-a-website/

 

Edited January 7 by Harlequin

[Schooner]

2 hours ago, Pete Haitch said:

 

 

Oh stop it 🤣 Would you take a fiver?!

 

1 hour ago, Annie said:

When I was much younger than i am today

Pavlovian, sorry!

 

1 hour ago, Miss Prism said:

 

I don't understand what you want.

To be able to embed images from gwr.org on RMWeb, cos it's an ace source of information and very well illustrated :) Currently links to images can be shared but the image won't automatically embed when doing so:

http://www.gwr.org.uk/armstrong-goods/1109-small.jpg

 

vs.

 

Source

 

Which means on people reading blocks of text or following links...or copying locally and uploading to RMWeb, which is a grey practice at best. For a more useful answer, see @Harlequin!

 

Track down and done, we'll see what it looks like dry, 🤞 for a subtle but important improvement to running and visuals. 

Edited January 7 by Schooner

[Miss Prism]

gwr.org.uk contains no personal information. Visitors cannot introduce or lodge personal information. It is not a 'user-to-user' site. There are no financial transactions. There are no stored passwords. So I have never felt a need to go https.

 

Secondly, I do not understand how an https protocol on gwr.org.uk would assist or facilitate showing graphical content here that is being copied.

 

[Miss Prism]

In context, there was a robust debate here on RMweb some time ago, and Andy Y decreed that hot-linking would not be allowed. I have obeyed that edict. The problem has become, years down the line, that the newer (and decidedly worse) forum software purposely facititates hot-linking (because the 12-year olds who program the forum software think it is cool), and I think Andy has thrown in the towel on that issue.

 

[Annie]

1 hour ago, Schooner said:

When I was much younger than i am today

Gosh! - I can remember buying that record at the old 'Rhythm and Rendezvous' music shop down the high street when i was in me teens.  Sadly It's not there anymore, - they went and built a shopping mall on top of it.

[Schooner]

26 minutes ago, Annie said:

they went and built a

 

1 hour ago, Miss Prism said:

Secondly, I do not understand how an https protocol on gwr.org.uk would assist or facilitate showing graphical content here that is being copied.

It doesn't. It negates the need to copy; it exchanges RMWeb bandwidth for gwr.org bandwidth which is a rough deal for you but offers great convenience for me :)

 

Not that it really matters, but presumably Andy was concerned about traffic the other way - people using RMWeb as a hosting site for their images and hotlinking to them from external sites. Given the amount of media uploaded by the hour to RMWeb I dread to think what such a practice would cost if it became widespread. I suspect, however, most hotlinking here is from the outside in, as it were - easily displaying images held elsewhere to illustrate points and posts here.

 

"Points and posts" Bing Image Creator (hotlinked)

 

vs.

 

https://www.bing.com/images/create/railway-points-and-fence-posts/1-659b42cf51cd49b0aa34eccb145052d6?id=iei0mmvEqieS%2fFJa1%2b55rw%3d%3d&view=detailv2&idpp=genimg&FORM=GCRIDP&mode=overlay

 

Edited January 8 by Schooner

[MrWolf]

Ha, it wasn't just me that had a Joni Mitchell flashback then! 

 

Where I grew up, they paved paradise and put up lots of unaffordable housing... 😆

[lezz01]

Not going into details I'll just say me too!

Regards Lez.

[Schooner]

And where I grew up is now a thumping great hole in the ground-

 

Oh god brain, really?!

 

- but the period I remember the area (pre-detonations) is being modelled with exceptional skill and documented on RMWeb. Every cloud!

[Miss Prism]

I do not understand why the RMweb software allows hotlinking of material from an https source, but does not allow hotlinking material from an http source.

 

[Miss Prism]

Original RMweb hotlinking thread.

[Harlequin]

3 minutes ago, Miss Prism said:

I do not understand why the RMweb software allows hotlinking of material from an https source, but does not allow hotlinking material from an http source.

 

 

2 minutes ago, Miss Prism said:

Original RMweb hotlinking thread.

 

I don't know either but we are a decade on from that discussion and things have changed a lot since then!

 

One thing I've noticed is that hotlinked images in RMweb usually now also link back to the source page - a proper link to a meaningful page that contains all the detailed information. That overcomes most issues of attribution.

 

On the more general point: Having a secure connection to a website is what people expect these days. They've been told that secure is good and unsecure is bad and browsers reinforce that in their address bar displays and their response to http addresses.

 

[Miss Prism]

39 minutes ago, Harlequin said:

I don't know either but we are a decade on from that discussion and things have changed a lot since then!

 

I'm not sure things have changed in substance since then. It's up to Andy to review and update RMweb's hotlinking policy.

 

 

39 minutes ago, Harlequin said:

On the more general point: Having a secure connection to a website is what people expect these days. They've been told that secure is good and unsecure is bad and browsers reinforce that in their address bar displays and their response to http addresses.

 

I get the impression it is widely acknowledged that the 'not secure' text on the view site information graphic is a misnomer. Lots of 'secure' sites can be  unsafe. Paying for an SSL for gwr.org.uk would produce no significant benefit.

 

[Nick C]

5 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

I do not understand why the RMweb software allows hotlinking of material from an https source, but does not allow hotlinking material from an http source.

 

Because it's a very bad idea to mix secure and insecure content in the same page, especially with dynamic content (such as a forum page...), as it opens up all kinds of opportunities for attackers to intercept requests and inject malicious code.

 

You don't need to pay for a certificate, they can be had for free from https://letsencrypt.org/, so there's no reason NOT to have one.

 

https://www.troyhunt.com/heres-why-your-static-website-needs-https/

 

[Miss Prism]

35 minutes ago, Nick C said:

You don't need to pay for a certificate, they can be had for free from https://letsencrypt.org/, so there's no reason NOT to have one.

 

Classic diy geekery, and a steep learning curve, but my web host (Ionos) doesn't support it, at least the last time I checked.

 

Some web hosts are now offering free SSLs in their hosting packages. This is a fairly recent development, and an indication of how competitive the hosting situation is,

 

[Miss Prism]

42 minutes ago, Nick C said:

Because it's a very bad idea to mix secure and insecure content in the same page, especially with dynamic content (such as a forum page...), as it opens up all kinds of opportunities for attackers to intercept requests and inject malicious code.

 

Thanks, and I think it explains why a coherent RMweb hotlinking position is now out of Andy Y's hands, because it is, in effect, being dictated by the forum software.