A stroll through Railway Modellers past

[kevinlms]

4 hours ago, cp409067 said:

 

*

When not yet a teenager (by a few months) I was permitted to veture solo from my home in the London suburbs, and to traverse the Underground system in order to attend the Easter 1960 MRC exhibition. I recall seeing JNM - perhaps I knew it was he from a photograph previously published in MRN. My memory is of tall dignified gentleman with substantial moustache, and dressed in wing collar and tie, waistcoat, striped trousers, and black tail coat.

 

I am saddened and surprised reading the above to learn this was shortly before his death at the age of only 68 years.

 

 

CP

Imagine if that was the standard attire for attending model railway exhibitions. I wonder why that dress code died out?

 

Edit to add.

 

It is important to note that the attire was directly related to the family history, where you had to dress to impress, as close ups with cameras etc, was just not practical (or possible) and you had to be recognised from a distance.

Edited March 7, 2022 by kevinlms
More info

[Pacific231G]

17 hours ago, kevinlms said:

Imagine if that was the standard attire for attending model railway exhibitions. I wonder why that dress code died out?

 

Edit to add.

 

It is important to note that the attire was directly related to the family history, where you had to dress to impress, as close ups with cameras etc, was just not practical (or possible) and you had to be recognised from a distance.

Not quite so formal perhaps but if you look at images of modellers with their layouts in RM from the 1950s and 1960s  and even into the 1970s most of them are wearing a suit or at least a collar and tie. I don't know if this was just because they were being photographed or if that was their normal modelling attire. Quite possibly it was as men in those days, at least those in white collar occupations, tended to wear nothing but suits which gradually cascaded down from "best" through daily office to weekend and finally to gardening (though the jacket might then be replaced with a jumper or cardigan) . Sports jackets were a less formal alternative but modern "casual" wear was relatively uncommon.   I don't think CJF ever appeared without a suit and tie.

[St Enodoc]

2 hours ago, Pacific231G said:

Not quite so formal perhaps but if you look at images of modellers with their layouts in RM from the 1950s and 1960s  and even into the 1970s most of them are wearing a suit or at least a collar and tie. I don't know if this was just because they were being photographed or if that was their normal modelling attire. Quite possibly it was as men in those days, at least those in white collar occupations, tended to wear nothing but suits which gradually cascaded down from "best" through daily office to weekend and finally to gardening (though the jacket might then be replaced with a jumper or cardigan) . Sports jackets were a less formal alternative but modern "casual" wear was relatively uncommon.   I don't think CJF ever appeared without a suit and tie.

One of our neighbours wore a white shirt and tie to mow his lawn - circa 1963.

[Nearholmer]

From what I can work out, the generations who were already adults at the time of WW2 always wore “smart” clothes when “out in public”, and when travelling. My grandfather was a gardener by trade, so he only wore a suit to weddings and similarly formal events, but went in sports jacket, collar and tie, cavalry twill trousers, and polished brogues elsewhere, whereas some people of the same age certainly wore suits. 
 

The generation who’d been children or youngsters during WW2 and the national service years, some of whom are members of RMWeb, seem to have followed the above into the 1960s, then progressively “casualised”, with only a few diehards remaining strictly “smart in public” beyond the 70s, but a noticeable percentage have kept up the sports jacket (especially 0 gauge modellers!) even up to now.
 

By the time we come to those who were children in the 60s and beyond, barely anyone maintained “smart in public” into adult life, except while attending white collar work. Worth mentioning the “Chap” fashion movement though, because that has left a few younger chaps with the habit of dressing like their (great?) grandfathers.

 

The wearing of ties at work seemed to wither quite suddenly in the 2010s, contemporary with The Tie-less Tories of the Cameron years, with even many Directors going tie-less except at formal meetings, ‘cos  it made them feel ‘cutting edge’, and immediately pre-pandemic “smart-ish casual” seemed the norm for most “back of house” office staff.

 

Post pandemic, those returning to offices are probably wearing their gardening clothes to work!

 

I bet people have achieved PhD’s by theorising about the whats and whys of all this. Maybe they even cited photos in RM as evidence.

 

 

[kevinlms]

Plenty of photos in Railway Modeller etc of boys in school uniform, even on weekends. Presumably public schools where if they were seen 'representing' the school in some way - perhaps boarders displaying at exhibitions, then uniforms on?

Pity some of the modern private* school kids, don't seem to care about the public reputations of their uniforms any more. They have been some very poor behaviour in Australia in recent times.

 

However, I digress. I was always taught by my mother that school clothes were for going to school in. After school meant taking them off, hanging up carefully and putting other clothes on. Do I still follow that logic - no! Unless filthy.

 

* In Australia, what you call public schools, are private schools here. Many of them have very high fees and still get public funding.

[St Enodoc]

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

sports jacket, collar and tie, cavalry twill trousers, and polished brogues

That is still the standard uniform for retired railway engineers. Black brogues = Mech or Elec, brown = Civil.

[Nearholmer]

Oh dear! 
 

I’m semi-retired electrical, and wear brown boots (properly polished) when in that rig. I hope that doesn’t mean I’ve got civil leanings.

[St Enodoc]

17 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

Oh dear! 
 

I’m semi-retired electrical, and wear brown boots (properly polished) when in that rig. I hope that doesn’t mean I’ve got civil leanings.

Brahn boots! I ask yer.

 

S. Holloway

[RichardT]

On 04/03/2022 at 06:53, Nearholmer said:

 

Does Railway Modeller mention timber shortages at this date?

Returning to another of our gentle RM-related cultural musings, I’ve just been listening to a 1954 Goon Show on Radio 4 Extra, which included Ned Seagoon asking shipbuilder Henry Crun what was causing the delay in building a replica of the Marie (sic) Celeste, to which Crun exclaims “It’s the wood! You can’t get the wood!”which seemed to elicit resigned laughter from the audience…

 

Richard

Edited March 8, 2022 by RichardT
Correcting the Goons quote after listening to the repeat.

[RichardT]

On 07/03/2022 at 05:02, kevinlms said:

Imagine if that was the standard attire for attending model railway exhibitions.

The other thing that strikes me from old RMs are the number of layout operators at public exhibitions who wore dust jackets/overall jackets (with shirt, tie & often pipe) as a kind of “operator’s uniform”.  Quite practical, but it makes them all look like lab technicians - perhaps that was the intended resonance?

 

As far as JNM is concerned, his contemporaries sometimes commented on his archaic dress style. As he came from a showbusiness/artistic family I suspect this was a very conscious stylistic affectation. (A bit like the “young fogies” who were prevelant during my university years in the early 80s.)   In his writings on locomotive matters in the 1940s and 1950s he was very keen on the idea of atomic-powered steam engines as a rival to diesels and, especially, electrics (he really disliked the latter for some reason). So quite up to date in some things you could say.
 

(Alternatively, you could read his atomic enthusiasm as an Edwardian view from someone brought up on HG Wells & Jules Verne: a steampunk before his time!)

 

Richard T

 

This discussion is a very welcome distraction from the news…

[ardbealach]

As someone who is now in his late seventies I can clearly recall the dress code of the Fifties and Sixties for railway enthusiasts and modellers.  Back then men's wardrobes were limited - workwear and workwear.  Suits worn to work would be worn in leisure time.  A good friend of mine, then in his early twenties in the mid Sixties and who worked for a large insurance company, had to wear a dark coloured wo piece suit and a white shirt and tie every day at work - even although he was not even on the front line and seen by the public.  He worked a five and a half day week, Saturday mornings were compulsory, but on a Saturday he was allowed to dress down to a sports jacket and grey flannels, but a tie was still compulsory.

 

With regard to school uniforms, back then I never owned a suit.  Like many of my contemporaries back then who, like me, went to state schools we would always wear our school uniforms on leisure days out.   The 1962 picture at Dunragit of the Wigtownshire Rambler to Whithorn sees me in my school uniform and collar and ties being worn by all.  In the second shot in 1965 [I think] of CR 123 at Callander [and I have just noted its bent front end] shows the other standard menswear of the day - the gaberdine trench coat.

 

I suppose we were still back then coming out of the fashion of the earlier age as many men had seen military service either in WW2 or National Service where uniforms and ties were worn at all times.   

 

Don't forget flat caps were much to be found in working men on the shop floor or on construction sites.  They tended to change to sports jackets - and still with ties - for their leisurewear.  And finally a black and white photo of my grandfather on holiday in the late 1950's with my grandmother and friend.  This was his everyday garb no matter where he went, complete with watch chain, as I remember him. [Alisdair] 

 

  

[Nearholmer]

It’s noticeable that trouser-waists actually went round men’s waists (irrespective of the girth of same), rather than  being cut to ride on the hip bones, too.

[RichardT]

41 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

 

It’s noticeable that trouser-waists actually went round men’s waists (irrespective of the girth of same)

 

The era of the “short portly” cut…

 

Richard

[Metropolitan H]

Regarding "Brahn boots" surely it depends on whether one is going up to London or down to the country?

 

I'm one of those who continued with school uniform for best till about 14 years old - then it was a sports jacket and tie, or a M&S windcheater for more casual days out, till student days.

 

Now well retired dress code is back to sports jacket for best - I do have a suit, but not sure I can still get in it. In the trousering dept, I now normally wear denims or corduary trousers - except when required to smarten up by the authority. I also now wear "Brahn boots" and belt except on very posh occasions.

 

Now can we get back to trains - and the memorable layouts that appeared in RM etc. - Borchester still gets one of my votes, along with Buckingham GC and ?????

 

Regards

Chris H

[cp409067]

4 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

It’s noticeable that trouser-waists actually went round men’s waists (irrespective of the girth of same), rather than  being cut to ride on the hip bones, too.

 

*

The significant factor was that such trousers were worn with braces rather than a belt.

And then in turn the braces covered by a waistcoat.

 

 

CP

[Nearholmer]

3 hours ago, Metropolitan H said:

Now can we get back to trains

 

i think that our host in this thread has not propelled us onward to the next month with one of his useful synopses.

 

Anyway, Railway Modellers past, and railway modellers past, are close companions.

 

One area where RM does slightly let itself down on the social history front is the lack of range in the adverts, which stick almost, but not quite, to subject. Old Meccano Magazines are better on that front, because they advertise all sorts of weird and wonderful things thhat give an insight into the wider life of the target audience.

[cp409067]

2 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

 

.....

 

One area where RM does slightly let itself down on the social history front is the lack of range in the adverts, which stick almost, but not quite, to subject. Old Meccano Magazines are better on that front, because they advertise all sorts of weird and wonderful things thhat give an insight into the wider life of the target audience.

 

*

Agreed. Without checking my archive, I seem to recall as follows.

 

[1]  That MM had advertising for chewing gum including that it had once been used to plug a radiator hole during the Le Mans 24 hour race.

 

[2]  MRN had ads for Senior Service cigarettes.

 

[3]  RM was tame by comparison in offering 6 x 4 garden sheds.

 

 

CP

 

[eldomtom2]

Vol.1 No.5

Jun-Jul 1950

 

Price: 1/6

 

Published by Ian Allan Ltd.

 

Editor: C. J. Freezer

 

Carrying on from Lake leaving the position last issue, there is a brief notice on The Editorship, stating that C. J. Freezer has now taken over.

 

M. Drinkwater presents The O.L.M.S. - An 'O' Gauge Line For Timetable Working. As he admits, this is a plan rather than a layout, the latter being under construction, but the unique nature of the plan means that I shall go into some detail describing it. It consists of a loop (named the "outer circle") with seven stations, marked A to G in sequence. There is a reversing loop between A and F, and a regular loop (named the "inner circle") between A and G.  Between A and the junction for the latter loop is a junction for a terminus station, marked T. It is in the operation of the layout where things gets interesting. Trains are run as closely as possible to real-world timetables, with time sped up by 12 and distances measured in "model miles" (the scale mile divided by the clock speed), which in the O gauge of the layout equals to 10 feet. Where this diverges from modern-day examples of timetabled layouts, however, is that rather that simulating the operations of a station the OLMS aims to simulate the operations of London-to-Scotland expresses, the example given being the Midday Scot. This is why the stations are merely lettered rather than named - which station they represent changes depending on how long the train has travelled. As described, "to complete the journey from Euston to Glasgow makes an initial circuit of the inner circle followed by twenty-two complete circuits of the outer circle before returning to the terminus via the crossover". The article is accompanied by a truly massive timetable, taking up all of one page and most of the next, displaying the real distances and times of the Midday Scot compared to that of the model, along with noting what each real-life station is represented as (Crewe, for instance, is station G on the ninth circuit).

 

There is a brief article entitled More About Hornby Dublo. This ultimately says little on Dublo that hadn't already been said in the Dublo article in the second issue, but does include two photos of classic "train set" layouts.

 

A. G. Thomas provides information on improving the Dublo N2 (though at this stage RM was clearly following Dublo's lead in never confirming its identity) in Hornby Dublo Conversations. Most interesting to me is this paragraph:

Quote

First let it be said that we shall consider not only the Dublo loco itself, but also the unpainted, cast body (not claiming to Dublo origin) that can now be obtained for less than five shillings from almost every model shop; no one seems to know exactly the history of this latter production, but the fact remains that an examination of the casting shows it to be at any rate a very near relation of its well known counterpart.

I have never heard of a copy of the Dublo N2 body before and would be interested to hear if anyone knows more.

 

From Across the Irish Sea is a brief article on an O-gauge layout built by CIE to promote themselves at the 1950 Spring Show.

 

H. A. Robinson, B.Eng, M. R. S. T. provides a brief history of the hobby in Fifty Years of Model Railroading. I note the use of the usually-American term - elsewhere it is clear that by the 1950s "railroad" was clearly defined as an American term as it is today.

 

For the benefit of younger modellers there is a brief article on An Interesting Hornby Layout, built by Mr. D. J. Muirhead of Hendon, London. "Hornby" without any suffix in those days of course meant gauge O, and the layout is presented in the hopes that it demonstrates how interesting operation can be achieved with non-scale equipment.

 

Locos Worth Modelling - No. 1 L.N.W.R. "Precursor" is a selection of photos of various details of the titular class. According to Whitehouse, "one can often obtain fine scale and accurate drawings of one's favourite locomotive but photographs of such items as rivet arrangements, brake gear, and other details, are lamentably absent". Whether or not the photos included were helpful to modellers I cannot say.

 

The Ten Minute Model for this issue has been suggested by Mr. D. S. Mitchell of Coulsdon, Surrey, who provides a method of using copper wire to create fencing.

 

Model Trade News has now ditched review scores, though editorial comments are still present. Covered this issue are:

• The Rogergauge metal gauge, which has measurements for a variety of OO and EM-related matters.
• Various news from Edward Exley (Sales) & Company, including new locomotive buffers (1s. 3d.), an increase in the price of ladders from 10d. to 1s. (but supposedly the length of said ladders has been doubled), boxes being provided for all Exley coaches ("a welcome sign of the times"), ventilators now being part of coach sides instead of being painted onto the windows, and a new catalogue.
• And Percival Marshall have produced a colour booklet with detailed livery plans of various pre-Grouping locomotives; included in the 2s. booklet ("not exorbitant with present costs of colour reproductions") are charts for LNWR 619, SECR 735, GNR 3, LBSC 189, and GWR 3046.

An article with a rather interesting history next: apparently a party of schoolboys from the Queen Alexandra College, Wakefield visited the works of the Leeds Model Company, and after the visit the managing director, Mr R. Rathbone, offered a prize of £1 for the boy who wrote the best essay on the visit. The resulting winner, written by Ian Plummer (age 12), has been published in this issue as Junior Impressions No. 1 - A Visit to the Leeds Model Co. Unsurpisingly considering the circumstances of its birth the article is rather glowing, to the point that the following comment has been inserted: "(Quote from Guide, evidently -Ed.)".

 

Edward Beal's article in the previous issue for a compact OO layout evidently drew some criticism, as a contributor going by the name of Joe Bloggs has submitted Another "Portable" Railway, deeming Beal's effort "too ambitious and too large for the average small-time modeller". Unsurprisingly it is a loop ("I should have liked a single line end-to-end layout but there is not the room"), this time with a Scottish theme and the typical "branch-to-terminus-above-main-line-tunnel" arrangement.

 

There are four letters in this issue's Modellers' Mailbag, three critical and one actively hostile. To begin with the non-critical outlier, W. S. H. of Chippenham, Wiltshire wonders why clockwork mechanisms are not popular in OO gauge. Moving on to the critical ones, W. A. Shillcock of Wallasey takes a dim view of Freezer's letter in the previous issue calling it "a waste of his time and your valuable space". Then there is a letter from R. E. Gilbert of London, titled "A Reprimand" by the editor, who criticizes the suggestion in the last issue of using OO gauge rail for bridge girders: "there are certain engineering principles that must be adhered to and has anybody seen a bridge carrying a railway made out rail section? The answer must be no!". Finally, there is the letter immediately below "A Reprimand", titled by the editor "...And Another", which I reproduce in full in the sake of fairness:

Quote

Dear Sir,
It was understood during the incubation period of the R.M. that at long last the serious modeller in the smaller gauges was to have a periodical free from fantasy, M.E.T.A. and trade influence, and it was on this basis that a large number of club members indicated their willingness to support such a magazinne.
Cannot this be so, or is it essential that we have pages of theory and drawings of a figure eight which can be conveniently folded up to form a stand for a bowl of flowers, coupled with further wasted pages of sales talk on toy trains.
Yours faithfully,
E. P. Swancott-Morgan, Wallasey

Next is Test Report No. 2 - Bassett-Lowke. This focuses on the reintroduction of the Flying Scotsman to the Bassett-Lowke range (having been absent since the war), now in BR blue with "hungry lion crest" (as the article describes it). Price is £11 8s. Also introduced is a "nondescript bogie coach" in BR livery, retailing at £2 4s. Performance is deemed good, though the coach bogies come in for some criticism.

 

Finally there is Planning a Layout 1. - Layout Types and 2. Main Lines by Michael Leigh. This is apparently the first two chapters of a series that will run in the magazine and later be published in book form. It should come as no surprise that all the basic layout types suggested are loops, or end-to-ends that take up the same space as a loop.

Edited March 20, 2022 by eldomtom2
correcting typo

[kevinlms]

4 hours ago, cp409067 said:

 

*

Agreed. Without checking my archive, I seem to recall as follows.

 

[1]  That MM had advertising for chewing gum including that it had once been used to plug a radiator hole during the Le Mans 24 hour race.

 

[2]  MRN had ads for Senior Service cigarettes.

 

[3]  RM was tame by comparison in offering 6 x 4 garden sheds.

 

 

CP

 

Many railway magazines (model & prototype) used to carry ads for dating services for years on end. Whether they meant something about rail enthusiasts in particular, I don't know!

[Nearholmer]

21 minutes ago, eldomtom2 said:

I have never heard of a copy of the Dublo N2 body before and would be interested to hear if anyone knows more.

I know nothing except that they regularly get featured in the vintage/collectible sub-forum of RMWeb.

 

21 minutes ago, eldomtom2 said:

Performance is deemed good, though the coach bogies come in for some criticism.

They are excellent coaches, of which I have probably more than is strictly necessary. They may be generic, but they are built like the proverbial, except for the bogies, which are much more delicate than the bodies.

 

 

Edited March 8, 2022 by Nearholmer

[RJS1977]

13 hours ago, RichardT said:

Returning to another of our gentle RM-related cultural musings, I’ve just been listening to a 1954 Goon Show on Radio 4 Extra, which included Ned Seagoon asking shipbuilder Henry Crun what was causing the delay in building a replica of the Marie (sic) Celeste, to which Crun exclaims “It’s the wood! You can’t get the wood!”which seemed to elicit resigned laughter from the audience…

 

Richard

 

See my post from 11:50 on Sunday :-)

[Pacific231G]

Most advertising in all three MR magazines were hobby related but MRC and particularly MRN had a regular scattering of adverts for Army and Royal Navy technical apprenticeships (seemingly aimed at parent as much as teenage boys) cigarettes, and Webley air guns. Because most of my magazines are in bound volumes, much of the advertising has been removed, even when the covers are included, but quite a few do include all the non editorial pages (i,ii, iii, iv etc). In RM I could actually find few if any 'off-topic' adverts.

I've also always found it interesting that Peco were quite happy for their magazine to include both advertising and fulsome reviews for the products of rival track manufacturers (notably GF, Wrenn & Gem) but, apart from the advertising revenue, I think Pritchard's belief was that, if the magazine promoted the hobby as a whole, albeit with a greater emphasis than the others on layout building, that would be good for his business.  

[kevinlms]

2 hours ago, Pacific231G said:

Most advertising in all three MR magazines were hobby related but MRC and particularly MRN had a regular scattering of adverts for Army and Royal Navy technical apprenticeships (seemingly aimed at parent as much as teenage boys) cigarettes, and Webley air guns. Because most of my magazines are in bound volumes, much of the advertising has been removed, even when the covers are included, but quite a few do include all the non editorial pages (i,ii, iii, iv etc). In RM I could actually find few if any 'off-topic' adverts.

I've also always found it interesting that Peco were quite happy for their magazine to include both advertising and fulsome reviews for the products of rival track manufacturers (notably GF, Wrenn & Gem) but, apart from the advertising revenue, I think Pritchard's belief was that, if the magazine promoted the hobby as a whole, albeit with a greater emphasis than the others on layout building, that would be good for his business.  

iv

 

driving me up the wall.

[eldomtom2]

Vol.1 No.6

Aug-Sept 1950

 

Price: 1/6

 

Published by Ian Allan Ltd.

 

Editor: C. J. Freezer

 

We begin the issue with another foray into small (for the time) layouts with The Possibilities of a Miniature Layout by M. E. J. Deane. This is a traditional GWR BLT in loop form on a 6ft x 6 1/2ft baseboard, not counting the Wantage Tramway-inspired extension. The layout gets the luxury of both the cover and frontispiece photos.

 

Placed on the next page without any comment whatsoever are drawings for a L.M.S. 15T. Box Van.

 

C. J. Freezer takes the time to introduce himself properly after taking over the editorship last issue in this issue's Editor's Page. He comes out firmly as an operation-focused modeller, indeed saying "I believe the super detail model is vastly overrated today".  There is also a small notice apologising that due to paper shortages the planned switch to monthly publication has not yet happened.

 

Next is Signalling and Model Railways by R. C. J. Day (who for some reason is specifiically noted as being a member of the Wimbledom MRC). This primarily focuses on giving a brief explanation of the basics of railway signalling at the time.

 

Then there is an uncredited article entitled Beginners Please! This provides an interesting insight into the hobby at the time - "your choice of scale and gauge is virtually limited to four groups" - those being "Standard" O, Fine-scale O, OO, and EM.

 

Shoved under the last page of the preceding article and the first page of the next article are some instructions and diagrams for making A Simply Made OO Point Lever and 4 mm Scale Sleepers.

 

C. J. Freezer returns to give us his Impressions of M.E. Show. Particular praise goes to Mr. Sherwood's 4mm scale model of a 2-10-10-2 Mallet and Mr. Bryant's 2mm scale Invernesky Pier. Particularly negative comment goes to the name and numberplates on two Castles, described in very strong terms as "little short of absolute abortions". Two reminders of the times - disbelief from the general public that 2mm scale models could be motorised and a model of a Ffestiniog Fairlie described as a "pleasant reminder of something that has gone".

 

Peter E. Randall writes a brief ode to The Semi-Scale Railway, extolling the virtues of such systems as Hornby-Dublo for allowing a working railway to be achieved quicker and cheaper than the "scale" alternatives.

 

The "series of prototype photographs" has been completely retooled and has now become Prototype Layouts No. I - Ashburton, G. W. R. , a far superior article to the previous offerings. In addition to five photographs of Ashburton, the article also contains a track plan and details of the station and why it makes for an attractive modelling subject.

 

Michael Leigh's series continues with Planning a Layout III - Station Layouts. This is primarily focused on ensuring then-prototype accuracy and so lacks the revealing assumptions of the previous entry.

 

This bimonth's Ten Minute Model is on creating station signs.

 

R. E. Gilbert, seemingly following on from last issue's letter, tackles the subject of Bridges, providing plans for a 50-foot girder bridge in the hopes of improving what in his opinion are the poor current standards among modellers.

 

The final proper article is entitled Workshop Corner and focuses on desks and tools. Another sign of the times - "asbestos sheet is a must" for protecting the workbench from solder damage.

 

There is no actual news/reviews section, but there is a small bit named B.-L. Books, talking about new instructional books Bassett-Lowke have produced for their pre-existing "Enterprise" and "Mogul" live steam kits (book price 1s. , Enterprise kit price £8 11s. , Mogul kit price £12 12s.).

 

Modellers' Mailbag is much larger than previous issues:

• Not Toys! - S. P. Harris of Camberwell is highly displeased at the public image of model railways as toys. For this he blames the press, the advertisments of "certain manufacturers" (from his description he seems to be referring to the Leeds Model Co.'s advertisment for a smoke-generating train set), and the practice of holding exhibitions during school holidays. Freezer's reply takes a more conciliatory tone, pointing out instances of more serious coverage in recent press articles, as well as suggesting that modellers perhaps are partly responsible for their own public image by taking a secretive attitude to it.
• A Correction - T. S. Lascelles of Sevenoaks corrects the statement in Cyril Fry's article in issue 4 that a Mr. William Watkins was the driver of Germany's first steam locomotive Adler and informs readers that the driver in question was actually named William Wilson.
• ...And A Criticism - A. G. Thomas of Catford overall likes the RM, deeming it "a refreshing change from almost interminable discourses on the intricacies of funnel radii and other obtuse problems", but is heavily critical of the number of typos - not only was his article "Hornby Dublo Conversions" renamed when published in the previous issue as "Hornby Dublo Conversations", but when redrawing his accompanying sketches for publication further spelling errors were introduced.
• ...Another - R. L. D. Maunsell of Dublin is angered that in last issue's article on the layout that CIE displayed it was not mentioned that it was built by Mr. and Mrs. Cyril Fry.
• Clockwork For OO - B. J. Leech of Farnsborough, in response to W. S. H.'s letter last issue, gives details of the products of A. & J. van Riemsdyk, who produce OO/EM gauge clockwork chassis (Four-coupled chassis price £2 1s. excluding purchase tax, Six-coupled chassis price £2 5s. excluding purchase tax, Eight-coupled chassis price £2 9s. excluding purchase tax, Ten-coupled chassis price £2 13s. excluding purchase tax).
• Hornby Dublo Conversions - L. B. Knight of Broadgreen, Liverpool, gives details of similar modifications he performed to those in last issue's article. In addition, apparently Meccano has written to the RM with instructions to remind the readers that they are unassociated with the cast-metal body mentioned in the article.

New in this issue is the Replies to Queries section, where the "Railway Modeller Advice Bureau" answers various questions. Answered in this issue are questions relating to baseboard construction and removing the top from a gauge glass.

[Enterprisingwestern]

On 08/03/2022 at 08:56, kevinlms said:

However, I digress. I was always taught by my mother that school clothes were for going to school in. After school meant taking them off, hanging up carefully and putting other clothes on. Do I still follow that logic - no! Unless filthy.

 

Why do you still wear school uniform?

 

Mike.