Non Rivet Counter Section

[Typeapproval]

Hi,

As a now retired, to use the phrase that fronted the "Railway Modeller" magazine for many years "The Average Enthusiast" I'm hoping to find a section in this esteemed site, where I don't feel like a second-class citizen as my interest is in having 'Acceptable' models to run on my model layout. I have frequently come across people who "Collect" models with no intention of ever opening the box! If that's their thing (Not Mine) good luck. I should point out this is not restricted to models, I attended a Motorcycle Show a while ago, I admired a pristine BSA, when I asked the owner how it went? He looked incredulous! then explained there were no internals to the Engine! his interest was taking it to shows, for it to be admired🤔. 

 

I understand that we all have our own interest and my personal choice is not necessarily that of many others. When my father gave me my first layout (not a train set!) the locomotive was a Triang Princess, the detail was in the 1950s amazing! there was an interior to the cab! Ok it had moulded handrails! but it looked like the loco it represented. The motor however definitely left a lot to be desired! Since then the manufacturers have made huge steps forward. I honestly believe the models of today are fantastic. 

 

However the amazing underfloor detail is completely invisible as the train moves around the layout. The fantastic detail of the printing on the manufacturers plate on the chassis of the coal wagon is completely unreadable at three feet, as I watch it roll slowly past. 

 

I accept the Hornby 4 and 6 wheel coaches weren't exact scale models, the same being true of Hattons Genesis offering, but as a person who's skills are lacking they fill a need. Perhaps a small amount of gratitude instead of persistent criticism, might encourage development.

 

I am not suggesting that we should revert to the bad old days of the Hornby Dublo N7 tank, in the liveries of all four companies, but to be quite as critical as some members of RMweb are of manufacturers is in my opinion over the top. 

 

I'm not proposing that we humbly accept any output from the big boys of the trade! Glaring errors either accidental or otherwise, should be raised but I do believe the balance has to be appropriate. 

 

From a purely selfish point of view, if manufactures reduced the amount of time nit picking, maybe they could introduce more diverse stock. The forthcoming release of the J69 will fill the wishes of many, there are plenty of items that appear on wish lists for years that would be welcomed.

 

I sincerely hope to find others of "The Average Enthusiast" class to discus modelling to my level, I strive to produce models to the best of my ability, I accept that I'm no Peter Denny, but I enjoy what I do.

 

David.

[AY Mod]

Every single person will have different levels of desire for detail Vs simplicity balance; what is acceptable to one wouldn't be to another and therefore content isn't going to please all or even a majority.

 

Therefore it's the responsibility of the individual to take what they want from the subject matter and disregard what is beyond their interest level rather than having a tailor-made solution for their level of knowledge/interest/expertise. It's like reading a non-fiction book; you wont be interested in it all or remember everything in it.

[woodenhead]

1 hour ago, Typeapproval said:

I sincerely hope to find others of "The Average Enthusiast" class to discus modelling to my level, I strive to produce models to the best of my ability, I accept that I'm no Peter Denny, but I enjoy what I do.

 

As Andy says, you might think you have found a group of modellers hereby known as the People’s Front of Average Modelling with a consensus, then one of you will cross another's red lines and the group will split and a second group the Average Modelling People’s Front will form.

 

Forevermore there will be two average modelling groups and neither will want to speak to another even if both sides worship a design clever 58 foot Maunsell rebuilt ex LSWR 48 foot coach.

 

🤣

[AY Mod]

Splitters!

[Flying Pig]

1 hour ago, AY Mod said:

Every single person will have different levels of desire for detail Vs simplicity balance; what is acceptable to one wouldn't be to another and therefore content isn't going to please all or even a majority.

 

Therefore it's the responsibility of the individual to take what they want from the subject matter and disregard what is beyond their interest level rather than having a tailor-made solution for their level of knowledge/interest/expertise. It's like reading a non-fiction book; you wont be interested in it all or remember everything in it.

 

But could we not get forum members to eat a particular kind of cookie representing their level of skill or interest which the software could then detect and filter out threads which might not be to their taste?  Perhaps starting with triple Belgian chocolate for the absolute finescalers and working down to something very plain?  As skill levels increased, consumption of the next cookie up would reveal new content.

 

 

[TheQ]

I think I'll be having the ships biscuit.

[Steamport Southport]

3 hours ago, Typeapproval said:

Hi,

As a now retired, to use the phrase that fronted the "Railway Modeller" magazine for many years "The Average Enthusiast" I'm hoping to find a section in this esteemed site, where I don't feel like a second-class citizen as my interest is in having 'Acceptable' models to run on my model layout. I have frequently come across people who "Collect" models with no intention of ever opening the box! If that's their thing (Not Mine) good luck. I should point out this is not restricted to models, I attended a Motorcycle Show a while ago, I admired a pristine BSA, when I asked the owner how it went? He looked incredulous! then explained there were no internals to the Engine! his interest was taking it to shows, for it to be admired🤔. 

 

I understand that we all have our own interest and my personal choice is not necessarily that of many others. When my father gave me my first layout (not a train set!) the locomotive was a Triang Princess, the detail was in the 1950s amazing! there was an interior to the cab! Ok it had moulded handrails! but it looked like the loco it represented. The motor however definitely left a lot to be desired! Since then the manufacturers have made huge steps forward. I honestly believe the models of today are fantastic. 

 

However the amazing underfloor detail is completely invisible as the train moves around the layout. The fantastic detail of the printing on the manufacturers plate on the chassis of the coal wagon is completely unreadable at three feet, as I watch it roll slowly past. 

 

I accept the Hornby 4 and 6 wheel coaches weren't exact scale models, the same being true of Hattons Genesis offering, but as a person who's skills are lacking they fill a need. Perhaps a small amount of gratitude instead of persistent criticism, might encourage development.

 

I am not suggesting that we should revert to the bad old days of the Hornby Dublo N7 tank, in the liveries of all four companies, but to be quite as critical as some members of RMweb are of manufacturers is in my opinion over the top. 

 

I'm not proposing that we humbly accept any output from the big boys of the trade! Glaring errors either accidental or otherwise, should be raised but I do believe the balance has to be appropriate. 

 

From a purely selfish point of view, if manufactures reduced the amount of time nit picking, maybe they could introduce more diverse stock. The forthcoming release of the J69 will fill the wishes of many, there are plenty of items that appear on wish lists for years that would be welcomed.

 

I sincerely hope to find others of "The Average Enthusiast" class to discus modelling to my level, I strive to produce models to the best of my ability, I accept that I'm no Peter Denny, but I enjoy what I do.

 

David.

 

Have you found the Pugbashes thread yet? Might be the sort of thing you are looking for. People having a bit of fun.

 

 

 

Jason

[woodenhead]

18 minutes ago, Flying Pig said:

 

But could we not get forum members to eat a particular kind of cookie representing their level of skill or interest which the software could then detect and filter out threads which might not be to their taste?  Perhaps starting with triple Belgian chocolate for the absolute finescalers and working down to something very plain?  As skill levels increased, consumption of the next cookie up would reveal new content.

 

 

Doesn't work - I love Belgian Chocolate cookies just like I love well detailed finescale models - but I cannot cook a Belgian Chocolate cookie just as I cannot build a truly finescale model of anything.

[Typeapproval]

Hi,

 

Sorry if I've put a cat in the bird cage!

 

I'm very much a "Cream Cracker" person, that and the occasional 'Rich Tea"!

 

 

[Hroth]

47 minutes ago, TheQ said:

I think I'll be having the ships biscuit.

 

Are Bens teeth strong enough to cope with Winalot?

 

[Unicorn1]

2 hours ago, woodenhead said:

As Andy says, you might think you have found a group of modellers hereby known as the People’s Front of Average Modelling with a consensus, then one of you will cross another's red lines and the group will split and a second group the Average Modelling People’s Front will form.

 

Forevermore there will be two average modelling groups and neither will want to speak to another even if both sides worship a design clever 58 foot Maunsell rebuilt ex LSWR 48 foot coach.

 

🤣

Reminds me of the Joe Meek appreciation society(s)

[woodenhead]

3 minutes ago, Typeapproval said:

Hi,

 

Sorry if I've put a cat in the bird cage!

 

I'm very much a "Cream Cracker" person, that and the occasional 'Rich Tea"!

 

 

Would those be Aldi, Waitrose or Jacobs Cream Crackers or McVities Rich Tea.

 

And there is the complexity of an average modeller - one could like a Railroad class 37, another a Bachmann and another an Accurascale, in all three cases they could be running them on set track, streamline or hand built track.

 

We're a complicated bunch, and probably all the better for it.

[ColinK]

I agree with much of what the OP said.  After one young rivet counter (probably aged about 10) shouted out at an exhibition ‘hey mister, your model of 33008 is wrong, it should have miniature snowploughs’, I switched to modelling 0-16.5 narrow gauge where anything goes and you can have lots of fun.

 

Strange though, that I exhibited my last 00 layout for 10 years and nobody mentioned that I had used Peco foam underlay for ballast.  It was well disguised and bedded into the scenery.  Still had fun though with a Lima deltic repainted in large logo livery, a Regional Railways Co-bo and a German 232 painted in BR livery. 

Edited December 18, 2023 by ColinK

[SM42]

The OP's parting words were " but I enjoy what I do"

 

Don't we all at whatever level we pitch our enjoyment? 

 

There is a danger of becoming  more and more obsessed with the number of rivets as the manufacturers compete for our hard earned,  and non visible in normal use underframe detail seems to be the latest developing arms race.

 

Simpler  close enough modelling has a lot going for it and has a place. 

 

Probably too late for any manufacturer to revert wholesale to it though. 

 

 

Andy

[woodenhead]

Just model in N, in the main rivets are less important to those of us with little trains.

[Steamport Southport]

1 hour ago, ColinK said:

I agree with much of what the OP said.  After one young rivet counter (probably aged about 10) shouted out at an exhibition ‘hey mister, your model of 33008 is wrong, it should have miniature snowploughs’, I switched to modelling 0-16.5 narrow gauge where anything goes and you can have lots of fun.

 

Strange though, that I exhibited my last 00 layout for 10 years and nobody mentioned that I had used Peco foam underlay for ballast.  It was well disguised and bedded into the scenery.  Still had fun though with a Lima deltic repainted in large logo livery, a Regional Railways Co-bo and a German 232 painted in BR livery. 

 

Was he right though?

 

Things that are not noticeable to some are very obvious to others. Maybe if it was obvious to a ten year old then an adult should be noticing these things....

 

 

Jason

[figworthy]

4 hours ago, TheQ said:

I think I'll be having the ships biscuit.

 

Would that be the lesser weevil ?

 

Adrian

[298]

There is a large step in the mindset between building something to exhibition standard (ie it works and looks good from 3 feet away, Vs what you see in front of you on the workbench or computer screen where I find it hard not to go to the n'th degree of detail. It would have been impossible to finish my latest exhibition layout if I didn't take a few compromises, basically because the information in quality photos was limited. 

 

For me the step change from trainset modelling to model railway was ballasting and painting the rails. I knew the colour of Airfix enamel on my GWR branchline probably wasn't right and my Dad had to prove it by taking me to the local mainline where I realised a completely different set of conditions produced different colours and weathering, such as ballast that is weathered in one direction in braking zones. 

 

I'm trying to stay away from a lot of the social media groups because standards don't seem to be what they were, it's never been quicker or easier to paint rails with a paint pen regardless of the shade of dirt & rust, but the current ethos seems to be how quickly you can build the same layout over and over again instead of enjoying the journey and learning and improving along the way.

[Flying Pig]

6 hours ago, woodenhead said:

Doesn't work - I love Belgian Chocolate cookies just like I love well detailed finescale models - but I cannot cook a Belgian Chocolate cookie just as I cannot build a truly finescale model of anything.

 

I was thinking of proprietary cookies throughout, as otherwise the scheme might become dangerously recursive. 

[The Johnster]

10 hours ago, woodenhead said:

As Andy says, you might think you have found a group of modellers hereby known as the People’s Front of Average Modelling with a consensus, then one of you will cross another's red lines and the group will split and a second group the Average Modelling People’s Front will form.

 

'No, this is the People's Liberation Front of Judea, you want the Liberation Front of Judean People, mate'.  'Nah, I'm looking for the Judean People's Liberation Front, don't know where I can find them, do you?'.  'Yeah, he's over there!'.

 

As someone who used to hang around on the fringes of Socialist Activism (Welsh Socialist Activism at that), this is all very familiar to me...

 

I'm not even consistent in my own standards of modelling on my own layout, I've done some reasonable stuff and a good bit of pure bodgery, so I'm certainly not in any position to be judgemental about what anyone else does.  I try to do my best, and sometimes I nearly succeed!  But if the OP feels like a second-class citizen, then we possibly need to examine how we are dealing with him/her and anyone with a similar outlook.  I want to be part of a hobby that is inclusive, and doesn't put people off because some of the way they do things is different to me, or anyone. 

 

I would, however, attempt to define 'Railway Modelling' as at least an attempt to recreate the appearance, operation, and as much detail as possible the real railway at a chosen period or locality, or at least within a timeframe and general area.  Perhaps someone who builds a layout and runs anything/everything on it without regard to this is not a 'proper' or 'serious' modeller, whatever you consider those to be; so what?  Is your railway a model of an actual place and correctly detailed, and does it use the correct scale gauge?  Thought not; me neither!  If he has problems we can help him with, let's help him!  Certainly let's try not to make him feel 'second class'.  I hope I don't do that; I try to treat everyone with respect and as I'd like to be treated myself. 

 

 

[kevinlms]

There is a thread on converting old Tri-ang Princess Elizabeth locos into other things, I believe. Perhaps that is more what you are looking for.

 

I had one years ago and now they hold no interest to me, but it is quite acceptable for YOU to be interested in such things. Personally, they might be a source for a cheap XO4 motor, but maybe it isn't anymore?

[Nearholmer]

An interesting underlying assumption, even in the OP, is that there are levels, a hierarchy, maybe like serial reincarnations at greater levels of spiritual awareness until true enlightenment, perfection in unity with the spiritual, is achieved.

 

Personally, I don’t buy that.

 

To me, it all looks more like “schools of art”, where different artists arrive at different approaches and techniques, and plenty move between approaches at different stages in their lives. You don’t go into a major gallery and rank the paintings in an hierarchical order according to how close to a high resolution photograph they are, do you? No, you appreciate different styles for what they are, not sneer at Pissarro because it’s a bit hard to work out what class the loco in his painting of Lordship Lane is, or Turner for all that fuzziness in his best known railway painting.

 

So …… admire the super-fine craftsmanship in photo-realistic modelling, but don’t allow yourself to be tricked into thinking that is the pinnacle of the only mountain, when in fact there is an entire range of mountains, each with its own set of crags and pinnacles.

 

 

[Colin_McLeod]

13 hours ago, SM42 said:

Simpler  close enough modelling has a lot going for it and has a place. 

 

Maybe a model train manufacturer could run with this concept

 😀

[kevinlms]

56 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

An interesting underlying assumption, even in the OP, is that there are levels, a hierarchy, maybe like serial reincarnations at greater levels of spiritual awareness until true enlightenment, perfection in unity with the spiritual, is achieved.

 

Personally, I don’t buy that.

 

No, I don't either.

 

On another group years ago, it was suggested to me that everyone started at the lowest level, perhaps a clockwork trainset on set track. Then went to perhaps a fixed board with the same set track, and electric.

Then you went to larger radius points, nickle silver flexible track, such as Peco.

Next step was hand built point work in OO, then when dissatisfied with that, it was EM and when that pissed you off, you eventually found your way to the true way of P4/S4! To me that looks like a recipe for years of disappointment and perhaps a different hobby would be better for you!

 

Not counting of course, diversions to other scales.

 

All of which is complete nonsense, many of us can and do, jump and miss stages or go back. One thing I've never done is try other than 4mm and doubt that I ever will.

[Gilbert]

I'm quite enjoying this at the moment.....Peco Set track on the dining room table....great fun...