Wright writes.....

[t-b-g]

What an amazing view. Is this "old layout" Buckingham Central by any chance?

 

That looks to be a GCR 11B, having the original 4' 9" diameter boiler and shorter firebox.

Yes and yes.

 

It is the 11B (small boiler variety as built) that Peter Denny built and it was photographed on Buckingham.

 

It is sights like this that make me want to build models.

[cctransuk]

Well I was past retirement age when I retired, something I now regret. Working long hours and overnight flights to and from West Africa has given me the opportunity to be a good customer with ready funds to support model suppliers. My years living in the US demonstrated that the "customer can and should be right".

 

But perhaps I expect too much? Apparently so.

 

Probably because the niche market supplier, continuing to trade on his own terms well past retirement age, would not be found in the US. I stand to be corrected, but I wonder if the US equivalent of our 'cottage industry' suppliers exist.

 

Can anyone post a link to a US niche market supplier who continues to trade well into retirement? My guess is that, if such craftsmen traders exist in the first place, they would shut up shop or sell-on their businesses when retirement age arrived.

 

As we all know to our cost, businesses that have been sold-on in the UK are more often than not totally lost, rather than requiring just a little extra effort on the part of the potential customer.

 

The customer is usually right - provided that he / she has reasonable expectations, given the circumstances of the supplier.

 

Pragmatism - the world would be a place of much less angst if there was a little more of it around!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Pebbles]

With Ref to the D9 Boiler Diameter. The original boiler over cladding was 5ft3 1/2inches, the McGowen kit is of the re-boilered version. Best guess for this is that the boiler being the same diameter as the D10 over

cladding it would been 5ft 9 1/4inches (23mm). Following the same path the smoke box would have been 5ft 11 3/4inches.

[Poggy1165]

Some traders, certainly in 7mm scale, do it mainly for the crack. They are not "businesses" in the true sense of the word. However a lot of people these days expect the same level of service they demand from Sainsburys or PC World, and it isn't going to happen.

 

As I told someone a long time ago, there is a particular trader out there who I am pretty sure doesn't give a **** whether I buy from him or not. But I value his creations, as they are darned good, and put up with the lack of internet, the general difficulty of getting hold of him, and the long delays in getting stuff. Because the alternative isn't a better service, it's nowt. At least until someone like Virgin decides that supplying railway modellers with their odds and ends is a highly profitable opportunity and pile in to the sector. (I think there is more chance of me winning Euromillions two weeks running.)

[gr.king]

I looked at drawings of several Robinson loco designs of the D9 "as built" and D9 "as reboilered" eras and in each case the diameter of the clothing plates was near-enough six inches more than the nominal boiler diameter, suggesting a standard thickness of lagging etc. I concluded therefore, that with a new 5' 0" diameter boiler in place of the original 4' 9" version, the reboilered D9s probably measured 5' 6" over the clothing plates, or 22mm in 4mm scale. I don't see any obvious reason why they would match the D10s, whose boilers were larger still at 5' 3" nominal dia and presumably around 5' 9" over the clothing.

[Clive Mortimore]

Thanks for your intemperate observations-I actually do produce my own components.  I also say that if a manufacturer produces something, at least have the commercial back up to deal with customers.  A computer and pay facilities are not difficult.

If you wish to see the hobby thrive, move with the times, and enjoy the increased customer base that a decent commercial outlook produces. 

Hi jrg1

 

Can I ask on behalf of all of us what is your trading name and a link to your products, just in case there is something I (or someone else) might buy from you.

[cctransuk]

.... there is a particular trader out there who I am pretty sure doesn't give a **** whether I buy from him or not. .......

 

Believe me, there's way more than one !!

 

My motivation for offering Cambridge Custom Transfers to the modeller was that there was nothing comparable at the time - Woodhead Transfers had just hit the buffers.

 

I found a means of home-producing more accurate transfers that had previously been, or currently were available, and I felt that it would be churlish to keep the benefits to myself when that means of home-production became generally unavailable.

 

So - I offered reprints of transfers that I produced for my own use to the railway modelling world in general, in the widest range of scales possible.

 

Had I taken the selfish option, my long-planned model of Evercreech Junction would now exist, instead of still being just an aspiration.

 

It would be no disaster for me if I never sold another transfer sheet - but I know that there are modellers out there who appreciate what I produce. I have a basic website which conveys sufficient information to the kind of modeller who will make trouble-free purchases - even so, I could at least double my own modelling output if I ceased trading.

 

It's an odd way to do business, and not entirely selfless, but I get satisfaction from the expressions of appreciation which I receive. On the other hand, those who demand multinational levels of service can go and do the other !!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

[Tony Wright]

What interesting recent discussions. Thank you all so much for your contributions.

 

 

As can be seen, the McGowan D9 is now complete. In total, it's taken under two days - about 14 hours all told. Not bad for a maligned old kit. 

 

Again, without appearing slapdash, if the boiler diameter isn't quite right I can't tell, if it's lacking finesse in detail, I'll live with it and it'll be fine for the MR/M&GNR bit of LB when it's backdated next year. What's most important is that it runs well and 'looks the part', at least to me. I added 'odd' bits, such as brake blocks (spares from my numerous frets), guard irons (shaped from brass fret) and a wheel and handle smokebox fastening (again, from my spares box). Will it do? For me, yes, and it's taken so little time as to hardly impact on my writing schedule. Were I 'pure', I'd at least treble (and more) the time taken to build it in rectifying faults and making it 'right'. That assumes that I could, which is probably untrue. 

 

Regarding modern electronic communication (and how it can be used), though I use it on this thread, I really want no part of it. If I want parts/kits/bits/accessories, I either write a letter, make a phone call, get them from shows or actually pay a call on the suppliers (many of whom are friends). I know the last mentioned is a privileged position but most traders I know are very friendly. 

 

Does anyone think that all those (like me) who don't embrace modern communication technologies are out of step? I don't. As an example of the 'arrogance' of those who do embrace it, some little time ago I attended at open day at a model railway club. The 'publicity officer' (if he had a title) just advertised the event electronically. It never made the printed media, either the local press or the model railway magazines. The result? Hardly anybody turned up. The 'target' market should have been (and has been) those of more mature years, who read the papers and the mags (that's not to say the young don't) and turn up; as they have done in the past. 

 

Finally (with reference to modern communications), why is it necessary for some to be 'permanently' attached to their mobile phones? Just recently, I've had the (like-able) company of a 20 year old. No matter what we were doing - operating the railway, eating a meal, indulging in conversation or tinkering at my workbench, every few moments he was fiddling with it. I told him to 'Put it down' on several occasions, and he just smiled. I actually meant it! I just hate the damned things. They make their users appear rude, stifle face-to-face conversation and are a constant source of interruption. 

Edited July 13, 2017 by Tony Wright

[Ian Smeeton]

Hi Tony.

 

I need to be able to hit more buttons than is allowed on this infernal computer thingy, with regard to your last post.

 

Craftsmanship/clever, for the D9 build, Agree re: mobile phones,

 

Friendly/supportive regarding meals & phones.

 

Thanks for (all) of your post(s)

 

More power to your elbow.

 

Regards

 

Ian

[Willie Whizz]

As usual, whenever this discussion comes up, there is the basic assumption that the owner of a range wishes to maximise their customer base, and attract as many sales as possible, by making their sales practices as simple as possible for the customer. Why should we assume any such thing - especially in respect of long-standing product ranges which usually have elderly, one person staffing.

 

So many of these ranges developed in the Royal Mail and cheque era - a method of trading that very much puts the proprietor in control of calls upon their time. There is an expectation nowadays that communication should be instantaneous, payment should be hands-off, and delivery should be by return-of-post.

 

Sorry, but many of the longer-standing niche traders are long past retirement age, and only continue to supply their products on a basis of minimal impact upon their time - they certainly aren't reliant on sales to provide their daily bread. This is surely better than them shutting up shop completely and withdrawing their products?

 

Those who winge about outdated communication, ordering and payment facilities should consider how badly they want a particular product - the alternative may be the response "S*d it - I can't be a*rsed with the hassle"!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

But among the problems with that approach is that:

• Many modellers don't even appreciate that a product that might meet their needs even exists, it is so very far 'below the radar'.  Therefore not only is there 'no sale', there is 'no project'.  It's a common complaint that too few models of pre-Grouping prototypes are seen on layouts set in the Grouping era, let alone the BR Steam era.  Given that many of the potential models have their origins with the kind of suppliers you're talking about, can you wonder at that?

   

• The existence - even on a 'theoretical' or 'occasional' basis - of an existing kit of a particular prototype can be a powerful deterrent to anyone else (who might be willing to take a more proactive approach) entering the market with a new version.  The CooperCraft saga (see 'Smaller Suppliers' thread) is a particularly good, and sad, example.

   

• And yet, if one of the bigger manufacturers produces a R-T-R example, everyone starts weeping for 'poor old so-and-so, who's had his livelihood taken away'.

Can't have it all ways, gentlemen!  I appreciate there is such a thing as making something for yourself and then making a few extra and letting a few kindred spirits have them, for perhaps a token payment to cover costs.  But that is not 'business', and we shouldn't pretend it is.  If you do have some sort of proper business, even if you're an elderly sole trader looking to supplement your pension with a little extra income, these days as a very minimum you need a web page (even if a single page that does no more than describe and illustrate your product and give your contact details and how to order and pay - and yes, why not "by cheque only" if that's what you want) - which can be had for minimal cost if you can't do it yourself - and an e-mail account which you do actually look at regularly and have the courtesy and gumption to reply to the messages you get sent.  This is 2017, not 1917, or even 1967 for goodness sake!

 

It seems to me that anyone with the skills to research and design, manufacture and write the instructions for such a relatively complex thing as a plastic, white-metal or resin kit should not actually find that beyond their capacity, even if they don't have an IT-savvy grandchild or nephew to help.  Tony is always encouraging us to 'have a go' at building kits, and that you won't know if you can do it till you try.  Well surely that applies to this stuff too?

[t-b-g]

But among the problems with that approach is that:

• Many modellers don't even appreciate that a product that might meet their needs even exists, it is so very far 'below the radar'.  Therefore not only is there 'no sale', there is 'no project'.  It's a common complaint that too few models of pre-Grouping prototypes are seen on layouts set in the Grouping era, let alone the BR Steam era.  Given that many of the potential models have their origins with the kind of suppliers you're talking about, can you wonder at that?

   

• The existence - even on a 'theoretical' or 'occasional' basis - of an existing kit of a particular prototype can be a powerful deterrent to anyone else (who might be willing to take a more proactive approach) entering the market with a new version.  The CooperCraft saga (see 'Smaller Suppliers' thread) is a particularly good, and sad, example.

   

• And yet, if one of the bigger manufacturers produces a R-T-R example, everyone starts weeping for 'poor old so-and-so, who's had his livelihood taken away'.

Can't have it all ways, gentlemen!  I appreciate there is such a thing as making something for yourself and then making a few extra and letting a few kindred spirits have them, for perhaps a token payment to cover costs.  But that is not 'business', and we shouldn't pretend it is.  If you do have some sort of proper business, even if you're an elderly sole trader looking to supplement your pension with a little extra income, these days as a very minimum you need a web page (even if a single page that does no more than describe and illustrate your product and give your contact details and how to order and pay - and yes, why not "by cheque only" if that's what you want) - which can be had for minimal cost if you can't do it yourself - and an e-mail account which you do actually look at regularly and have the courtesy and gumption to reply to the messages you get sent.  This is 2017, not 1917, or even 1967 for goodness sake!

 

It seems to me that anyone with the skills to research and design, manufacture and write the instructions for such a relatively complex thing as a plastic, white-metal or resin kit should not actually find that beyond their capacity, even if they don't have an IT-savvy grandchild or nephew to help.  Tony is always encouraging us to 'have a go' at building kits, and that you won't know if you can do it till you try.  Well surely that applies to this stuff too?

 

In an ideal world I would agree with you. But what about a trader who has a limited amount of that most valuable resource, namely time?

 

If they have enough orders and business to service the amount of trade they get but don't have any extra time available, then how would they be able to handle the extra enquiries and business that a website would be expected to generate?

 

It is not just about setting a website up. It is about keeping it updated and having the resources to deal with the business generated by it.

 

I earn a living from model railways nowadays and I have a good amount of work coming in through recommendation and word of mouth and no spare capacity to do more. Tell me again why I should be expected to have a website? The same applies to the sorts of traders you are talking about.

 

I find that asking around, particularly on RMWeb, will soon get you pointed in the direction of more obscure products. If there are products that are so under the radar that nobody has heard of them, then you can always either make what you want yourself or choose to build something else.

 

But I would rather these traders carry on as they are rather than have them swamped with orders to the point where they get fed up and pack in trading.

[cctransuk]

.......

It seems to me that anyone with the skills to research and design, manufacture and write the instructions for such a relatively complex thing as a plastic, white-metal or resin kit should not actually find that beyond their capacity, even if they don't have an IT-savvy grandchild or nephew to help.  Tony is always encouraging us to 'have a go' at building kits, and that you won't know if you can do it till you try.  Well surely that applies to this stuff too?

 

But perhaps they simply don't want to !!

 

If monetary gain is not their motivation in producing said kit - perhaps they and a few friends want / need the subject - they are at liberty to do what they want with that asset.

 

There is no clear demarcation between what is and what is not 'a business' - and there is no "bare minimum" as to how they choose to make their achievement available, or even known, to other modellers.

 

We live in a free society - thank God - and how we (legally) conduct our lives and leisure is solely our concern; we are under no obligation to publicise it at all - let alone via a web-site.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Edited July 13, 2017 by cctransuk

[pom-pom]

I looked at drawings of several Robinson loco designs of the D9 "as built" and D9 "as reboilered" eras and in each case the diameter of the clothing plates was near-enough six inches more than the nominal boiler diameter, suggesting a standard thickness of lagging etc. I concluded therefore, that with a new 5' 0" diameter boiler in place of the original 4' 9" version, the reboilered D9s probably measured 5' 6" over the clothing plates, or 22mm in 4mm scale. I don't see any obvious reason why they would match the D10s, whose boilers were larger still at 5' 3" nominal dia and presumably around 5' 9" over the clothing.

 

This is most useful to know, thanks. So it would appear the McGowan D9 boiler plus cladding diameter is slightly large and in fact nearer that of the D10. The very slight ovality to the boiler is greater in the vertical plane and so if one wanted to go to the extent of some serious filing on the top surface, as you did with the B4 then things could be corrected. However, taking a look at Tony's commendable finished efforts I would be hard pushed to notice. For sure, taking a close look at details reveals limitations of the castings and their fit but overall I am convinced that I am looking at a rebuilt D9... the end result and the speed in which it was accomplished is impressive. I am certainly now reevaluating the potential of my kit of 'lumpy bits of metal'.

[pom-pom]

What interesting recent discussions. Thank you all so much for your contributions.

 

McGowan D9 03.jpg

 

As can be seen, the McGowan D9 is now complete. In total, it's taken under two days - about 14 hours all told. Not bad for a maligned old kit. 

 

Again, without appearing slapdash, if the boiler diameter isn't quite right I can't tell, if it's lacking finesse in detail, I'll live with it and it'll be fine for the MR/M&GNR bit of LB when it's backdated next year. What's most important is that it runs well and 'looks the part', at least to me. I added 'odd' bits, such as brake blocks (spares from my numerous frets), guard irons (shaped from brass fret) and a wheel and handle smokebox fastening (again, from my spares box). Will it do? For me, yes, and it's taken so little time as to hardly impact on my writing schedule. Were I 'pure', I'd at least treble (and more) the time taken to build it in rectifying faults and making it 'right'. That assumes that I could, which is probably untrue. 

 

Regarding modern electronic communication (and how it can be used), though I use it on this thread, I really want no part of it. If I want parts/kits/bits/accessories, I either write a letter, make a phone call, get them from shows or actually pay a call on the suppliers (many of whom are friends). I know the last mentioned is a privileged position but most traders I know are very friendly. 

 

Does anyone think that all those (like me) who don't embrace modern communication technologies are out of step? I don't. As an example of the 'arrogance' of those who do embrace it, some little time ago I attended at open day at a model railway club. The 'publicity officer' (if he had a title) just advertised the event electronically. It never made the printed media, either the local press or the model railway magazines. The result? Hardly anybody turned up. The 'target' market should have been (and has been) those of more mature years, who read the papers and the mags (that's not to say the young don't) and turn up; as they have done in the past. 

 

Finally (with reference to modern communications), why is it necessary for some to be 'permanently' attached to their mobile phones? Just recently, I've had the (like-able) company of a 20 year old. No matter what we were doing - operating the railway, eating a meal, indulging in conversation or tinkering at my workbench, every few moments he was fiddling with it. I told him to 'Put it down' on several occasions, and he just smiled. I actually meant it! I just hate the damned things. They make their users appear rude, stifle face-to-face conversation and are a constant source of interruption. 

 

That's fantastic Tony, I am quite taken aback that such a convincing representation would result from a box of small horrors. You've given me inspiration to look at mine from a new more positive perspective. The speed at which you have accomplished this is an interesting reflective point. Had you been constantly sidetracked by trivial corrective processes you would still be at the "filing masses of metal off" stage yet here we are two days later and what you have is unmistakenly a D9 despite small dimensional errors. Something there for many of us to learn.

 

Mobile phones... yes... it both amuses and horrifies me to see groups of people who have met and gone out somewhere yet are completely in ignorance of their companions as they tap, tap, tap away. Even my girlfriend sits bathed in the cold grim light of a LCD screen on the sofa each evening, tap, tap, tapping. I wonder what the statistics are on road traffic accidents caused by texting-pedestrians wandering into the paths of vehicles. Even the phones are irritating - the art of handwriting replaced by one-digit tap, tap, tapping. I know how to spell but my finger misses or hits adjacent keys to those intended... the result is rubbish... only to be further belittled by the spell-shecker software kicking in, offering to correct all my awful mistakes. And yes, allowing a phone streaming endless 'social media' notifications to take precedence over interaction with someone in person is the height of bad manners!

 

Nick

[pom-pom]

The building of that B4 pictured above was something of an epic. The McGowan kit provided a lot of what was required, but a number of parts of it demanded a lot of alteration or had to be replaced by scratchbuilt substitutes. The boiler, in two halves and including as far as I remember both the Belpaire firebox and the almost "immovably rigid" shape of the thick smokebox was a swine. As received, the two halves soldered together would have made a narrow vertical oval in section, and given the attached 'boxes I could see no hope of squeezing it to an acceptable shape, of correct size, in a vice. I put the two halves together with huge fillets of solder and epoxy in the joints to make the thing wide enough, then filed off MASSES of whitemetal top and bottom until it approached a circle in section. I never got it quite the whole way there, but nobody so far has been able to see that it isn't circular! The cab roof and top half of the cab front / spectacle plate was an appalling joke too. Had I used the as-provided lumpy bits that were cast on to the front edge of the excessively flat and wide, slab-thickness roof, to form the necessary features, the spectacles would have been ridiculously squat, slit-like features. I filed another load of metal off the bottom face of the roof until it was thin enough to bend to the correct curve, made new parts for the cab front, trimmed and chamfered the edges of the roof and put the rain strips were they should be, inboard, not right out on the edges where nearly every 4mm scale GC kit manufacturer over years has blindly put them!

I recall that none of the major components of the kit actually registered with one another in any obviously "correct" or "intended" way either. It was a case of having to spend a lot of time looking at best available drawings and photos in order to decide which parts were the right shapes and sizes, and how far forward, back, up or down they should be attached to one another in order to get a correct start on the fundamental structure of the thing. Having to go back and start again was the last thing I wanted to find myself doing.....

The body and tender caused enough headaches without getting involved in the McGowan chassis parts. I gave-in and used an RTR B12 chassis, which I eventually re-wheeled.

 

Apologies to you Sir for misattributing your fine work earlier. The sweat exuded and the trials and tribulations experienced are represented magnificently in your description of the works! To extract the salient points, if you'll excuse my cheek, and for future builders of McGowan kits here is a summary of what one should expect:

 

• an epic
• demanded a lot of alteration
• had to be replaced
• a swine
• I could see no hope
• filed off MASSES of whitemetal
• an appalling joke
• provided lumpy bits
• filed another load of metal off
• none of the major components of the kit actually registered with one another in any obviously "correct" or "intended" way
• last thing I wanted to find myself doing
• caused enough headaches

 

Said much tongue-in-cheek..!

[Tony Teague]

Willie-Whizz said:

It seems to me that anyone with the skills to research and design, manufacture and write the instructions for such a relatively complex thing as a plastic, white-metal or resin kit should not actually find that beyond their capacity, even if they don't have an IT-savvy grandchild or nephew to help.  Tony is always encouraging us to 'have a go' at building kits, and that you won't know if you can do it till you try.  Well surely that applies to this stuff too?

 

---

 

My experience is that some, far larger, companies that are able to manufacture good quality products can still have poor marketing & particularly website skills, so it can surely be no surprise that "garden shed hobbyists" who produce obscure kits and parts that we might all want, may have NIL selling, marketing or website skills - and certainly it would be unrealistic for us to expect that they should.

 

What I find more frustrating is when an entire business or product range is sold - usually due to the retirement or demise of the proprietor - and the buyer then fails to keep the range available; why would anyone do this I wonder? Nevertheless I can think of several examples in recent years.

 

As to mobile devices, I share Tony's immense frustration that their perpetual use in the name of "social media" destroys face-to-face interaction and even damages relationships; my wife and I recently observed a young family at an adjacent table in a restaurant where the son was playing games on a tablet device whilst mum and daughter were each busy with continuous texting. Dad stared into space like "Billy no-mates", and this continued even after food was placed in front of them. So much for family life! I regard it as "anti-social media".

 

Tony (a proud luddite)

Edited July 14, 2017 by Tony Teague

[chris p bacon]

Just a note on the subject of phones. I pointed out to someone at work recently that he was constantly picking the phone up and looking at the screen and said he was becoming obsessed with it, he pointed out that he didn't carry a watch anymore (they always get damaged at work) and was looking at the time on the phone.  

 

A bricklaying subcontractor I use has anywhere between 30-60 brickies working for him at any one time, If they're caught using their phone in his time he throws it in the water butt, seems to work in stopping them (I've seen 2 occasions) 

[Jol Wilkinson]

 

What I find more frustrating is when an entire business or product range is sold - usually due to the retirement or demise of the proprietor - and the buyer then fails to keep the range available; why would anyone do this I wonder? Nevertheless I can think of several examples in recent years.

 

As to mobile devices, I share Tony's immense frustration that their perpetual use in the name of "social media" destroys face-to-face interaction and even damages relationships; my wife and I recently observed a young family at an adjacent table in a restaurant where the son was playing games on a tablet device whilst mum and daughter were each busy with continuous texting. Dad stared into space like "Billy no-mates", and this continued even after food was placed in front of them. So much for family life! I regard it as "anti-social media".

 

Tony (a proud luddite)

 

Tony,

 

the issue has been  - on occasion - that the person buying another business has either been misled as to the ease with which it can be run (well organised stock lists, supplier references, packing lists, etc.) and/or has failed to exercise due diligence before paying up. Of course, they may be simply out of their depth or have an over inflated view of their own expertise/ability. How often do they enter into a proper contract of sale which should protect both parties?

 

I, and I suspect many others, also strongly dislike the impact of the mobile phone on society. Those who use them so readily do not, I suspect, see any reason to have a normal conversation with family or friends. I see it also as a sign of insecurity that they feel that they might be missing out on something in their crucially important wider world of like minded "friends". Their insecurity is further illustrated by the need to have the latest iPhone, wear visibly branded clothes, drive a "premium" brand car, etc. to show that they have "made it".

 

Can I join your Luddite Group?

 

Jol

[t-b-g]

Tony,

 

the issue has been  - on occasion - that the person buying another business has either been misled as to the ease with which it can be run (well organised stock lists, supplier references, packing lists, etc.) and/or has failed to exercise due diligence before paying up. Of course, they may be simply out of their depth or have an over inflated view of their own expertise/ability. How often do they enter into a proper contract of sale which should protect both parties?

 

I, and I suspect many others, also strongly dislike the impact of the mobile phone on society. Those who use them so readily do not, I suspect, see any reason to have a normal conversation with family or friends. I see it also as a sign of insecurity that they feel that they might be missing out on something in their crucially important wider world of like minded "friends". Their insecurity is further illustrated by the need to have the latest iPhone, wear visibly branded clothes, drive a "premium" brand car, etc. to show that they have "made it".

 

Can I join your Luddite Group?

 

Jol

 

You are spot on with that Jol.

 

There is a huge difference between the originator of the business starting from nothing, gradually building up a product range and learning as they go along, compared to a new owner taking it over and really expecting (and being expected) to know everything about it straight away.. 

 

When the system works well, the transition can work almost seamlessly. I will quote Andrew Hartshorne and his acquisition of Comet as an excellent example of how it can and should be done.

 

As for phones, I do have a mobile. I use it as a portable alarm clock but other than that, I only ever use it to keep in touch with family when they or I am away and even then it is usually just an "I got here safely" text. I am on Facebook because I joined when my daughters were away at University as a way of keeping in touch but in 10 years I have hardly posted anything. It is a good way of seeing what my friends get up to and sometimes somebody will post a link to some wonderful modelling work on the net that I wouldn't have seen otherwise but over a week, I will probably be on it for no more than 5 minutes.

 

Now RMWeb! That is another story. If I spent a bit less time on here I might get a lot more done! Still, I regard this as the place where I interact with a bunch of like minded people. If you like, it is what I do instead of being a member of a model railway club.

 

But if the internet and mobile phones were banned tomorrow, I don't think that my social life would end, as it would for many youngsters. I do have some very good real friends and I see them regularly, which would be enough social interaction for me! When we do meet up, which is usually 3 - 4 times a week, the mobile phones very rarely come out!

[Focalplane]

When I wrote yesterday about the lack of customer service I was mostly talking about dealings with larger companies that have paid staff and job titles.

 

When lived in the USA (I left in 2003) there were many small companies trading in limited ranges for detailing models, etc.  Some grew, some disappeared, but I cannot say for sure how many retired seniors still run such sidelines these days.  Americans are generally much more positive about retirement and what one can do, helped by a really useful organization, the AARP, of which there is no equivalent in Britain.  One of the joys of this topic (Wright Writes) is that it engages many seniors, not only in eastern England but all over the place, and that can only be a good thing.

 

As to smart phones, I only recently bought one with a European wide contract from sosh.fr.  This allows me to follow RMWeb while traveling, check the odd email, etc.  But its most useful attribute is that as long as I keep it somewhere on me it logs how much I walk each day.  The average for the first half of July is 3.4 kms/day.  It encourages me to walk when I could drive.  Too bad it is not waterproof for logging how far I swim as well!

 

My 27 year old grand niece is currently staying with us as she is taking up a job teaching in an international school near Perpignan.  We use texting for one simple reason - I know when to start preparing our lunch!  She, on the other hand seems to very adept at texting with two thumbs to all her friends all the time.  Each generation makes up its own rules.

[Poggy1165]

I have often pondered on the possibility of putting together a short run of 7mm scale LDEC cattle vans. I only really need two or three. But with casting being the process it is, it wouldn't be that much harder to produce a run of say, 12, or 20.

 

This would be "sort of" going into business. But I think I can safely say that such a process would not make me a millionaire. So why on earth would I want to go to the additional trouble of (for example) setting up a website? Frankly, there would probably be enough trouble dealing with complaints that the bolts weren't quite those used by the LDEC, or whatever. Would it not just be easier to dispose of them by word-of-mouth, preferably to friends or GCRS members? It's not as if the world is going to beat a path to my door demanding the production of thousands of the damned things.

 

Many traders are only slightly more ambitious than this. For my part, the more I think of it, the more hassle-free appears the alternative of just knocking up one for myself in Plastikard and calling it a day.

[Arthur]

 

Can I join your Luddite Group?

 

Jol

I joined an internet forum Luddite group. We gave up all modern nastiness including use of web forums.

 

 

 

For some reason the group immediately folded. Bizarre.

 

.

[4630]

Each generation makes up its own rules.

 

 

And to me that's the nub of the issue.  Live and let live.

[Compound2632]

Now RMWeb! That is another story. If I spent a bit less time on here I might get a lot more done!

 

Quite...

[Jol Wilkinson]

 Each generation makes up its own rules.

 

But not necessarily good ones. Internet and text bullying seem to be acceptable for some.  Taking videos of accidents, etc. rather than seeing if you can do something to help, even if it is calling the emergency services or just getting out of the way. Then posting said videos on social (?) media sites, sometimes causing more grief and unhappiness for those involved or their friends and relations.

 

Their was a recent video shown on BBC local news of a bus that had caught fire on the A11 and been burned out. The driver had managed to pull into a apparently and got out unharmed (it wasn't in service) but it was notable that no one had stopped in the layby to offer assistance. 

 

It seems that society is becoming more ME, ME, ME than before, with less consideration for and of others.