Wright writes.....

[Clem]

I couldn't resist going to that Facebook page and having a look.... My goodness, there was some spleen being vented. I thought about making a comment such as 'You don't know Tony Wright so how can you make such judgemental and frankly, venomous assertions." But then I thought no, when people want to be outraged and offended, no amount of reasoned argument will ebb that desire. As they say, you can lead a horse to water.....

[Hollar]

Tollesbury is a beautiful little layout, which is a hard thing to achieve for spectators who, like me, know your the location pretty well.  It's evidence that something can look 100% convincingly real, without actually being based on .  All you have to do is build it with a knowledge of the area that is both profound and backed by instinct, painstaking care, and enough discipline not to invent a specious lineside industry for the sake of more traffic.  I think I last saw it at Railex, where the operators were sitting in front of a large cheerful sign apologising for having left the sky at home.  Some days I know just how they felt.

 

It's not the only way to build a railway, but it is layouts like Tollesbury, Black Dog  and St Merryn that make my jaw drop when I see them.

 

Tone

[Tony Wright]

I couldn't resist going to that Facebook page and having a look.... My goodness, there was some spleen being vented. I thought about making a comment such as 'You don't know Tony Wright so how can you make such judgemental and frankly, venomous assertions." But then I thought no, when people want to be outraged and offended, no amount of reasoned argument will ebb that desire. As they say, you can lead a horse to water.....

It's interesting how folk can take offence so easily, isn't it Clem?

 

I reckon, in my case, I must have a gift for it, because I do it so easily. 

 

The 'howlers' I referred to in the article are ones I've seen (in the flesh and in all forms of the media) over the last couple of years. Some complainants (it would appear) must believe that I can see through walls and be able to nit-pick with regard to what everyone is doing, model railway-wise. I would defend everyone's right to do whatever they wish on their own model railways, but if it's seen in the wider world, isn't there a responsibility to get things as correct as possible? To some, obviously not.

 

Someone made a very valid point earlier on the thread regarding several other articles in the same RM issue. The Hybrid Highs Variants, Towester, Wrington Vale, Milton Street, Class 123 in 2FS, Ventnor West, Moorside, Oakham, Fish Traffic for Dent, Weatherbury Magna, Milton Quays and Easy loads for modern wagons all show (in one form or another) what I was trying to get at in my piece. I thought it was an excellent issue (abstracting my article, of course). 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[t-b-g]

Interesting, Tony,

 

We've known each other a long time, and are very good friends, but you're way, way, way wide of the mark by suggesting that what I wrote implied that others were doing it all wrong. The gist of what I wrote (and I've mentioned it many times now) is that people should be encouraged to make things for themselves, be helped by those who have skills/experience, be encouraged to observe the prototype in their modelling and conduct research. Also, to be very suspicious of so-called 'experts'. Please, tell me what's wrong about that. 

 

Basing an opinion on the comments of others without first seeing which 'stick' poked which 'bear' is a bit dodgy, if I may be so bold? 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Many apologies Tony! I made my comment based on what others had said about what you had written. I should have known better!

 

You have been known to use the word "must" a time or too. I didn't pick you up on it when you said that any layout of Leicester Central must have V2s. They were only there for less than half the existence of the station, so it is perfectly possibly to model the station without them if you set the layout in the first 35 years or the last few years when it was nearly all Black 5s and Royal Scots and a V2 was a rare visitor.

 

I had a brief look at some of the stuff on Facebook but quickly gave up.

 

I do recall you once telling me that a certain editor had asked you to write something deliberately provocative and that you had obliged. I wondered if this might have been a similar situation.

 

As for cutting metal, I use very fine blades in a piercing saw. I don't get the blades from model railway suppliers any more. I use Vallorbe Swiss made blades obtained from a watch maker tool supplier. They make cutting metal so much easier and even I can cut a straight line with them.

 

Another regular metal cutter used nothing but this beast, with coarse fretsaw blades. 

 

 

Your trick of fixing metal to hardboard worked for him, although the Reverend Denny used pins, not glue, to fix them together.

 

I have a few scraps as examples.

 

[Atso]

I couldn't resist going to that Facebook page and having a look.... My goodness, there was some spleen being vented. I thought about making a comment such as 'You don't know Tony Wright so how can you make such judgemental and frankly, venomous assertions." But then I thought no, when people want to be outraged and offended, no amount of reasoned argument will ebb that desire. As they say, you can lead a horse to water.....

 

Neither could I and also thought about posting something but decided it wouldn't make any difference. Interestingly, I've just gone back to see if there are any new post and couldn't find that thread. Using the search function didn't work either, perhaps it has been taken down; and perhaps for the best for the two members that may have been misidentified as Tony.

[Atso]

Is this the ultimate in 'elitist' modelling?

 

me 01.jpg

 

Two years ago, I was scanned by ModelU and a model of me, in picture-taking mode was created. Yesterday, Mr Anglian presented me with me, absolutely beautifully-painted. Thanks ever so much, Tim. Today, then, I've planted myself on Little Bytham. 

 

me 02.jpg

 

If I'm standing on a station platform and a train is coming, I'll take its picture. 60014 has a special significance for me. It's the first A4 I actually can remember seeing, in the early/mid-'50s, though, as a sprog, I didn't have a camera at the time. So, some 65 years later, here we are again. 

 

Those Facebookers will have a field day with this. Little Bytham is representative of the summer of 1958, yet, clearly, SILVER LINK is in 1961 condition. Outrageous, misleading, hypocritical, just plain-wrong and an insult to those who know of such things - in fact worse, to those who don't! I made the loco from an old Wills kit (scratch-building a chassis for it), and Ian Rathbone painted it. Must do better next time will be on the report!  

 

Lovely to see the ModelU version of yourself painted Tony. 'Wright sights' perhaps?

 

Being totally ignorant of the post war scene (and almost totally ignorant of the pre-war one!) I wouldn't know that Silver Link's condition is wrong for 1958. I do know that the locomotive very much looks the part and fits in perfectly with the surroundings of the layout in you photographs.

[Tony Wright]

Many apologies Tony! I made my comment based on what others had said about what you had written. I should have known better!

 

You have been known to use the word "must" a time or too. I didn't pick you up on it when you said that any layout of Leicester Central must have V2s. They were only there for less than half the existence of the station, so it is perfectly possibly to model the station without them if you set the layout in the first 35 years or the last few years when it was nearly all Black 5s and Royal Scots and a V2 was a rare visitor.

 

I had a brief look at some of the stuff on Facebook but quickly gave up.

 

I do recall you once telling me that a certain editor had asked you to write something deliberately provocative and that you had obliged. I wondered if this might have been a similar situation.

 

As for cutting metal, I use very fine blades in a piercing saw. I don't get the blades from model railway suppliers any more. I use Vallorbe Swiss made blades obtained from a watch maker tool supplier. They make cutting metal so much easier and even I can cut a straight line with them.

 

Another regular metal cutter used nothing but this beast, with coarse fretsaw blades. 

 

DSCN1861.JPG

 

Your trick of fixing metal to hardboard worked for him, although the Reverend Denny used pins, not glue, to fix them together.

 

I have a few scraps as examples.

 

DSCN1865.JPG

Thanks Tony,

 

I don't think Steve Flint specifically asked me to write in a 'provocative' way, just write in my 'normal' manner, which is just about the same thing I suppose. 

 

I was chatting to him at the Southampton Show (an excellent one, by the way) last year when he requested a write a piece from the position of my observations of the current state of the hobby. Would it surprise you that my article was 'toned-down'? Our conversation went along the lines of (my) perception being that...........

 

The hobby is becoming more RTR-dominated (and not just in OO).

More folk seem to moan today (through social media?) about such and such a loco/carriage/wagon not being available RTR, yet don't seem prepared to make/modify it for themselves; because they can't/won't, or can't afford others to do the things for them. Many of the sternest moaners are anonymous. 

There's been a dropping off in folk actually making things (cause and effect?).

We (and include all modellers in this 'we') should encourage others to have a go at making things for themselves.

We (same 'we') should be prepared to offer advice and assistance.

Any advice should be treated with a little caution (especially that given by self-proclaimed experts). 

Reliable research is paramount.

Time taken carefully in making models is never wasted

The best way to make a model is to copy prototype practice.

Anyone writing about the hobby in the media should make sure that what they're writing about is good advice, shows best practice and is not misleading.

 

Which, give or take, is what I said in the article. Talk about social media being highly inflammable! 

 

I must remind myself not to use must too much - once a teacher, always a teacher................................

 

I had a good chat with Roy Johnstone today, one time editor of the late Model Railways. He told me that when he took over the role, just about everything handed over by the previous editor consisted of how to make things, mainly in metal. He thought it was all a bit too 'high brow' at the time (20 years ago). My word, such stuff today would be considered very elitist - much higher than high-brow. 

 

He also told me how Iain Rice had picked him up for suggesting (in an editorial) that model railways should be fun. 'No, it's a very serious hobby' was the comment. Which rather suggests to me (at least in some circles) that being 'serious' about one's railway modelling and having fun are incompatible. I find that deeply depressing. I admit, that I do the 'serious' research whenever I begin making a model, and I'm serious as to how accurate it is and, particularly, how well it runs. But, when it runs, it's great fun, especially in the company of others. I know Buckingham is huge fun to run, but Peter took his modelling seriously, I know. 

 

I've also been told that the Facebook page in question has now been closed down. TW breaks the Internet! My. 

 

Finally, we're all told that the hobby is a broad church. Which it is, I suppose. Except that, as in all religions, there are many different interpretations, many ending up being incompatible, or even hostile with/to each other. Though I'm against hostility, perhaps the hobby is becoming more fragmented. As long as we respect others' (valid) points of view, then we should all get along. I thought my points of view in my article were reasonably well-presented, yet, I'm told that some of the comments on Facebook were vituperative in the extreme. I hope I never come across as that, even though I've never understood collecting, would much sooner see something made by someone than something just out of a box or made for them, would quite happily see a 'collectible' model's value slashed by someone detailing/improving/altering it and cheerfully chuck away (responsibly) any packaging. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

Lovely to see the ModelU version of yourself painted Tony. 'Wright sights' perhaps?

 

Being totally ignorant of the post war scene (and almost totally ignorant of the pre-war one!) I wouldn't know that Silver Link's condition is wrong for 1958. I do know that the locomotive very much looks the part and fits in perfectly with the surroundings of the layout in you photographs.

Thanks Steve,

 

My model of SILVER LINK has electric warning flashes and a Smith-Stone speedometer fitted (April 1961). The double chimney is correct, though the other two are tantamount to apostasy according to my own principles.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[LNER4479]

... tantamount to apostasy ...

Cripes! That's got us all fumbling for our OEDs...

[Clem]

It's interesting how folk can take offence so easily, isn't it Clem?

 

I reckon, in my case, I must have a gift for it, because I do it so easily. 

 

The 'howlers' I referred to in the article are ones I've seen (in the flesh and in all forms of the media) over the last couple of years. Some complainants (it would appear) must believe that I can see through walls and be able to nit-pick with regard to what everyone is doing, model railway-wise. I would defend everyone's right to do whatever they wish on their own model railways, but if it's seen in the wider world, isn't there a responsibility to get things as correct as possible? To some, obviously not.

 

Someone made a very valid point earlier on the thread regarding several other articles in the same RM issue. The Hybrid Highs Variants, Towester, Wrington Vale, Milton Street, Class 123 in 2FS, Ventnor West, Moorside, Oakham, Fish Traffic for Dent, Weatherbury Magna, Milton Quays and Easy loads for modern wagons all show (in one form or another) what I was trying to get at in my piece. I thought it was an excellent issue (abstracting my article, of course). 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

"It's interesting how folk can take offence so easily, isn't it Clem?

 

I reckon, in my case, I must have a gift for it, because I do it so easily. "

 

Tony, I have that same gift. Still it's good to be gifted! 

 

"I thought it was an excellent issue (abstracting my article, of course). "

I haven't yet read your article. In fact I haven't yet bought a copy  ..... But I will now -  for your article if nothing else! :-) .  (Of course I'm sure there are many other good articles in it.)

 

It just beats me how people who seem to know very little about the creative side of modelling can criticise someone who has repeatedly given their time to others for the purpose of the imparting of skills, knowledge and encouragement. Creative modelling is fun and you can't beat that sense of achievement '(buzz' as us rock 'n' rollers would say) when you've finished something and it's turned out well. I do feel sorry for those who'll never experience that.

Edited January 14, 2019 by Clem

[petrovich]

Neither could I and also thought about posting something but decided it wouldn't make any difference. Interestingly, I've just gone back to see if there are any new post and couldn't find that thread. Using the search function didn't work either, perhaps it has been taken down; and perhaps for the best for the two members that may have been misidentified as Tony.

I cannot find it using the search so confirming your "it has been taken down".

 

Perhaps the government and its agencies should talk to Tony as an alternative to co operative hackers. 

 

Regards

 

Peter

[Lecorbusier]

 

The hobby is becoming more RTR-dominated (and not just in OO).

More folk seem to moan today (through social media?) about such and such a loco/carriage/wagon not being available RTR, yet don't seem prepared to make/modify it for themselves; because they can't/won't, or can't afford others to do the things for them. Many of the sternest moaners are anonymous. 

There's been a dropping off in folk actually making things (cause and effect?).

 

It just goes to show how supply and demand can effect things I suppose.  The explosion in the sheer range and quality of RTR over the last 20 years has been extraordinary. This means that people can achieve much finer layouts out of the box than ever used to be the case. Given this i can understand how ones hopes and expectations might rise and so complaints will arise for those things not commercially available ... particularly where absolute fidelity to a specific loco/coach/wagon at a specific point in time is not the aim. I can also see that many will be seduced into finer scale modelling with no will or wish to roll up sleeves and get hands dirty so to speak ... or perhaps there interest lies in scenic modelling or some other aspect.

 

If there was a way to measure, I would be fascinated to know what relative numbers in the hobby are now compared to say the mid 1990s. Perhaps the RTR box openers are a new comtemporary subset of the hobby in addition to what went before rather than instead of?

 

 

 

He also told me how Iain Rice had picked him up for suggesting (in an editorial) that model railways should be fun. 'No, it's a very serious hobby' was the comment.

 

Sorry ... the day it stops being fun and becomes work, I'm off. Fun and serious I don't think are mutually exclusive. 

Edited January 14, 2019 by Lecorbusier

[robertcwp]

Thanks Tony,

 

I don't think Steve Flint specifically asked me to write in a 'provocative' way, just write in my 'normal' manner, which is just about the same thing I suppose. 

 

 

[robertcwp]

 

Sorry ... the day it stops being fun and becomes work, I'm off. Fun and serious I don't think are mutually exclusive. 

I agree, although I'm in the fortunate position of having a job which can be fun too. Yes, applying accounting standards and interpreting and applying company law really can be fun. I get paid for it too. And, yes, I have a degree in economics and accounting. 

 

I could be a much better modeller than I am and learn to do a lot of things, but my other fun occupation, as in the one that pays the bills and pays for the trains, the photo collection and the carriage workings, does take up a lot of time and brainpower. 

[Anglian]

Thanks ever so much, Tim. Today, then, I've planted myself on Little Bytham. 

 

 

You are very welcome. It's nice to see a figure I've painted photographed professionally. I have a sense of relief – I think this one stands up to the camera, that can often be quite unforgiving. (Does anybody take photographs of their models to highlight possible flaws, during the building process?) 

 

I very much enjoy painting the Monty's metal figures but ModelU figures are really fabulous to work with and are highly recommended. Being 3D scans the soft folds of clothing and the subtlety of a pose are beautifully rendered. The material they are created with is a little brittle so caution is advised, if there are very thin parts included as part of the pose. For example, the handle a fireman's shovel may need very careful handling when removing the figure from the base for planting on the layout, or footplate. I cleaned the figure but stopped short of degreasing (as I would with a metal figure) – I had no idea how the material may be effected by cellulose. A thinned coat of white enamel, followed by an equally thin coat of white acrylic were applied before painting with Vallejo acrylics. I'm told by a friend the correct Spanish pronunciation of Vallejo is Bah-yea-ho but ask for such paints, even in a model shop that turns out to stock them, and people look at you a bit strangely, at least in my experience.

 

With this figure I experimented by using gloss varnish to suggest the camera lens. However, at 4mm scale I felt the reflective effect it gave was too prominent so I repainted over it.

 

 

 

 

Edited January 14, 2019 by Anglian

[Buhar]

It's good that you can turn up to be scanned in 2018 and (unless you went to a vintage shop first) what you happened to be wearing fits in with the summer of 1958!

[t-b-g]

Thanks Tony,

 

I don't think Steve Flint specifically asked me to write in a 'provocative' way, just write in my 'normal' manner, which is just about the same thing I suppose. 

 

I was chatting to him at the Southampton Show (an excellent one, by the way) last year when he requested a write a piece from the position of my observations of the current state of the hobby. Would it surprise you that my article was 'toned-down'? Our conversation went along the lines of (my) perception being that...........

 

The hobby is becoming more RTR-dominated (and not just in OO).

More folk seem to moan today (through social media?) about such and such a loco/carriage/wagon not being available RTR, yet don't seem prepared to make/modify it for themselves; because they can't/won't, or can't afford others to do the things for them. Many of the sternest moaners are anonymous. 

There's been a dropping off in folk actually making things (cause and effect?).

We (and include all modellers in this 'we') should encourage others to have a go at making things for themselves.

We (same 'we') should be prepared to offer advice and assistance.

Any advice should be treated with a little caution (especially that given by self-proclaimed experts). 

Reliable research is paramount.

Time taken carefully in making models is never wasted

The best way to make a model is to copy prototype practice.

Anyone writing about the hobby in the media should make sure that what they're writing about is good advice, shows best practice and is not misleading.

 

Which, give or take, is what I said in the article. Talk about social media being highly inflammable! 

 

I must remind myself not to use must too much - once a teacher, always a teacher................................

 

I had a good chat with Roy Johnstone today, one time editor of the late Model Railways. He told me that when he took over the role, just about everything handed over by the previous editor consisted of how to make things, mainly in metal. He thought it was all a bit too 'high brow' at the time (20 years ago). My word, such stuff today would be considered very elitist - much higher than high-brow. 

 

He also told me how Iain Rice had picked him up for suggesting (in an editorial) that model railways should be fun. 'No, it's a very serious hobby' was the comment. Which rather suggests to me (at least in some circles) that being 'serious' about one's railway modelling and having fun are incompatible. I find that deeply depressing. I admit, that I do the 'serious' research whenever I begin making a model, and I'm serious as to how accurate it is and, particularly, how well it runs. But, when it runs, it's great fun, especially in the company of others. I know Buckingham is huge fun to run, but Peter took his modelling seriously, I know. 

 

I've also been told that the Facebook page in question has now been closed down. TW breaks the Internet! My. 

 

Finally, we're all told that the hobby is a broad church. Which it is, I suppose. Except that, as in all religions, there are many different interpretations, many ending up being incompatible, or even hostile with/to each other. Though I'm against hostility, perhaps the hobby is becoming more fragmented. As long as we respect others' (valid) points of view, then we should all get along. I thought my points of view in my article were reasonably well-presented, yet, I'm told that some of the comments on Facebook were vituperative in the extreme. I hope I never come across as that, even though I've never understood collecting, would much sooner see something made by someone than something just out of a box or made for them, would quite happily see a 'collectible' model's value slashed by someone detailing/improving/altering it and cheerfully chuck away (responsibly) any packaging. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

I can't and won't argue with any of that!

 

I always say that I may take my modelling seriously but never myself.

 

There is a difference between enjoying a hobby and having fun. Fun suggests frivolity. I get plenty of frivolity but it comes from the banter between friends rather than the actual making of things or working on layouts.

[Clearwater]

I suspect “box opening” has always been part of the hobby but the internet, both via the YouTube videos and places like Facebook, have made the collecting side of the hobby more visible and it easier for users to share their disgust that exactly the model they want has not been made by the manufacturer.

 

David

[t-b-g]

You are very welcome. It's nice to see a figure I've painted photographed professionally. I have a sense of relief – I think this one stands up to the camera, that can often be quite unforgiving. (Does anybody take photographs of their models to highlight possible flaws, during the building process?) 

 

I very much enjoy painting the Monty's metal figures but ModelU figures are really fabulous to work with and are highly recommended. Being 3D scans the soft folds of clothing and the subtlety of a pose are beautifully rendered. The material they are created with is a little brittle so caution is advised, if there are very thin parts included as part of the pose. For example, the handle a fireman's shovel may need very careful handling when removing the figure from the base for planting on the layout, or footplate. I cleaned the figure but stopped short of degreasing (as I would with a metal figure) – I had no idea how the material may be effected by cellulose. A thinned coat of white enamel, followed by an equally thin coat of white acrylic were applied before painting with Vallejo acrylics. I'm told by a friend the correct Spanish pronunciation of Vallejo is Bah-yea-ho but ask for such paints, even in a model shop that turns out to stock them, and people look at you a bit strangely, at least in my experience.

 

With this figure I experimented by using gloss varnish to suggest the camera lens. However, at 4mm scale I felt the reflective effect it gave was too prominent so I repainted over it.

 

 

 

 

 

Yes! I take photos during construction and put them up on the big computer screen. A mobile phone is useless for this!

 

Many a fault that was undetected by my eyes alone jumps out in a photo. Like the missing step on the 4-4-0T.

 

I have looked at the photos more closely today and spotted a missing bracket to support the tank under the bunker, missing sandpipes from the footplate down to the rail and a missing step at the front of the tanks.

 

More little jobs for tomorrow!

[Tony Wright]

It's good that you can turn up to be scanned in 2018 and (unless you went to a vintage shop first) what you happened to be wearing fits in with the summer of 1958!

Which just goes to show how much I'm a follower of fashion.

 

Actually, Mo buys all my clothes. She knows my size (and it's a lot bigger than in 1958 - and 1978!). I don't wear jeans (were they very common in 1958?); mainly old-style cords (which were), open-necked shirts and comfy jumpers most of the time. I don't wear trainers (pumps in 1958), just 'sensible' shoes, so, yes, I haven't altered sartorially at all. Except that I'd have been wearing shorts in 1958 - something I've never worn (except to play sports) for the last near-60 years! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

You are very welcome. It's nice to see a figure I've painted photographed professionally. I have a sense of relief – I think this one stands up to the camera, that can often be quite unforgiving. (Does anybody take photographs of their models to highlight possible flaws, during the building process?) 

 

I very much enjoy painting the Monty's metal figures but ModelU figures are really fabulous to work with and are highly recommended. Being 3D scans the soft folds of clothing and the subtlety of a pose are beautifully rendered. The material they are created with is a little brittle so caution is advised, if there are very thin parts included as part of the pose. For example, the handle a fireman's shovel may need very careful handling when removing the figure from the base for planting on the layout, or footplate. I cleaned the figure but stopped short of degreasing (as I would with a metal figure) – I had no idea how the material may be effected by cellulose. A thinned coat of white enamel, followed by an equally thin coat of white acrylic were applied before painting with Vallejo acrylics. I'm told by a friend the correct Spanish pronunciation of Vallejo is Bah-yea-ho but ask for such paints, even in a model shop that turns out to stock them, and people look at you a bit strangely, at least in my experience.

 

With this figure I experimented by using gloss varnish to suggest the camera lens. However, at 4mm scale I felt the reflective effect it gave was too prominent so I repainted over it.

 

 

 

 

Thanks again Tim,

 

I take pictures of what I'm making all the time, throughout the build-process. All my grotty building is highlighted in the extreme. 

 

I very often wish I wasn't quite so good at photography! I hope that doesn't come across as immodest. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[trustytrev]

Fully agree, Modbury is beautiful.

 

I believe we are both at Southampton in a couple of weeks so we will have another chance to put the world to rights - always fun.

 

We certainly did have fun when we came to see LB. I seem to remember you and Kim did most of the driving whilst I watched with my nose hovering over the lineside fence as trains whizzed past even faster than Mallard achieved - marvelous!

 

Back to Stevanage and I caught up with Steve (Atso) and we continued our bartering whereby I save any N gauge wheels I get from conversions along with any other bits that might be useful in exchange for his surplus loco bodies. This time, among other things, Steve gave me a Stanier 0-4-4T body to evaluate. Its a little modern really for my period but I managed to find of picture of one at Bath so will build a chassis for it at some point. Steve also gave me a lovely GN six-wheel parcels van but no picture as yet.

 

20190113_153127.jpg

 

My other highlight of the weekend, apart from the excellent layouts, was Keith Gloster's part built SDJR 7F which he brought along to show progress. These 2-8-0s are my favorites and Keith is making a superb job.

 

 20190112_133140_001.jpg

 

 

Jerry

Hello,

       Are these 2mm scale?

trustytrev.?)

[trustytrev]

Hello,

       I have come to the conclusion my choice of a piercing saw with a 150mm deep throat to start with was asking for disappointment due to being more difficult to handle. I am waiting for another with a  shallower 70mm throat which should make things easier.I have also ordered some heavier blades now the size options have become  more clear to understand. I had tack soldered the Comet chassis sides together to enable cutting and filing of mirror images. I am trying my best to make use of as many of the original parts such as wheels and motion from Hornby's rebuilt Scot as it would be a shame to discard them. Quartering the drivers with different sized crank pin fasteners is in the process of being resolved. I discovered the GW quartering press was a problem if going this route. I am awaiting the arrival of another type that rests the axle on two center flanges and requires the crank pins to just touch either side to right angled verticals.

trustytrev.

[Chamby]

Thanks Tony,

 

I don't think Steve Flint specifically asked me to write in a 'provocative' way, just write in my 'normal' manner, which is just about the same thing I suppose. 

 

I was chatting to him at the Southampton Show (an excellent one, by the way) last year when he requested a write a piece from the position of my observations of the current state of the hobby. Would it surprise you that my article was 'toned-down'? Our conversation went along the lines of (my) perception being that...........

 

The hobby is becoming more RTR-dominated (and not just in OO).

More folk seem to moan today (through social media?) about such and such a loco/carriage/wagon not being available RTR, yet don't seem prepared to make/modify it for themselves; because they can't/won't, or can't afford others to do the things for them. Many of the sternest moaners are anonymous. 

There's been a dropping off in folk actually making things (cause and effect?).

We (and include all modellers in this 'we') should encourage others to have a go at making things for themselves.

We (same 'we') should be prepared to offer advice and assistance.

Any advice should be treated with a little caution (especially that given by self-proclaimed experts). 

Reliable research is paramount.

Time taken carefully in making models is never wasted

The best way to make a model is to copy prototype practice.

Anyone writing about the hobby in the media should make sure that what they're writing about is good advice, shows best practice and is not misleading.

 

Which, give or take, is what I said in the article. Talk about social media being highly inflammable! 

 

I must remind myself not to use must too much - once a teacher, always a teacher................................

 

I had a good chat with Roy Johnstone today, one time editor of the late Model Railways. He told me that when he took over the role, just about everything handed over by the previous editor consisted of how to make things, mainly in metal. He thought it was all a bit too 'high brow' at the time (20 years ago). My word, such stuff today would be considered very elitist - much higher than high-brow. 

 

He also told me how Iain Rice had picked him up for suggesting (in an editorial) that model railways should be fun. 'No, it's a very serious hobby' was the comment. Which rather suggests to me (at least in some circles) that being 'serious' about one's railway modelling and having fun are incompatible. I find that deeply depressing. I admit, that I do the 'serious' research whenever I begin making a model, and I'm serious as to how accurate it is and, particularly, how well it runs. But, when it runs, it's great fun, especially in the company of others. I know Buckingham is huge fun to run, but Peter took his modelling seriously, I know. 

 

I've also been told that the Facebook page in question has now been closed down. TW breaks the Internet! My. 

 

Finally, we're all told that the hobby is a broad church. Which it is, I suppose. Except that, as in all religions, there are many different interpretations, many ending up being incompatible, or even hostile with/to each other. Though I'm against hostility, perhaps the hobby is becoming more fragmented. As long as we respect others' (valid) points of view, then we should all get along. I thought my points of view in my article were reasonably well-presented, yet, I'm told that some of the comments on Facebook were vituperative in the extreme. I hope I never come across as that, even though I've never understood collecting, would much sooner see something made by someone than something just out of a box or made for them, would quite happily see a 'collectible' model's value slashed by someone detailing/improving/altering it and cheerfully chuck away (responsibly) any packaging. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.

 

The other thing that we have to factor in, in defence of the RTR brigade, is the fact that so few model shops and exhibitions promote the kit building side of our hobby (other than perhaps plastic kits). It has become very much a niche (rather than elite) pursuit, in part because it is now so inaccessible compared to the availability of RTR models - you really have to know where to go and hunt the stuff down from relatively obscure specialist suppliers. And that’s before you get into the skills side of things, given that metalwork has long fallen out of the National curriculum (was it ever in it?). We’ve covered this before earlier in this thread, but it remains very relevant in the context of your article.

 

I think kit building your own stuff will remain a niche activity because of this. If it is seen as elitist, this is probably because it is perceived as unattainable by the average enthusiast, the barriers to entry are high when starting out from a naive position. Thankfully, it is not because the kit builders are endowed with a massive superiority complex!

 

Phil

[Clive Mortimore]

The other thing that we have to factor in, in defence of the RTR brigade, is the fact that so few model shops and exhibitions promote the kit building side of our hobby (other than perhaps plastic kits). It has become very much a niche (rather than elite) pursuit, in part because it is now so inaccessible compared to the availability of RTR models - you really have to know where to go and hunt the stuff down from relatively obscure specialist suppliers. And that’s before you get into the skills side of things, given that metalwork has long fallen out of the National curriculum (was it ever in it?). We’ve covered this before earlier in this thread, but it remains very relevant in the context of your article.

 

I think kit building your own stuff will remain a niche activity because of this. If it is seen as elitist, this is probably because it is perceived as unattainable by the average enthusiast, the barriers to entry are high when starting out from a naive position. Thankfully, it is not because the kit builders are endowed with a massive superiority complex!

 

Phil

Hi Phil

 

Model shops don't promote what will not sell. I asked for some Romford wheels a couple of years ago in my then local shop, "We don't stock them any more because no one ask for them". A shop I have always bought wheels from. It proves how often I buy wheels.

 

Playing with a scenic break idea today.