Wright writes.....

[Andrew P]

Merry Christmas Tony and Mo, thanks for making John and I so welcome earlier in the year, it was a real tonic when I was recovering.

 

Anyway have a very good Christmas, and a Happy and Prosperous New Year.

[Allegheny1600]

Hi Tony and Mo,

As Andy said above (hear, hear) Merry Christmas, a very happy 2015 to you both and many, many thanks again for your wonderful hospitality and friendship.

Festive regards,

John and Bev E.

[Tony Wright]

Hi Tony and Mo,

As Andy said above (hear, hear) Merry Christmas, a very happy 2015 to you both and many, many thanks again for your wonderful hospitality and friendship.

Festive regards,

John and Bev E.

Many thanks John and Bev, and Andy above.

 

How now nice to be given such personal good wishes and have them broadcast. May we reciprocate, please?

 

You are, of course, most welcome next year for a return visit. Much has been done scenically on LB and there at least four new locos.

 

Best,

 

Tony.

[corneliuslundie]

First, a big thanks to Tony and all the other contributors for the amount of input to this thread, though I have to say that it has not been conducive to a lot of modeling in this house – I seem to have spent a lot of time over the past few weeks reading through 131 pages instead of actually making things!

 

I have, in truth learned a lot, even though my modelling is streets away from main line BR(ER) in all respects.

 

However, I wonder if the sheer numbers of large LNER and BR(ER) layouts under construction, and also Tony’s many articles, are not self fertilising. People see these layouts and say “Wow, I am going to do that!” (even if the end result is then all done with RTR equipment). That leads to a greater market for RTR locos and stock for such models encouraging the manufacturers to produce more (aided and abetted by Tony visiting them and showing them beautiful locos and suggesting them as models to produce).

 

As I said, my preferences are rather different, and I am sure I am not going to be inundated with RTR models, or even kits. For the Rhymney Railway in 1912 in 4mm there are currently four wagon kits that I know of (and two are sold as GWR). The only carriages are some former etched zinc sides. There have been some locomotives, notably two by C J Lester (of which more anon). Of course there are many wagon kits for companies which would have been seen on a Rhymney/GWR joint line in 1912 and there are quite a few relevant GWR loco and wagon kits. There is even RTR if one has a big layout, such as the 28xx and mogul and of course some pannier tanks which got everywhere. I may have missed a few items because I have not been looking recently but I don’t think so, and a good number of my wagon kits are from small traders who have since retired.

 

The other big difference is the amount of information available. For most of the RR wagons I scratch build there are no photos (I have identified about 15 photos of RR or ex RR wagons, and many of those are either iron minks or the few roll wagons). We do have drawings, notably those produced over the years by T L Jones and Mike Lloyd, as well as manufacturers’ drawings from the Metropolitan Wagon Co and a few from other sources (see the thread on 19^th century wagons in the Pre-Grouping section of RMWeb for a few examples).

 

The big advantage of course is that no-one (except perhaps Penrhos1920) is going to look at my models and tell me they are wrong!

 

Now this is not all good. I have tried building loco kits in the dim and distant past (a Ks Armstrong goods and a Ks 14xx) but not very successfully and they have both been disposed of. The C J Lester kits are in the same mould as that nice little B&M loco you built or one of the poorer Jidenco kits – perhaps more accurately termed an aid to scratch building though sold as complete kits. They CAN be built. John Bancroft built me the Lester Rhymney K class 0-6-0ST but he exhausted his supply of expletives long before it was finished and ended up scratch building a chassis.

 

I still have the J class 0-6-0ST kit in its box. How many BR 16T minerals would I have to build in exchange for Tony building the J? I believe BR had a million but that might not be enough as a fair barter!

 

Unfortunately then there are no “easy” kits for me to practise on as suggested by Tony, though I do have a Peckett X class kit to build when I can find some 4ft H spoke wheels.

 

The other big advantage of building a Rhymney layout is that passenger trains are typically four 4-wheel coaches and since gradients are steep goods trains are also short (and therefore more frequent). And stations do not sprawl as there is no room in a steep sided South Wales valley. So I can manage something not too compressed in the extremely restricted space I have.

 

So my suggestion if you want apple green engines and teak carriages (or the same in BR livery) is to look beyond the LNER main line. You can still have quite big LNER locos, or at least some of them, but think of somewhere like the NER in the north east, the LDECR or the GNR in Lincolnshire or west Yorkshire.

 

Finally, on use of English. I was for most of my career a technical editor. My initial training was that there was only one way to write English correctly. When I moved on I gratefully used that as a basis but did drop some of the odder rules we were given, such as not putting a hyphen after a prefix, so “exarmy” etc. But for the last six years before I retired I taught English as a foreign language overseas. It made me look at the language and realize that many of the “rules” we are taught in school are a load of tosh. Such as not using split infinitives because they are not used in Latin (where an infinitive is one word!) or “I before E except after C” – and the first example most children test it on is “their”! Many of our grammar rules were written in the 18^th century by grammarians who were applying rules from Latin to a Germanic language. And it is interesting to see how they are gradually disappearing.

 

The second thing I realized that there is no such thing as “correct” English. What is often claimed to be such is actually Midlands English as used by the likes of Shakespeare and later the BBC. Just like most languages English has dialects, all equally valid.

 

Thirdly, all languages change, and in these days of mass communication they change faster than ever before. New words are invented, old ones drop out of use and words change their meaning. One example I used to show to our students: “terrifying, terrible, terrific” – all from the same root but the last has reversed its meaning during its history. Or “wicked” which now for most of those under the age of 40 means something like “wonderful”. This has always happened and we can’t stop it.

 

Finally, and please don’t have apoplexy at this point, these days the British are one of the smaller groups using the English language. The biggest dialect is Indian English and it is one of the furthest removed from Oxford English. The Americans (or mainly Webster of the dictionary) have also changed it enormously. But the good news is that English is a very forgiving language. You can make all sorts of grammatical howlers, use the wrong word and make other mistakes but you can make yourself understood. In many other languages this is just not true. It you don’t pronounce words correctly no-one will understand you.  But not always! What do you make of the current American phrase “Way to go!” It actually means well done.

 

So, way to go, Tony. Keep it up.

 

Happy Christmas toi all the contributors whose writings I have so much enjoyed.

 

Apologies for the verbal diarrhoea, but I have got it off my chest in one go. I’ll sit quietly at the back now, sir.

 

Jonathan David

 

Edited to double the number of wagon kits to four.

Edited December 25, 2014 by corneliuslundie

[Jol Wilkinson]

Well done Jonathan, you almost got to the end without a spelling mistake! 

 

Whilst I cannot disagree with anything you say about the English language, there are times when I do think that people haven't taken enough care to use it properly enough to communicate their meaning sufficiently well. To comment on that usual brings a volley of excuses. No wot i mene?

 

I remain of the view that effective communication is the responsibility of the writer, not the reader.

 

Jol

[Donington Road]

First, a big thanks to Tony and all the other contributors for the amount of input to this thread, though I have to say that it has not been conducive to a lot of modeling in this house – I seem to have spent a lot of time over the past few weeks reading through 131 pages instead of actually making things!

 

I have, in truth learned a lot, even though my modelling is streets away from main line BR(ER) in all respects.

 

However, I wonder if the sheer numbers of large LNER and BR(ER) layouts under construction, and also Tony’s many articles, are not self fertilising. People see these layouts and say “Wow, I am going to do that!” (even if the end result is then all done with RTR equipment). That leads to a greater market for RTR locos and stock for such models encouraging the manufacturers to produce more (aided and abetted by Tony visiting them and showing them beautiful locos and suggesting them as models to produce).

 

As I said, my preferences are rather different, and I am sure I am not going to be inundated with RTR models, or even kits. For the Rhymney Railway in 1912 in 4mm there are currently two wagon kits that I know of (and one is sold as GWR). The only carriages are some former etched zinc sides. There have been some locomotives, notably two by C J Lester (of which more anon). Of course there are many wagon kits for companies which would have been seen on a Rhymney/GWR joint line in 1912 and there are quite a few relevant GWR loco and wagon kits. There is even RTR if one has a big layout, such as the 28xx and mogul and of course some pannier tanks which got everywhere. I may have missed a few items because I have not been looking recently but I don’t think so, and a good number of my wagon kits are from small traders who have since retired.

 

The other big difference is the amount of information available. For most of the RR wagons I scratch build there are no photos (I have identified about 15 photos of RR or ex RR wagons, and many of those are either iron minks or the few roll wagons). We do have drawings, notably those produced over the years by T L Jones and Mike Lloyd, as well as manufacturers’ drawings from the Metropolitan Wagon Co and a few from other sources (see the thread on 19^th century wagons in the Pre-Grouping section of RMWeb for a few examples).

 

The big advantage of course is that no-one (except perhaps Penrhos1920) is going to look at my models and tell me they are wrong!

 

Now this is not all good. I have tried building loco kits in the dim and distant past (a Ks Armstrong goods and a Ks 14xx) but not very successfully and they have both been disposed of. The C J Lester kits are in the same mould as that nice little B&M loco you built or one of the poorer Jidenco kits – perhaps more accurately termed an aid to scratch building though sold as complete kits. They CAN be built. John Bancroft built me the Lester Rhymney K class 0-6-0ST but he exhausted his supply of expletives long before it was finished and ended up scratch building a chassis.

 

I still have the J class 0-6-0ST kit in its box. How many BR 16T minerals would I have to build in exchange for Tony building the J? I believe BR had a million but that might not be enough as a fair barter!

 

Unfortunately then there are no “easy” kits for me to practise on as suggested by Tony, though I do have a Peckett X class kit to build when I can find some 4ft H spoke wheels.

 

The other big advantage of building a Rhymney layout is that passenger trains are typically four 4-wheel coaches and since gradients are steep goods trains are also short (and therefore more frequent). And stations do not sprawl as there is no room in a steep sided South Wales valley. So I can manage something not too compressed in the extremely restricted space I have.

 

So my suggestion if you want apple green engines and teak carriages (or the same in BR livery) is to look beyond the LNER main line. You can still have quite big LNER locos, or at least some of them, but think of somewhere like the NER in the north east, the LDECR or the GNR in Lincolnshire or west Yorkshire.

 

Finally, on use of English. I was for most of my career a technical editor. My initial training was that there was only one way to write English correctly. When I moved on I gratefully used that as a basis but did drop some of the odder rules we were given, such as not putting a hyphen after a prefix, so “exarmy” etc. But for the last six years before I retired I taught English as a foreign language overseas. It made me look at the language and realize that many of the “rules” we are taught in school are a load of tosh. Such as not using split infinitives because they are not used in Latin (where an infinitive is one word!) or “I before E except after C” – and the first example most children test it on is “their”! Many of our grammar rules were written in the 18^th century by grammarians who were applying rules from Latin to a Germanic language. And it is interesting to see how they are gradually disappearing.

 

The second thing I realized that there is no such thing as “correct” English. What is often claimed to be such is actually Midlands English as used by the likes of Shakespeare and later the BBC. Just like most languages English has dialects, all equally valid.

 

Thirdly, all languages change, and in these days of mass communication they change faster than ever before. New words are invented, old ones drop out of use and words change their meaning. One example I used to show to our students: “terrifying, terrible, terrific” – all from the same root but the last has reversed its meaning during its history. Or “wicked” which now for most of those under the age of 40 means something like “wonderful”. This has always happened and we can’t stop it.

 

Finally, and please don’t have apoplexy at this point, these days the British are one of the smaller groups using the English language. The biggest dialect is Indian English and it is one of the furthest removed from Oxford English. The Americans (or mainly Webster of the dictionary) have also changed it enormously. But the good news is that English is a very forgiving language. You can make all sorts of grammatical howlers, use the wrong word and make other mistakes but you can make yourself understood. In many other languages this is just not true. It you don’t pronounce words correctly no-one will understand you.  But not always! What do you make of the current American phrase “Way to go!” It actually means well done.

 

So, way to go, Tony. Keep it up.

 

Happy Christmas toi all the contributors whose writings I have so much enjoyed.

 

Apologies for the verbal diarrhoea, but I have got it off my chest in one go. I’ll sit quietly at the back now, sir.

 

Jonathan David

 

Jonathan, I am sure your observation about the modelling aspect of large prototype layouts seeding the RTR market and enthusing other modellers to 'give it go' is happening more than ever.

In my opinion the biggest single factor in all of this is the internet and particularly this website and similar forums.  Without it, where would we be seeing these magnificent layouts, modelling techniques, sharing knowledge, friendly discussions, photographs and diagrams and so on.  There is only so much that the model press can portray and exhibitions cannot show those 'stay at home' layouts.  In the past modelling was probably more localised with modellers meeting and discussing railways with friends and acquaintances in their nearest modelling shops and visiting exhibitions that were in a limited mileage of their home town.  The use of the internet has without doubt expanded the model railway scene.

[Tony Wright]

What a splendid post from Jonathan David. 

 

In just about everything I'm in agreement, though I also side with Jol with his comments about the 'correct' use of English. In my teaching days, I always used to thank the usual miscreants for admitting misdeeds by their saying 'I didn't do nothing, sir'. Prejudice notwithstanding, I always regard a piece of written correspondence with less respect if it's riddled with spelling and grammatical errors, even though I might well be aware of its author's sentiments. I suppose I'm definitely 'old school', and can recall in crystal clarity being shamed in front of my classmates at junior school (all but 60 years ago!) for spelling 'immediately' incorrectly. I was nine years old and I resolved, even then, that the humiliation would never be repeated. Miss Williams was a brilliant teacher, but today if she behaved in such a manner she'd get a written warning for 'abusing' her charges. If I recall correctly, I was also caned at about the same time for talking in assembly.

 

As for a preponderance (some might say a plethora) of ECML prototype depictions, I cannot claim any 'credit'. When I started looking at the subject 'seriously', many truly great men had already trodden the path and shown (old-fashioned English, 'shewn') the way beforehand; the Barnett Club with Peterborough North stocked with John Edgson's outstanding locos and stock, Bert Collins' Hitchin, Roy Jackson and friends with High Dyke and (though it wasn't strictly prototypical) Frank Dyer with Borchester. All had one thing in common - they were built by true modellers; the actual makers of things. There was little reliance on what the RTR market had to offer and no reliance whatsoever on paying other folk to make things for them. They were my 'heroes', my mentors and the most influential. I recall 30 years ago writing about my first Stoke Summit where I cited my influencers and also stated it was most important that I made things myself.

 

I have 'assisted' the makers of Biggleswade in the past, but only as a part-time operator, stock provider and photographer. I've certainly photographed Retford and there is at least one loco chassis running on it which I built. I've also done a fair bit of work for Gilbert Barnatt on his Peterborough North. Those things said, I'd certainly not call myself influential with regard to any of those layouts. 

 

As for the exhibition manifestation of Stoke Summit, as is well known that was a group effort. What was also vital (carrying on the theme) was that the gang members were all modellers - makers of things. As for RTR, we really couldn't have given a fig because we made most of the stock we needed. If a kit were not available, we would generate it. So, if I've had any slight 'influence' it's been in assisting (though others have done much more) in the making of various appropriate kits for 'The Elizabethan', other Thompson stock and Gresley stock, and 'The Anglo Scottish Car Carrier'; other than my building one vehicle, it was others in the group who produced the last-mentioned. They were, of course, marketed through Southern Pride and it's to Dave Lewis that the greatest thanks must be given.

 

Now, locos and stock-wise, so much is available RTR that to populate a current Stoke Summit in BR steam days would be so much easier. But, so much less-interesting to me because, at source, it would be RTR, available to anyone with the purchasing power.

 

As for Little Bytham, as I've said on many occasions much more credit should go to the 'growing' band of merry men who are contributing to it. Thankfully, this costs me little in cash because I build locos/stock for those most accomplished fellows in return for what they do for me. I'm delighted with the recent progress and even more delighted to have so many visitors who operate the railway, usually better when I'm out of the way and doing something else.

 

Regarding my 'being consulted' by manufacturers, there is a danger that it could be perceived I have a great influence. This is not true - I merely assist; Bachmann with its C1 and Thompson carriages, Hornby in a (tiny) way with the O1 and Heljan with the forthcoming O2. I have assisted kit manufacturers (perhaps) more by test-building new products and writing instructions, but that's all. A new kit for an LNER main line loco should shortly be arriving for assessment. Please, watch this space.

 

If I have had an 'influence' on others through my writings, DVDs, demonstrations and tutorials then that's something to ponder. 

 

May I thank all those contributors and critics who've so added to this diverse thread? It's true, the web has given much greater accessibility to knowledge and opinion but not all of it is positive, though I actively-seek constructive criticism. May I wish all viewers the best for the season as well? 

 

I'll be at St Albans next month and Doncaster in February, so please seek me out and have a chat if you wish. At the latter show, many of the models seen on this thread will be on display.

 

Finally, my apologies if this over-long response has too many errors in English! 

 

Edited because I put an apostrophe in the wrong place. Hypocrisy rules!

Edited December 23, 2014 by Tony Wright

[johnarcher]

How do you get away with it? When I dared to suggest that 'true modelling' is essentially about making things, rather than shopping for them (I don't recall if it was here or on a narrower forum), I got labelled with words like 'snob'. Perhaps you benefit from a long accumulation of respect (well-earned).

 

As for the language (I am also an EFL teacher, working part-time in France), I would agree that some grammar rules were indeed pointless importations from Latin, and that change is inevitable and an acceptance of different varieties of English essential. I would add though that some changes increase the expressive capabilities of the language (new words and expressions), while others reduce it (loss of distinctions in meaning, eg between you and one), and the latter are to be regretted, if not resisted.

The latter is because I emphatically agree that "effective communication is the responsibility of the writer, not the reader", and there are regrettable tendencies nowadays to confuse inarticulacy with sincerity, and meaningless gobbledygook with profundity.

One very clear statement though - a Merry Christmas to Tony, and all contributors to his thread, and indeed to the forum.

[gr.king]

Best Christmas wishes to all. I'm certainly looking forward to it.

 

For those who saw my pictures of home chaos a couple of weeks ago, I can now say that the dining table, top of hi-fi cabinet and space at the bottom of our stairs are all now cleared of railway modelling bits and pieces. I've had a jolly good sort out of items that had become disorganised too. A fair number have gone in the bin, stripped of anything useful. I've certainly refreshed my memory regarding the items I have available to suit future modelling plans and have had the satisfaction in one or two cases of grouping together oddments to create viable packages of parts. Given other family plans for Christmas, I think I finished tidying up, after several days of intermittent activity, with about ten minutes to spare.....

[corneliuslundie]

Just a brief response as I don't want to pollute this thread with material irrelevant to modelling the East Coast main line.

 

I agree heartily about language being about effective communication and that some changes can reduce its effectiveness; also that the responsibility lies with the person giving the message. And yes, I did leave one typo. I didn't obey my cardinal rule to get someone else to proofread my writings before putting them in print (what is the electronic equivalent of print in this context?)

 

But my main reason for returning is to ask some advice of the collected wisdom here. I mentioned last time that none of the prototypes I would like to model for the Rhymney offers a simple kit. Well, as you will gather from my signature I am currently distracted by a small 1930s ex-Cambrian layout for which ex-Cambrian 2-4-0T no 1197 would be ideal. There is a cast kit and a chassis kit, and the correct wheels are available. But I will need a motor and gearbox! The last time I bought one it was a Portescap. So, my learned friends, any thoughts, and where do I actually buy such things? It will have to be by mail order/Internet as I think my nearest model shop is in a Shrewsbury industrial estate in a foreign country.

 

And to Tony, I think you have used up this decade's allocation of the word "hypocrisy". Pragmatist perhaps, hypocrite rarely.

[gr.king]

 Many of our grammar rules were written in the 18^th century by grammarians who were applying rules from Latin to a Germanic language.

 

If so, is there an implication that strict grammatical rules are alien to the Germanic family of languages? That doesn't seem to be the case with historic High German or modern "standard" German. Consider the many different forms of the definite article, according to gender and case, vowel changes in certain circumstances, all those verb forms (regular and irregular) plus the strict requirement for the verb to appear at the end of the sentence in certain situations - in the infinitive form of course. There are even different forms of "you", formal and familiar (like thee and thou in older English?).

The legacy in modern English of many of the shared Germanic features of Middle English is still apparent.

Edited December 24, 2014 by gr.king

[johnarcher]

Just a brief response as I don't want to pollute this thread with material irrelevant to modelling the East Coast main line.

 

I agree heartily about language being about effective communication and that some changes can reduce its effectiveness; also that the responsibility lies with the person giving the message. And yes, I did leave one typo. I didn't obey my cardinal rule to get someone else to proofread my writings before putting them in print (what is the electronic equivalent of print in this context?)

 

But my main reason for returning is to ask some advice of the collected wisdom here. I mentioned last time that none of the prototypes I would like to model for the Rhymney offers a simple kit. Well, as you will gather from my signature I am currently distracted by a small 1930s ex-Cambrian layout for which ex-Cambrian 2-4-0T no 1197 would be ideal. There is a cast kit and a chassis kit, and the correct wheels are available. But I will need a motor and gearbox! The last time I bought one it was a Portescap. So, my learned friends, any thoughts, and where do I actually buy such things? It will have to be by mail order/Internet as I think my nearest model shop is in a Shrewsbury industrial estate in a foreign country.

 

And to Tony, I think you have used up this decade's allocation of the word "hypocrisy". Pragmatist perhaps, hypocrite rarely.

Hello, I was thinking of doing one of those Cambrian 2-4-0T's, I would have used a Branchlines 80:1 gearbox I have, but I would suggest you look at High Level for the best selection and quality. They do a useful planning sheet to judge which box will fit best. The chassis kit is Mainly Trains I think, and I believe they are gradually closing down so if you want one I wouldn't leave it too long.

Now, of course, I'll decide that I will do one after all and find you've bought the last chassis kit!

Edited December 24, 2014 by johnarcher

[Tony Wright]

Just a brief response as I don't want to pollute this thread with material irrelevant to modelling the East Coast main line.

 

I agree heartily about language being about effective communication and that some changes can reduce its effectiveness; also that the responsibility lies with the person giving the message. And yes, I did leave one typo. I didn't obey my cardinal rule to get someone else to proofread my writings before putting them in print (what is the electronic equivalent of print in this context?)

 

But my main reason for returning is to ask some advice of the collected wisdom here. I mentioned last time that none of the prototypes I would like to model for the Rhymney offers a simple kit. Well, as you will gather from my signature I am currently distracted by a small 1930s ex-Cambrian layout for which ex-Cambrian 2-4-0T no 1197 would be ideal. There is a cast kit and a chassis kit, and the correct wheels are available. But I will need a motor and gearbox! The last time I bought one it was a Portescap. So, my learned friends, any thoughts, and where do I actually buy such things? It will have to be by mail order/Internet as I think my nearest model shop is in a Shrewsbury industrial estate in a foreign country.

 

And to Tony, I think you have used up this decade's allocation of the word "hypocrisy". Pragmatist perhaps, hypocrite rarely.

Jonathan,

 

Many thanks indeed. 

 

Why you should think that you're 'polluting' this thread with material irrelevant to the ECML puzzles me. Where is it laid down in stone that 'Wright Writes' is only concerned with that most popular modelling subject? Though, of course, it's my principal interest, the wide spread of correspondence on this thread indicates that it's much more than that, which pleases me. 

 

Motors and gearboxes? 

 

Though Portescaps are usually dead easy to install, more recent examples have a tendency to whine. That said, they are visually very smooth.

 

My personal preferences are DJH ones in the GB series. If you can afford it, buy them ready-assembled. If not, order them as kits. However, like any delicate mechanism, they take time and care to get right. I've fitted at least two as replacements in locos built by others for Gilbert Barnatt (Peterborough North), entirely to his satisfaction. He also has locos built by me which have DJH 'boxes installed which work very sweetly. 

 

Others, in no particular order which I've used with success include Comet (especially the latest - if expensive - coreless motor-driven ones), London Road, Markits and High Level. The last-mentioned are very sweet but avoid (in my experience) those which have the final gear wheel attached to the driven axle only by adhesive of some kind. 

 

I've also used the most simple, fold-up motor mounts as well; those supplied by Branchlines (can be noisy in my experience, though I have several which are really sweet) and SE Finecast. The latter are really easy to assemble and are usually very quiet and smooth. For examples of both kinds, ask Graham Nicholas of Grantham fame who owns two locos I've made for him. Though both are silky-smooth visually, the Branchlines-driven one is noisier in comparison, but only in one direction. 

 

Motors I use now are exclusively Mashimas, either in can-form or the open-framed type (the latter for those who have no need of DCC). In my experience, if ever one fails after much use it's the flat-can type.

 

I hope this helps. In time, I'll post pictures of the types of drives I've used.  

[Tony Wright]

How do you get away with it? When I dared to suggest that 'true modelling' is essentially about making things, rather than shopping for them (I don't recall if it was here or on a narrower forum), I got labelled with words like 'snob'. Perhaps you benefit from a long accumulation of respect (well-earned).

 

As for the language (I am also an EFL teacher, working part-time in France), I would agree that some grammar rules were indeed pointless importations from Latin, and that change is inevitable and an acceptance of different varieties of English essential. I would add though that some changes increase the expressive capabilities of the language (new words and expressions), while others reduce it (loss of distinctions in meaning, eg between you and one), and the latter are to be regretted, if not resisted.

The latter is because I emphatically agree that "effective communication is the responsibility of the writer, not the reader", and there are regrettable tendencies nowadays to confuse inarticulacy with sincerity, and meaningless gobbledygook with profundity.

One very clear statement though - a Merry Christmas to Tony, and all contributors to his thread, and indeed to the forum.

Why should one be labelled a snob for actually suggesting that the making of things be essential to 'true modelling'? How absurd. One might fairly describe those who preach such nonsense as being pusillanimous! 

 

When I listed those guys who influenced me it was because they made things - themselves! One other great influence I neglected to credit was the late Brian van Meeteren. What a wonderfully self-effacing man he was. He had no engineering training, yet built some wonderful ECML locos. Many were from Jamieson kits, but his modest approach in explaining how he did things gave me (and doubtless many others) the motivation to have a go at actually making locos, some 40 years ago now. I owe him more than he ever knew.

 

I learned little from those who paid others to do just about everything for them.

 

In case any of the above smacks of snobbery, then that's up to others to interpret what's written how they like.

[Allegheny1600]

If so, is there an implication that strict grammatical rules are alien to the Germanic family of languages? That doesn't seem to be the case with historic High German or modern "standard" German. Consider the many different forms of the definite article, according to gender and case, vowel changes in certain circumstances, all those verb forms (regular and irregular) plus the strict requirement for the verb to appear at the end of the sentence in certain situations - in the infinitive form of course. There are even different forms of "you", formal and familiar (like thee and thou in older English?).

The legacy in modern English of many of the shared Germanic features of Middle English is still apparent.

I'll vouch for that!

In attempting to 'model' Prussian railways of the early post WW1 era, I do find it helpful to gain a grasp of the appropriate language and while I can mumble a few phrases in a pub, shop or restaurant, reading German is fiendishly difficult for one as lacking in education as I am.

Google "translate" helps with a lot of words but you have to assemble the grammar yourself and make the best of a bad job.

Speaking of modern technology, I think it was Jonathan (Corneliuslundie) who mentioned 'proofreading' prior to posting? Well, years ago I downloaded a "spell checker", possibly from my browser (Firefox) and that effectively 'proofreads' for me.

As with the translated German language, these things are an aid only and cannot help with bad grammar, you still have to do some work yourself!

Cheers,

John E.

[PGC]

...... If I recall correctly, I was also caned at about the same time for talking in assembly.

 

 

.............and he hasn't stopped talking since!!!!!!!  

 

Sorry, Tony, couldn't help but tease gently.

 

Happy Christmas to you, your family and all other modellers.

 

Phil

[corneliuslundie]

Many thanks for all the replies. That;'s what I call service.

 

On motors and gearboxes, I think I'll look first at High Level or Branchlines but I shall be very interested to see those which Tony has used. More Googling, methinks (a new verb). And I'll order the chassis and body soon, before the former disappears. It looks as though they are much less than half the total cost, anyway.

 

A propos of which, I wasn't suggesting you should not apply Germanic rules to English, merely irrelevant Latin ones. Obviously, there are German rules which do not apply. English is a mish mash of words and grammar from all over the place. And as for Google Translate, until a while ago if you tried to use it for Albanian to English it turned sentences into negatives, and the past tense of "to be" into "dog" ("kam qenë" is the past tense of "to be", "qen" is the indefinite singular nominative for dog) so I ended up in an e-mail from a student being addressed as "dear puppy".

 

And Americans are never "well", a;ways "good"!

 

Nadolig Llawen

 

edited to add a silent ë and the word "nominative"

Edited December 24, 2014 by corneliuslundie

[Richard_A]

Just bought myself a copy of your into the blue book, as a Christmas present to myself and i must say it is very good value for £9.99 hopefully there will be more to come?

[LNER4479]

One might fairly describe those who preach such nonsense as being pusillanimous! 

Blimey Tony - we had to look that one up. Gill asks why you didn't just say 'timid'?(!)

 

Merry Christmas to you and Mo and look forward to coming to plant your new signal in early 2015.

[Donington Road]

Blimey Tony - we had to look that one up. Gill asks why you didn't just say 'timid'?(!)

 

Merry Christmas to you and Mo and look forward to coming to plant your new signal in early 2015.

 

Same here.  I thought it might be a good word for the Scrabble board but with only a seven letter rack hopes are not high.

 

Merry Christmas to everyone on this thread and thank you Tony for a lovely visit to Little Bytham a few days ago.

[johnarcher]

Why should one be labelled a snob for actually suggesting that the making of things be essential to 'true modelling'? How absurd. One might fairly describe those who preach such nonsense as being pusillanimous! 

 

When I listed those guys who influenced me it was because they made things - themselves! One other great influence I neglected to credit was the late Brian van Meeteren. What a wonderfully self-effacing man he was. He had no engineering training, yet built some wonderful ECML locos. Many were from Jamieson kits, but his modest approach in explaining how he did things gave me (and doubtless many others) the motivation to have a go at actually making locos, some 40 years ago now. I owe him more than he ever knew.

 

I learned little from those who paid others to do just about everything for them.

 

In case any of the above smacks of snobbery, then that's up to others to interpret what's written how they like.

Thanks Tony, if you feel like a laugh, here it was - http://ngrm-online.com/forums/index.php?/topic/12486-a-different-kind-of-elitism/page-3,  (page 3, #42)

I hope it's OK to give a link to elsewhere., if not moderator please feel free to get rid of it.

Merry Christmas to everyone once more

Edited December 24, 2014 by johnarcher

[Blue Max]

'A new kit for an LNER main line loco should shortly be arriving for assessment. Please, watch this space.'

 

Hi Tony, this was an interesting statement that certainly set the brain working overtime. Any idea for the timescale on this, or do we just have to keep reading the updates here for the time being? 

Edited December 24, 2014 by Blue Max

[micklner]

'A new kit for an LNER main line loco should shortly be arriving for assessment. Please, watch this space.'

 

Hi Tony, this was an interesting statement that certainly set the brain working overtime. Any idea for the timescale on this, or do we just have to keep reading the updates here for the time being? 

I can only think of one needing updating?.

 

Merry Xmas to all !!

[micklner]

Re Gearboxes 

 

I only use High Level without any problems. The glued (Loctite) gear versions are all ok until you have to remove them. Quite easy to remove, just use a drift to knock the axle through. I am not sure but I think you can know specify a grub screw fitting as a alternative fixing. Perhaps High Level who are now on here can confirm ? 

Mashima cans for me too. Avoid the 12 series no grunt.

[Tony Wright]

Blimey Tony - we had to look that one up. Gill asks why you didn't just say 'timid'?(!)

 

Merry Christmas to you and Mo and look forward to coming to plant your new signal in early 2015.

Because it means a little more than timid. It means faint-hearted, suggesting, to me, that the people it refers to aren't prepared to do things for themselves and thus accuse those who try (and succeed?) as being snobbish or even elitist. It can also refer to a person being mean-spirited. Isn't it a lovely word, though?

 

Merry Christmas to you and Gill, and all involved with the making of Grantham.

 

I await the new signal with eager anticipation, though I could be accused as showing some pusillanimity by not making it myself. In my defence, I have made signals, but the notion bores me. I'd much sooner make locos for you in return! And paint backscenes.