Wright writes.....

[t-b-g]

2 minutes ago, BMacdermott said:

Hello Tony

 

As we are on  the subject of 'observation', may I make an observation in respect of LB? And I assure you it is not in any way criticism - just observation.

 

Having watched many videos of your freight trains, there seem to be few - if any - vans (or general merchandise wagons) that have chalk destinations or such markings. Some brake vans on the 'real railway' had road numbers chalked on the ends.

 

A photo of a van in the Cheona Railways in Profile Series - No.3 BR Vans - shows the destination BEDFORD in letters about eight inches tall!

 

Has anyone here ever replicated the markings of a real van or wagon on their own models?

 

Brian

 

Yes! As part of my failed attempt to observe the real thing I lettered some for Retford. I just copied what Geoff Kent does for his. He isn't on "the list" either despite being the best observer of the prototype I know, bar none! Even though he models fictitious locations!

[TrevorP1]

54 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

'Surely the figure of “Sir” on LB is an anachronism? And not based on observation?'

 

I agree entirely! In fact 'me' on Little Bytham is an act of the grossest arrogance and total disregard for historical accuracy. I am, in fact, guilty as charged of complete lack of observation. If one is going to be a hypocrite, then no half-measures! 

 

 

 

 

I don't think it's arrogant at all Tony. A little bit of fun on a 'private' layout. In it's way I think it underlines the authenticity of the rest of LB.

 

I will never be able to compare my efforts to yours but my wife has suggested that at an appropriate stage we get ourselves scanned to sit on a platform bench to watch my trains go by!

[jwealleans]

Quote

Has anyone here ever replicated the markings of a real van or wagon on their own models?

 

 

Yes.   I tried the transfers which some suppliers offer but they didn't work to my eyes.  Now I use a white or grey chinagraph pencil honed to a very fine point.

 

 

 

Edited September 30, 2019 by jwealleans

[grahame]

20 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

it's not the quality of the ingredients that is in question, rather the complete hash that's been made of using them. (Just look at that guttering...) I'm curious that it is stated to be a Metcalfe kit. With the stretcher bond brickwork, it's clearly not a current kit, neither is it the earlier version of terraced houses in 4 mm scale. 

 

I did undertake a similar simple beginners style improvement for a 2mm/N Metcalfe kit as an article for a magazine many years ago. The 'improvements', not perfect by any means but hopefully something beginners could easily accomplish, included replacing the printed roof with embossed plastic, cutting and squaring all the corner edges so that they weren't open and were sharp right angles, new chimney pots, added door steps and window sills, a decent ridge from plastic strip and rod, and some guttering and down pipe. Here's a comparison - the Metcalf kit (made as supplied) on the left and one with a few tweaks on the right:

 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

7 hours ago, landscapes said:

Hi Tony

 

May I ask you a question please.

 

I refer to the additional pipework you always add to your locomotives boilers, I believe you refer to them as the wiggly bits.

 

May I ask how you achieve these I know the pipework is made using fuse wire but I assume there are other parts of the detailing as well?,  in reality surely there wasn't just pipework I assume there must have been some types of valves, may I ask you what do you use to form these.

 

I am sorry if I do not make myself clear as I am talking about pipework on locomotives that I have no knowledge of whats so ever but they certainly do improve the appearance of the models.

 

Regards

 

David

 

 

You may always ask a question, David (even though it takes up my time in answering questions and assisting folk - sorry, my poor attempt at irony!) 

 

Wiggly pipes? Yes, they're present on the smokeboxes of most ex-LNER locos. What they actually do, I have no idea - oil atomising pipes? No two locos appear to have exactly the same arrangement - some have more bends, and other conduits go straighter. 

 

 

Bachmann certainly don't fit them as a detail on their A1s, yet they're very visible. The smokebox looks 'naked' without them!

 

 

Neither do they fit them on their A2s (nor the cylinder draincock-operating wire or electric lighting cable). It's a pity there's a seam line at the bottom of this model's boiler. 

 

 

Hornby actually does represent them, but there are too many on the firm's A3s. The higher valve was only present on the non-driving side, but Hornby puts it on both sides. On this model, I just carved off the top valve/conduit and made a proper bottom one from some 5 Amp fusewire. 

 

 

I really think they're essential on any ER loco, whether RTR or kit-built. Obviously, it's easier in metal, because the whole lot can be soldered. On this DJH A1, I've made the 'valves' from different-length handrail pillars, and the wiggly pipes themselves from 5 Amp fusewire. It's simplified, but effective. I also add the conduit up to the top electric lamp, again made from 5 Amp fusewire. 

 

 

Observation of the prototype will tell you where the wiggly pipes go. Just a 'representation' is enough to make the eye believe it's 'right'.  

 

 

Don't forget there's also a wiggly pipe running from the back end of the vacuum ejector pipe in front of the cab, draining through the footplate ahead of the Cartazzi keep on this side. Again, I made this from 5 Amp fusewire.

 

I hope all this helps.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Clem]

10 hours ago, BlackRat said:

I recently had a conversation with the owners of a layout based in North Cornwall, where even the uniform of the local plod had been taken into consideration but to me, the trees just didn't look right as any tree in on the North Coast, what they are are definitely wind blown to the prevailing wind.

Are you talking about the Billy Whizz trees? 

[Clive Mortimore]

45 minutes ago, BMacdermott said:

Hello Tony

 

As we are on  the subject of 'observation', may I make an observation in respect of LB? And I assure you it is not in any way criticism - just observation.

 

Having watched many videos of your freight trains, there seem to be few - if any - vans (or general merchandise wagons) that have chalk destinations or such markings. Some brake vans on the 'real railway' had road numbers chalked on the ends.

 

A photo of a van in the Cheona Railways in Profile Series - No.3 BR Vans - shows the destination BEDFORD in letters about eight inches tall!

 

Has anyone here ever replicated the markings of a real van or wagon on their own models?

 

Brian

Hi Brian

 

I did on some weathered parcels stock, that has long been passed on to others. One of the CCTs had "pete'bro" on its side, which was seen on a parcels vehicle at Bedford Midland Road when I was train spotting, causing much amusement to the other train spotters.

 

Anyhow why wouldn't BEDFORD be in large lettering on a wagon, a wonderful town to grow up in.

[Clem]

Tony, I've really enjoyed looking at your shots in your last couple of posts. I've said before but LB really is a masterpiece! Looking at your side on view of 'Cock O' The North', the exposed frames in front of the cylinders took me right back to being a nipper at Grantham. I remember standing at the end of the platform on many occasions and being fascinated by the rivets on the frames of the A2/1s, A2/2s and A2/3s although in my memory it was mainly A2/3s. This transportation back in time, is the big extra bonus of modelling if you're old enough to remember the real thing. I've even got (somewhere - probably in the loft) an old school book from when I was about 8 or 9 where, on the inside cover, I'd attempted a side on drawing of one. Probably done when I should have been listening to the teacher. Pretty sure I included the rivets, although I may not have been accurate with the counting of them.

Edited September 30, 2019 by Clem

[landscapes]

29 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

You may always ask a question, David (even though it takes up my time in answering questions and assisting folk - sorry, my poor attempt at irony!) 

 

Wiggly pipes? Yes, they're present on the smokeboxes of most ex-LNER locos. What they actually do, I have no idea - oil atomising pipes? No two locos appear to have exactly the same arrangement - some have more bends, and other conduits go straighter. 

 

 

Bachmann certainly don't fit them as a detail on their A1s, yet they're very visible. The smokebox looks 'naked' without them!

 

 

Neither do they fit them on their A2s (nor the cylinder draincock-operating wire or electric lighting cable). It's a pity there's a seam line at the bottom of this model's boiler. 

 

 

Hornby actually does represent them, but there are too many on the firm's A3s. The higher valve was only present on the non-driving side, but Hornby puts it on both sides. On this model, I just carved off the top valve/conduit and made a proper bottom one from some 5 Amp fusewire. 

 

 

I really think they're essential on any ER loco, whether RTR or kit-built. Obviously, it's easier in metal, because the whole lot can be soldered. On this DJH A1, I've made the 'valves' from different-length handrail pillars, and the wiggly pipes themselves from 5 Amp fusewire. It's simplified, but effective. I also add the conduit up to the top electric lamp, again made from 5 Amp fusewire. 

 

 

Observation of the prototype will tell you where the wiggly pipes go. Just a 'representation' is enough to make the eye believe it's 'right'.  

 

 

Don't forget there's also a wiggly pipe running from the back end of the vacuum ejector pipe in front of the cab, draining through the footplate ahead of the Cartazzi keep on this side. Again, I made this from 5 Amp fusewire.

 

I hope all this helps.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Thank you Tony, for posting the photos.

 

Great photos and superb locomotives.

 

Regards

 

David

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, BMacdermott said:

Hello Tony

 

As we are on  the subject of 'observation', may I make an observation in respect of LB? And I assure you it is not in any way criticism - just observation.

 

Having watched many videos of your freight trains, there seem to be few - if any - vans (or general merchandise wagons) that have chalk destinations or such markings. Some brake vans on the 'real railway' had road numbers chalked on the ends.

 

A photo of a van in the Cheona Railways in Profile Series - No.3 BR Vans - shows the destination BEDFORD in letters about eight inches tall!

 

Has anyone here ever replicated the markings of a real van or wagon on their own models?

 

Brian

I take on board your 'observation' totally, Brian,

 

The chalk markings or bits of paper applied to vans is on my 'to do' list. Some have it, but too many don't.

 

Someone (and I can't remember who it was - much to my shame!) sent me some transfers for exactly the signage you suggest. I must get around to applying them!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

16 minutes ago, landscapes said:

Thank you Tony, for posting the photos.

 

Great photos and superb locomotives.

 

Regards

 

David

Thanks David,

 

I think what should be remembered is that several of these 'superb locomotives' are that because of Ian Rathbone's painting, and, in the case of the Bachmann A2, Tom Foster's weathering. 

 

I renumbered/renamed the two Bachmann ER Pacifics, changed the awful bogie wheels and jacked the rear ends up to match the locos' footplates with the tenders' soleplates. The A1 also has replacement brass smoke deflectors. 

 

The awful bogie wheels were replaced on the Hornby A3 as well. 

 

Even though these improvements are worth it, I never use these RTR locos. I always run what I've built myself on LB.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, Steamport Southport said:

Regarding the Metcalfe kit article. I feel that some of you are being a little bit harsh IMO.

 

The article clearly says it's a Metcalfe kit and is aimed at total beginners using other manufacturers detailing parts as a quick project. BTW those parts are made by manufacturers that everyone rates, such as DCC Supplies, Ratio and York.

 

We've all got to start somewhere. Newcomers and youngsters need encouraging to pick up that knife and start cutting things. Okay the results aren't going to be outstanding, but if you want exquisite modelling maybe you would be better reading MRJ rather than the mainstream magazines.

 

 

 

Jason

Good evening Jason,

 

Though I admire your 'defence' of the article (which I've not seen; nor really wish to, having looked at the picture), it brings me back to what I've mentioned many times; regarding the responsibility of authors, especially with reference to articles for beginners, to get things as 'right' as they can. If the picture is anything to go by, then a beginner, using it for guidance, won't produce a very 'accurate' model. To get a sash window (even though it might be an excellent aftermarket product) so wrong suggests a real lack of 'observation'. 

 

That articles for beginners are published is laudable, but surely 'accuracy' should be a pre-requisite?

 

I'm reminded of the article which Darren Sherwood once wrote regarding detailing a Hornby A3. WINDSOR LAD was the chosen 're-branding'. He fitted a GNR tender and German deflectors - neither of which 60035 ever towed or carried. The livery was a work of fiction (BR green, obviously), and the whole thing was a mess. Ian Rathbone and I found over 25 faults with the whole thing. I wrote to Chris Leigh about it. A little while later, I was accosted by the magazine's publisher at a Warley Show, claiming I was 'Felstead' (the first production A3). Apparently, this 'Felstead' claimed to have found over 100 faults in the model (that's some going!) and had put them all 'online'. 'You must be Felstead', I was told. Since (at the time) I had no access to the interweb (nor even knew anything about it, or Felstead), I had to claim ignorance of the whole thing. 'Why do you think it's me?' I asked. 'Because someone said Felstead might be a guy who lives in Wolverhampton, makes loads of ER models and writes articles about them!' It looks like two and two made five (or more!) in this case. I asked to see the list of 'mistakes'. Though many were trivial, I had to agree with the majority. 

 

Who actually is, or was 'Felstead'? 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[dibber25]

Oh, dear. Thank you, Tony, for bringing that up again. Some sleeping dogs aren't allowed to lie. I feel that someone 'up there' must have it in for me because I would never have stumbled across this post had I not felt the need to ask a question of someone who, I felt sure, would know the answer. So I'll get my question out of the way first. A picture has been posted on a Facebook page which I follow. Apparently taken at Hull, it is a picture of 60518 (ugly thing - A2 stroke something, no doubt, no date, but final crest on tender). The loco is coupled to a Gresley saloon of some sort and the tender has POISON. CHROMATE painted in large letters. I'm guessing this must have been some sort of test, perhaps, of water treatment? I'm intrigued and felt sure you would know the answer.

I've no idea who 'Felstead' was but, as I said at the time, the fundamental error with the A3 was the result of me requesting a change of name at the last minute. I just fancied Windsor Lad because I spent most of my married life in Windsor. As a Southern and GWR man I had not really considered that my choice of name might undermine the project to that extent. (CJL)

[Theakerr]

A comment on observation.   One can observe a scene, picture etc., but, and I am not sure this is technically correct based on the dictionary definitions I found, we observe Armistice Day and other memories.   Therefore, One could observe a memory of a loved one by maintaining a something that was theirs even if it has all sorts of errors.  Just observing.

[dibateg]

Chalked up wagons, just a couple I did a few years ago in 7mm. Both are Freightman kits.. Difficult to get right, so I just kept it to a few simple inscriptions. It does add some interest and in that era, all vans seemed to have markings of some sort on them. Back to observation then.... I know I have plenty that have no chalk marks...

 

 

Regards

Tony

[cctransuk]

Observation is a two-edged sword !!

 

 

Look at the Standard tank on the right - who would dare use two different weights of Gill Sans number transfers on their model?

 

Swindon did !!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Northmoor]

Completely agree about modelling the everyday and observation can make the unbelievable turn out to be true.  I grew in West Wales where for several years, a regular evening service comprised a Class 47 diesel and three coaches.  On a number of occasions, it ran with two.  This was for almost its entire journey, on a two-track railway.

[Clive Mortimore]

Thinking about what we see daily and then forget to model, seasons comes top of the list. How many models have green grass, blue sky and trees in full leaf but no sign of any wild flowers? Surely the modeller has set his/her train set in summer?

 

There are some modelers who do convincing autumn and wintry snow scenes but how many do a typical British winter day when everything seems grey and dank?  As for spring when the trees are in new leaf and blossom, new growth along the track and road sides, and "modern image" layouts with fields of oil seed rape?

 

Most layouts , except the snow ones, have no weather except sunshine, no puddles and other post rain effects. No frosty morning winter scenes where all the sleepers are covered in white.

 

I have several ideas for Sheffield Exchange where I hope I can portray which season it is and what the weather is like. My scenic area will be within the railway boundary, which will present its own limitations as flowering Buddleia was not common along our lineside back in the 60s.

 

I won't mention how many modellers have locos and stock appearing to be heavily weathered by winter damp and muck running on their summer layouts when most dirty railway items have a more dusty appearance.

[Tony Wright]

11 hours ago, dibber25 said:

Oh, dear. Thank you, Tony, for bringing that up again. Some sleeping dogs aren't allowed to lie. I feel that someone 'up there' must have it in for me because I would never have stumbled across this post had I not felt the need to ask a question of someone who, I felt sure, would know the answer. So I'll get my question out of the way first. A picture has been posted on a Facebook page which I follow. Apparently taken at Hull, it is a picture of 60518 (ugly thing - A2 stroke something, no doubt, no date, but final crest on tender). The loco is coupled to a Gresley saloon of some sort and the tender has POISON. CHROMATE painted in large letters. I'm guessing this must have been some sort of test, perhaps, of water treatment? I'm intrigued and felt sure you would know the answer.

I've no idea who 'Felstead' was but, as I said at the time, the fundamental error with the A3 was the result of me requesting a change of name at the last minute. I just fancied Windsor Lad because I spent most of my married life in Windsor. As a Southern and GWR man I had not really considered that my choice of name might undermine the project to that extent. (CJL)

Good morning Chris,

 

How good to hear from you. 

 

I'm afraid I don't know the answer to your question, though, as you surmise, it could well be to do with water treatment. 'Chromate' is a salt of chromic acid (which doesn't sound too healthy), which is also linked with lead (another dodgy-to-health substance). 

 

The LNER and its successors never had any water-treatment plants on the grand scale (unlike the LMS, which did) and briquettes of something or other would be dropped into the tender tanks to soften the water (rather like on the Bulleids, which had a separate lid for this). Certainly Top Shed, which got its water from the nearby canal, suffered from hard water, as did any of the ER/NER depots northwards in the limestone belts. 60518 was a long-time Tyneside-based loco, until she went to York in 1960, so I'd suspect the picture was taken between 1960 and 1962, when she was dumped at Scarborough. Though rated RA9, the line to Hull never saw many Pacifics, so it's likely to be a test-run. Can you post the picture on here, please? I'm not familiar with it.

 

Speaking of soft water, older locos allocated to Scotland often had boilers fitted which were 40 years old - unheard of further south. 

 

Perhaps a chemist will answer your question for us.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

11 hours ago, Theakerr said:

A comment on observation.   One can observe a scene, picture etc., but, and I am not sure this is technically correct based on the dictionary definitions I found, we observe Armistice Day and other memories.   Therefore, One could observe a memory of a loved one by maintaining a something that was theirs even if it has all sorts of errors.  Just observing.

Your definition of 'observe' is certainly correct, but, according to my dictionary 'observe' also means 'Perceive, mark, watch, take notice of, become conscious of...........', which I think is exactly what we're using it for in this context. 

 

I know in my Art School days, our tutors always told us to 'Observe, observe, observe..............' Which means look hard and take notice in my book.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Nick Holliday]

11 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Weird, completely weird. Looks like a 12-year-old's first attempt. What is the base kit though? - it obviously has potential. Stretcher bond is rather odd - or was this a "refinement" too?

For some reason there is no reference to the source of the basic kit, but some of the printing, particularly the roof, is a bit pixelated. The stretcher bond is not a refinement, obviously an early example of cavity wall construction! (Or lack of observation by the designer?)

[Tony Wright]

9 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Thinking about what we see daily and then forget to model, seasons comes top of the list. How many models have green grass, blue sky and trees in full leaf but no sign of any wild flowers? Surely the modeller has set his/her train set in summer?

 

There are some modelers who do convincing autumn and wintry snow scenes but how many do a typical British winter day when everything seems grey and dank?  As for spring when the trees are in new leaf and blossom, new growth along the track and road sides, and "modern image" layouts with fields of oil seed rape?

 

Most layouts , except the snow ones, have no weather except sunshine, no puddles and other post rain effects. No frosty morning winter scenes where all the sleepers are covered in white.

 

I have several ideas for Sheffield Exchange where I hope I can portray which season it is and what the weather is like. My scenic area will be within the railway boundary, which will present its own limitations as flowering Buddleia was not common along our lineside back in the 60s.

 

I won't mention how many modellers have locos and stock appearing to be heavily weathered by winter damp and muck running on their summer layouts when most dirty railway items have a more dusty appearance.

Very sound Clive,

 

The reason for most layouts not depicting a cold/snowy/frosty winter's day is that I would think it's more difficult to do convincingly. Consider a deciduous tree. In the depth of winter every bough, branch  and even large twig would have to be modelled. Not just a basic armature, where large clumps of full summer foliage are then stuck on. Much quicker! 

 

In my own case, my sightings of the ECML were almost always in the summer (August) holidays, when a week or two would be spent with relations living not far from Retford/Doncaster. It must have rained on some of those wonderful trainspotting days, but my memory is mainly of basking in the sun alongside or on top of the 'wall' at Retford. 

 

Basing my observations on observation of prototype pictures, few cameramen in the '50s would take pictures in the rain, especially of fast-moving trains. Why? The light would usually be poor, resulting in a slow shutter speed and blurred images. So, my modelling is done 'in the sun' so to speak. There are a few wild flowers depicted on LB, but for most of the time the cuttings/embankments were cropped really low by the track gang. On Stoke Summit, I actually modelled an area of burnt grass, caused by a steam loco spitting out sparks and causing a lineside fire. That was based on observation.  

 

'I won't mention how many modellers have locos and stock appearing to be heavily weathered by winter damp and muck running on their summer layouts when most dirty railway items have a more dusty appearance.'

 

Finally, just to show that observation of the prototype  is paramount at all times..........................

 

 

A high-summer scene, where the loco's weathering isn't that dusty at all. This is a summer 1962 picture (taken in Saltersford Cutting); note, as you say, the wild flowers. 

 

 

And a winter's scene where the loco appears to be quite dusty. Note the evidence of water spillage after topping up the tender tank (probably in Retford Station), something very rarely modelled. 

 

And, how would one model those trees?

 

Please (all) observe copyright restrictions.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

Edited October 1, 2019 by Tony Wright
typo error

[Clive Mortimore]

8 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Very sound Clive,

 

The reason for most layouts not depicting a cold/snowy/frosty winter's day is that I would think it's more difficult to do convincingly. Consider a deciduous tree. In the depth of winter every bough, branch  and even large twig would have to be modelled. Not just a basic armature, where large clumps of full summer foliage are then stuck on. Much quicker! 

 

In my own case, my sightings of the ECML were almost always in the summer (August) holidays, when a week or two would be spent with relations living not far from Retford/Doncaster. It must have rained on some of those wonderful trainspotting days, but my memory is mainly of basking in the sun alongside or on top of the 'wall' at Retford. 

 

Basing my observations on observation of prototype pictures, few cameramen in the '50s would take pictures in the rain, especially of fast-moving trains. Why? The light would usually be poor, resulting in a slow shutter speed and blurred images. So, my modelling is done 'in the sun' so to speak. There are a few wild flowers depicted on LB, but for most of the time the cuttings/embankments were cropped really low by the track gang. On Stoke Summit, I actually modelled an area of burnt grass, caused by a steam loco spitting out sparks and causing a lineside fire. That was based on observation.  

 

'I won't mention how many modellers have locos and stock appearing to be heavily weathered by winter damp and muck running on their summer layouts when most dirty railway items have a more dusty appearance.'

 

Finally, just to show that observation of the prototype  is paramount at all times..........................

 

 

A high-summer scene, where the loco's weathering isn't that dusty at all. This is a summer 1962 picture (taken in Saltersford Cutting); note, as you say, the wild flowers. 

 

 

And a winter's scene where the loco appears to be quite dusty. Note the evidence of water spillage after topping up the tender tank (probably in Retford Station), something very rarely modelled. 

 

And, how would one model those threes?

 

Please (all) observe copyright restrictions.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

Hello Tony

 

The top A3 is incredibly dirty, it looks like the muck is well caked on but dry. It doesn't look muddy.

 

As for the lower photo it is a wintry scene, one of those periods where we have high pressure over the country and everything dries up but it is bitterly cold, very hard to do convincingly. 

[Corbs]

I've previously attempted to model water spillage running down the side of a saddle tank using glue 'n glaze. It looked good to begin with, but unfortunately has faded over time. 

Have you had any luck with a different material, Tony?

[PMP]

10 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

 

There are some modelers who do convincing autumn and wintry snow scenes but how many do a typical British winter day when everything seems grey and dank?  (Snip)

 

10 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Most layouts , except the snow ones, have no weather except sunshine, no puddles and other post rain effects. No frosty morning winter scenes where all the sleepers are covered in white.

 

 

 

Valid points, regarded capturing grey overcast winter days I’ve certainly had a go in he past, learning from it for the future. The frosty day is one I’ve had a go at too. The frost on sleepers etc isn’t difficult, the real challenge is getting frost to look right, and to scale and lit correctly on things like vehicles and buildings, considering the effect of differential temperatures of surfaces and thermal shadows.

 

Some grey from a few years back