Castle Aching

[CF MRC]

3 hours ago, Edwardian said:

 

Very small, as you guess.  The replica coaches at York have 3' diameter wheels, so really are the offspring of a pre-Grouping wagon that got together with a stagecoach.

 

And, to celebrate this special day ....

 

 

 

EDIT: It struck me that I should compare these with the, nominally HO 1830s, Spanish coaches.  Please bear in mind that these were very hastily assembled and painted (probably around 3 am) in preparation for Tabitha's Victorian railway presentation at school, and, so, need re-working.  Also, I really must get round to fixing Tiger/Lion's coupling rods the right way up.

 

Anyway, I think they show the Spanish coaches scale well for 1830s British outline stock in 4mm, though they are wider that the Rocket coaches, which, perhaps, reflects the traditional 'Iberian Gauge'

 

Very useful photos James.  It would be really wonderful if someone (Hornby?) made a model of Lion to go with these coaches along with the open 2nds.  I appreciate that there are 3D prints available, but they are not quite in the same league as the Hornby models. 
 

Tim

[Edwardian]

One of the replicas, possibly the 1930 ones, at York: 

 

[Nearholmer]

How much of the closeness to a typical coal wagon is a function of the possibility that the replicas had coal wagon wheel-sets and axleboxes?

[Compound2632]

Truth will out.

 

Is the Mountsorrel book part of this recent purchase? It does have some rather delightful Hunslets. I have been fascinated by the photo at the top of p. 27. This shows a pair of Midland 3-plank dropside wagons of the earliest type known to me, with two-plank ends held in place by internal knees rather than external end pillars and hinges bracketed off the solebars. This type of wagon pre-dates the opening of the Litchurch Lane Carriage & Wagon Works and the Lot Book; it was probably built before 1874, which is the date ascribed to the version with two-plank ends and external end pillars. At the end of 1894, there were a little over 15,200 low side wagons of pre-Lot Book vintage in the company's stock. An example of the type can be seen, along with later examples, including the 1874 version on the left, in this photo of widening work at Leicester in the mid-1890s:

 

 

NRM DY 471, released under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0) licence by the National Railway Museum.

 

The caption in the Mountsorrel book describes the two wagons as "internal user" but I have come to doubt this. Both wagons are wearing their Midland numberplates and at least the nearer one has its tare weight painted on the lower edge of the solebar in Midland fashion. If they had been sold out of Midland stock, surely evidence of Midland ownership would have been removed? The only other markings are the letters N D on the nearer wagon and S D on the further, in letters about 15" high, much like the well-known E D of Midland Engineer's Department ballast wagons (cf. the Leicester photo above). Both wagons have the protective flaps over the axleboxes characteristic of ballast wagons. 

 

Until 1883, the Midland's Engineers' Department was divided into Northern and Southern Divisions. I wonder if this photo reflects this. The date need not be before 1883; these ballast wagons could well have retained their divisional branding for years afterwards; they may never have been re-lettered E D.

[Edwardian]

4 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

Truth will out.

 

Is the Mountsorrel book part of this recent purchase? It does have some rather delightful Hunslets. I have been fascinated by the photo at the top of p. 27. This shows a pair of Midland 3-plank dropside wagons of the earliest type known to me, with two-plank ends held in place by internal knees rather than external end pillars and hinges bracketed off the solebars. This type of wagon pre-dates the opening of the Litchurch Lane Carriage & Wagon Works and the Lot Book; it was probably built before 1874, which is the date ascribed to the version with two-plank ends and external end pillars. At the end of 1894, there were a little over 15,200 low side wagons of pre-Lot Book vintage in the company's stock. An example of the type can be seen, along with later examples, including the 1874 version on the left, in this photo of widening work at Leicester in the mid-1890s:

 

 

NRM DY 471, released under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0) licence by the National Railway Museum.

 

The caption in the Mountsorrel book describes the two wagons as "internal user" but I have come to doubt this. Both wagons are wearing their Midland numberplates and at least the nearer one has its tare weight painted on the lower edge of the solebar in Midland fashion. If they had been sold out of Midland stock, surely evidence of Midland ownership would have been removed? The only other markings are the letters N D on the nearer wagon and S D on the further, in letters about 15" high, much like the well-known E D of Midland Engineer's Department ballast wagons (cf. the Leicester photo above). Both wagons have the protective flaps over the axleboxes characteristic of ballast wagons. 

 

Until 1883, the Midland's Engineers' Department was divided into Northern and Southern Divisions. I wonder if this photo reflects this. The date need not be before 1883; these ballast wagons could well have retained their divisional branding for years afterwards; they may never have been re-lettered E D.

 

The Mountsorrel volume I've had for sometime, grabbing one as soon as it came out.  It was a 'must' as I grew up near Mountsorrel, and the quarry line joined the Midland mainline very near my village.

 

The line, rather splendidly in my view, actually linked the Midland and Great Central mainlines, which run parallel and fairly close to one another at this point. IIRC, the connection with the GCR was used to aid London Extension construction, but I believe that the quarry traffic continued to go out via the Midland.

 

 

[Compound2632]

Midland Railway 890 Class 2-4-0 No. 69A as running in 1905, from the Ratio 2-4-0 kit.

 

Right, now you've got the book with the best collection of photos relative to this locomotive: R.J. Essery & D. Jenkinson, An Illustrated Review of Midland Locomotives Vol. 2 (Wild Swan, 1988), pp. 29-33. A photo speaks a thousand words. The few words in Essery & Jenkinson can be supplemented by the dense text in S. Summerson, Midland Railway Locomotives (Irwell Press, 2007) and the article by D. Hunt, The Kirtley Era 2–4–0s, Part 3, Midland Record No. 34 (Wild Swan Publications, 2011) pp. 55-96 - your copy currently being enjoyed by some overworked and underpaid courier, I gather. 

 

The first question has to be, what does the Ratio kit represent? The box art shows No. 254 in post-1928 LMS livery. Taking this at face value, it's old No. 1514 of the 1400 Class, built by Neilson in 1881, reboilered from P boiler to B boiler in 1927, but before being renumbered 20254 in 1937. The B boiler was the standard boiler fitted to Johnson goods engines; this had a barrel 2" longer than the original P boiler. Many of these B boilers were spare from goods engines rebuilt in the early 20th century with the larger-diameter H boiler; they could be got to fit the 2-4-0s. What I don't know is whether the B boilers were mounted so that the barrel projected 2" further into the smokebox, or with the firebox projecting 2" further back into the cab. I suspect the latter. Since the transition from firebox to boiler cladding is pretty much hidden by the splashers, the only tell-tales would be the positions of the boiler bands and the dome, which would be 1" further back for the B boiler. On my example of the kit, the dome is 22.0 mm from the rear of the smokebox; for the B boiler this should be 5’6⅝”, for the P boiler, 5’5⅝”, so the kit is nicely ambiguous. 

 

The kit of course has a Deeley smokebox and chimney. The chimney of mine is long gone. When built, the 1400 Class had 3'7" chimneys; these were replaced by 3'4" chimneys from the late 1880s and 3'2" Deeley chimneys with capuchon when the engines were given Deeley smokeboxes. No. (20)254 was one of a small number of the class to get Stanier chimneys in 1937.

 

The 1400 Class had 6’8½” diameter driving wheels; with thicker tyres, these were nominally 6'9" by the early 20th century, with 20 spokes and the crank in line with a spoke. The rather dodgy wheels with the kit are 26 mm diameter with 20 spokes; the nearest match Alan Gibson wheels are the same. The first Johnson 2-4-0s, the 1282 Class, were built with 6'6" diameter wheels, as did the first 4-4-0s, the 1312 Class. The box art for the Ratio 4-4-0 kit shows No. 306 of this class, also in post-1928 livery - though the red is highly doubtful. As far as I can make out, Ratio used the same boiler/splasher/cab molding for both the 2-4-0 and 4-4-0. I'm really not sure how to disentangle all this, not having good drawings showing the dimensions of the splashers in their final form...To my eye, the splashers do look right for a 1312 Class 4-4-0 - the top of the brass beading is a little below the top of the cab side sheet, whereas on a 1400 Class 2-4-0, it's at about the same height. On the other hand, photos of the 6'6" 1282 Class 2-4-0s show the top of the beading at the level of the cab side sheet... Maybe the cab side sheets were different heights...

 

Turning next to comparison of the 890 Class and 1400 Class, by the end of the 19th century they were identical in basic dimensions: 6’8½” diameter drivers, P boiler at 7'2" centre line above rail level, 18" x 24" cylinders. The 890 Class having been rebuilt twice and the 1400 Class once, both classes had acquired the final form of reverse-curve splashers, in lieu of the earlier shape with a flat middle section. Compare Essery & Jenkinson, Vol. 2 Plate 27 - 890 Class No. 905 - with Vol. 2 Plate 57 - 1400 Class No. 1505. The most significant dimensional difference is subtle and far from obvious. The top of the platform or footplate was 4’2½” above rail level for the 1400 Class but 4’0¾” for the 890 Class (also the 1070 and 1282 Classes), so the splashers etc. are correspondingly taller. Given the ambiguity about the kit's splashers, I doubt one should worry about that 0.5 mm.

 

Now for the real visual differences that would distinguish a model of an 890 Class from a 1400 Class engine.

 

The biggest of these are the outside frames. Forward of the leading axlebox, on the 1400 Class these have a continuous curve; on the 890, the shape is symmetrical about the axlebox with a straight lower edge before the final curve down to the buffer beam bracket. At the rear, the frame on the 1400 curves down gracefully to form the back plate for the cab steps; on the 890, it continues straight to the rear buffer beam with the steps on a separate plate behind. Around the leading axlebox, the 1400 only has a couple of prominent boltheads for the spring links and one further back that might be to do with the brake mounting. The 890 is much more pimply in this area, with rows of rivets fore and aft - the Ratio molding has the aft ones, which does suggest that the designer wasn't exactly sure which class he was modelling!

 

The other really noticeable difference is in the valve chest covers, at the foot of the smokebox front. On the 1400, these are concave pieces neatly following the profile of the frames. On the 890, which has the same concave curve to the frames, these covers are piano-lid shaped - a convex curve - and stand higher than the frames. Once you've spotted it in the photos it's obvious - Plates 29 and 30 and your photo of 69A at South Lynn.

 

That's enough for now; I'll come back to the tender later.

Edited September 23, 2021 by Compound2632
68A in title amended to 69A - no change to content.

[Northroader]

4 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

How much of the closeness to a typical coal wagon is a function of the possibility that the replicas had coal wagon wheel-sets and axleboxes?

Trying to make out the detail of the replica in the NRM, the axle guards do have a pi-shape rather than the W-shape, as there are no supporting diagonals which a “modern” coal wagon would have, so they’ve tried to copy the original there. The axleboxes can’t be seen in enough detail, presume they’re some form of oil box, I would expect the old ones were grease? The springs are interesting:

if you look at the ones in the engraving, they have a very elegant reverse curve to bring them down to the axleboxes, which would tax a blacksmith to do. Artists licence? The replica ones are more a standard curve, but they’re odd in being about a 12 leaf. Sixteen ton mineral wagons did quite happily with six leaves, allowing for more dependable metallurgy than in Stephensons day, so you wonder where the replica springs came from, they look quite a thinner section material. Twelve leaf springs in modern times are usually found under something like the steel bodied grain hoppers, and the hysteresis in them was such that they were useless for the purpose. The springs in all these cases end with a curled over end retained by a bolt, and rubbing underneath the solebar, with nary any short suspension link to ease the ride, all standard British practice. In conclusion, very doubtful any coal wagons were harmed in producing the replica.

(p.s. would it be possible by careful choice of carriage names and judicious marshalling to spell out any phrase?)

Edited February 29, 2020 by Northroader

[Compound2632]

11 minutes ago, Northroader said:

(p.s. would it be possible by careful choice of carriage names and judicious marshalling to spell out any phrase?)

 

Bit grim, but: Despatch Huskisson.

[Hroth]

Not L&M coach names, but you can get a satisfactory warning with the first series of Oxford Rail PO wagons - Fear Crippen...

 

Back to the coaches;

 

R3809 set - Times, Experience, Despatch

R3810 set - Globe, Renown, Wellington

 

Given the Iron Dukes popularity at the time, running Despatch Wellington might be viewed as unfortunate too...

Edited February 29, 2020 by Hroth
I before E, except after D...

[Annie]

Reading the Telegraph today I see there is yet another named storm assaulting the British Isles!  

 

What gods has Albion offended to cause such furious weather?

 

Emergency pre-Raph picture need to cheer everyone up.

 

 

'No not that one Dodkin you bloody idiot!'       Can't get decent staff these days...........

[Edwardian]

26 minutes ago, Hroth said:

Not L&M coach names, but you can get a satisfactory warning with the first series of Oxford Rail PO wagons - Fear Crippen...

 

Back to the coaches;

 

R3809 set - Times, Experience, Despatch

R3810 set - Globe, Renown, Wellington

 

Given the Iron Dukes popularity at the time, running Despatch Wellington might be viewed as unfortunate too...

 

To reflect my extensive, but thus far unsuccessful, attempts to get the Rocket model to work (honestly, don't buy one), and in honour of Simon Kohler who more than any other single individual defines the Hornby experience for me, I am minded to rename one of the coaches "Tedious"

[Hroth]

12 minutes ago, Annie said:

What gods has Albion offended to cause such furious weather?

 

We're probably being punished for letting Boris get away with "it"...

 

7 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

To reflect my extensive, but thus far unsuccessful, attempts to get the Rocket model to work (honestly, don't buy one), and in honour of Simon Kohler who more than any other single individual defines the Hornby experience for me, I am minded to rename one of the coaches "Tedious"

 

I've the R3810 set on order,  IF it turns up and doesn't work, or bits are falling off, it's going straight back for a refund.  I'm not even going to try and rectify things...

[Edwardian]

3 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

Midland Railway 890 Class 2-4-0 No. 68A as running in 1905, from the Ratio 2-4-0 kit.

 

Right, now you've got the book with the best collection of photos relative to this locomotive: R.J. Essery & D. Jenkinson, An Illustrated Review of Midland Locomotives Vol. 2 (Wild Swan, 1988), pp. 29-33. A photo speaks a thousand words. The few words in Essery & Jenkinson can be supplemented by the dense text in S. Summerson, Midland Railway Locomotives (Irwell Press, 2007) and the article by D. Hunt, The Kirtley Era 2–4–0s, Part 3, Midland Record No. 34 (Wild Swan Publications, 2011) pp. 55-96 - your copy currently being enjoyed by some overworked and underpaid courier, I gather. 

 

The first question has to be, what does the Ratio kit represent? The box art shows No. 254 in post-1928 LMS livery. Taking this at face value, it's old No. 1514 of the 1400 Class, built by Neilson in 1881, reboilered from P boiler to B boiler in 1927, but before being renumbered 20254 in 1937. The B boiler was the standard boiler fitted to Johnson goods engines; this had a barrel 2" longer than the original P boiler. Many of these B boilers were spare from goods engines rebuilt in the early 20th century with the larger-diameter H boiler; they could be got to fit the 2-4-0s. What I don't know is whether the B boilers were mounted so that the barrel projected 2" further into the smokebox, or with the firebox projecting 2" further back into the cab. I suspect the latter. Since the transition from firebox to boiler cladding is pretty much hidden by the splashers, the only tell-tales would be the positions of the boiler bands and the dome, which would be 1" further back for the B boiler. On my example of the kit, the dome is 22.0 mm from the rear of the smokebox; for the B boiler this should be 5’6⅝”, for the P boiler, 5’5⅝”, so the kit is nicely ambiguous. 

 

The kit of course has a Deeley smokebox and chimney. The chimney of mine is long gone. When built, the 1400 Class had 3'7" chimneys; these were replaced by 3'4" chimneys from the late 1880s and 3'2" Deeley chimneys with capuchon when the engines were given Deeley smokeboxes. No. (20)254 was one of a small number of the class to get Stanier chimneys in 1937.

 

The 1400 Class had 6’8½” diameter driving wheels; with thicker tyres, these were nominally 6'9" by the early 20th century, with 20 spokes and the crank in line with a spoke. The rather dodgy wheels with the kit are 26 mm diameter with 20 spokes; the nearest match Alan Gibson wheels are the same. The first Johnson 2-4-0s, the 1282 Class, were built with 6'6" diameter wheels, as did the first 4-4-0s, the 1312 Class. The box art for the Ratio 4-4-0 kit shows No. 306 of this class, also in post-1928 livery - though the red is highly doubtful. As far as I can make out, Ratio used the same boiler/splasher/cab molding for both the 2-4-0 and 4-4-0. I'm really not sure how to disentangle all this, not having good drawings showing the dimensions of the splashers in their final form...To my eye, the splashers do look right for a 1312 Class 4-4-0 - the top of the brass beading is a little below the top of the cab side sheet, whereas on a 1400 Class 2-4-0, it's at about the same height. On the other hand, photos of the 6'6" 1282 Class 2-4-0s show the top of the beading at the level of the cab side sheet... Maybe the cab side sheets were different heights...

 

Turning next to comparison of the 890 Class and 1400 Class, by the end of the 19th century they were identical in basic dimensions: 6’8½” diameter drivers, P boiler at 7'2" centre line above rail level, 18" x 24" cylinders. The 890 Class having been rebuilt twice and the 1400 Class once, both classes had acquired the final form of reverse-curve splashers, in lieu of the earlier shape with a flat middle section. Compare Essery & Jenkinson, Vol. 2 Plate 27 - 890 Class No. 905 - with Vol. 2 Plate 57 - 1400 Class No. 1505. The most significant dimensional difference is subtle and far from obvious. The top of the platform or footplate was 4’2½” above rail level for the 1400 Class but 4’0¾” for the 890 Class (also the 1070 and 1282 Classes), so the splashers etc. are correspondingly taller. Given the ambiguity about the kit's splashers, I doubt one should worry about that 0.5 mm.

 

Now for the real visual differences that would distinguish a model of an 890 Class from a 1400 Class engine.

 

The biggest of these are the outside frames. Forward of the leading axlebox, on the 1400 Class these have a continuous curve; on the 890, the shape is symmetrical about the axlebox with a straight lower edge before the final curve down to the buffer beam bracket. At the rear, the frame on the 1400 curves down gracefully to form the back plate for the cab steps; on the 890, it continues straight to the rear buffer beam with the steps on a separate plate behind. Around the leading axlebox, the 1400 only has a couple of prominent boltheads for the spring links and one further back that might be to do with the brake mounting. The 890 is much more pimply in this area, with rows of rivets fore and aft - the Ratio molding has the aft ones, which does suggest that the designer wasn't exactly sure which class he was modelling!

 

The other really noticeable difference is in the valve chest covers, at the foot of the smokebox front. On the 1400, these are concave pieces neatly following the profile of the frames. On the 890, which has the same concave curve to the frames, these covers are piano-lid shaped - a convex curve - and stand higher than the frames. Once you've spotted it in the photos it's obvious - Plates 29 and 30 and your photo of 69A at South Lynn.

 

That's enough for now; I'll come back to the tender later.

 

Stephen, thank you.  That was very interesting, informative and useful.

[Donw]

It is strange there should be quite a few of us with a connection to Ironbridge. We moved there at the end of 1973 and have also lived at Broseley across the river and nearby Much Wenlock .Sadly the railway had gone by then apart from the connection to the Power Station. 

When large branches or trees came down the river they would go out in a coracle and put a rope on it. It would then be pulled to the side and lashed to the railings. To feed the fire once dry. There was a story about Harry that he was suspected of doing a bit of poaching. He was acosted by a local policeman walking down from Farley.  He was carrying three rabbits and the policemean said "I'll take those" come with me. So they walked down to the Ironbridge police station and on arrival Harry said "I have me rabbits now". The astonished Policeman said no you will be on a charge. I don't think so Harry replied I have been on the Lord Liutenant's land catching some for him and he gave me these. Thankyou for carrying them. It may not be true but was in keeping with his character.

 

Don

[Nearholmer]

20 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

Sometimes model trains are simply things to be looked at and admired

 

It wasn't meant to be a prophesy.

[webbcompound]

1 hour ago, Hroth said:

Given the Iron Dukes popularity at the time, running Despatch Wellington might be viewed as unfortunate too...

the Chartists would go for it though

 

[robmcg]

6 hours ago, Edwardian said:

 

To reflect my extensive, but thus far unsuccessful, attempts to get the Rocket model to work (honestly, don't buy one), and in honour of Simon Kohler who more than any other single individual defines the Hornby experience for me, I am minded to rename one of the coaches "Tedious"

 

I totally empathise with your unpleasant experience with the Rocket set having had a number of damaged or non-working engines from Hornby.

 

However Simon Kohler has been a friend for many many years and unfailingly supportive to me, and has been a complete gentleman in every way.

 

Where he gets the stamina to endure some of the people at shows I will never know.

 

I think he and a very few others have turned Hornby around from what may well have been liquidation , and we would not have the luxury of current and planned models,  at all. (Unpleasant though the Rocket has proven to be).

 

I don't know Lyndon Davies and certain people in Phoenix but they are actually being rather brave, if one can overlook the appalling product you have received.  As to cctansuk  I cannot talk of him without frustration and impotent rage, except to say when I see his explanation of anything I tend to lose the will to live.

 

I just wrote my take on the Rocket Fiasco in the Hornby section, clarifying for cctransuk his erroneous interpretation of consumer rights. But I daresay he would think otherwise, and it is amusing to me (and I am about the least vindictive person in the world, really)  when Hornby Clan class models were judged to be very rare paid in an Ebay auction a winning bid which was of the order of a very stupid number of the Queen's Coins, which he the dismembered and painted, which as we all know is his perfect right. Similar price to top-end Bachmann SECR Class at the peak of that particular fever.

 

I do understand obsessive behaviour a little, and auction fever,  and certainly I have an intimate understanding of my ineptitude and general failings, but there are some who see things rather as if they are a priori wiser than others and generously offer their greater knowledge to the world.

 

Perhaps I should think more of Midland Railway locomotive boiler changes. Or the exact reason why Swindon removed front bogie brakes from their Stars...   

 

cheers and apologies 

 

  

 

 

Edited February 29, 2020 by robmcg
added comment

[Edwardian]

2 hours ago, robmcg said:

 

I totally empathise with your unpleasant experience with the Rocket set having had a number of damaged or non-working engines from Hornby.

 

However Simon Kohler has been a friend for many many years and unfailingly supportive to me, and has been a complete gentleman in every way to me.

 

Where he gets the stamina to endure some of the people at shows I will never know.

 

I think he and a very few others have turned Hornby around from what may well have been liquidation , and we would not have the luxury of current and planned models,  at all. (Unpleasant though the Rocket has proven to be).

 

I don't know Lyndon Davies and certain people in Phoenix but they are actually being rather brave, if one can overlook the appalling product you have received.  As to cctansuk  I cannot talk of him without frustration and impotent rage, except to say when I see his explanation of anything I tend to lose the will to live.

 

 

 

I just loved Kohler chanelling Bond villain in the James May programme (the "tedious" bit, rather than the bit where he threatened to burn down Rails of Sheffield). However, I was not impressed with the underhand fratricidal nature of the Terrier and Class 66 releases, and I'm afraid I do measure the man by that. I'm sure, though, that he also has the many virtues you have found in him.  We human beings have many sides to us, Blofeld, after all, exhibited a fondness for cats.

 

I am probably more in agreement where our custom transfer friend is concerned. Visit his website, it's a giggle as it lists all the things he isn't prepared to do for customers (like make custom transfers, IIRC).  Let that dog find a bone and he'll gnaw at it until Kingdom come.

 

Anyway, the Rocket topic has become tedious.  perhaps I have helped make it so.  Last I saw there was some pointless debate about fiddly breakable detail.  I don't suppose this model is any more or less vulnerable than many modern models, but I don't recall anyone experiencing issues of this nature.  The vulnerability is in the tender wiring and the problem is that the ruddy things don't run!

 

 

[Hroth]

6 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

Blofeld, after all, exhibited a fondness for cats.

 

I'm not sure that says much in his favour...

 

[Edwardian]

4 minutes ago, Hroth said:

 

I'm not sure that says much in his favour...

 

 

OK, well how about his work on Amazonian fish conservation?

 

EDIT: Blofeld, not Kohler, obviously

 

 

Edited February 29, 2020 by Edwardian

[robmcg]

14 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

 

I just loved Kohler chanelling Bond villain in the James May programme (the "tedious" bit, rather than the bit where he threatened to burn down Rails of Sheffield). However, I was not impressed with the underhand fratricidal nature of the Terrier and Class 66 releases, and I'm afraid I do measure the man by that. I'm sure, though, that he also has the many virtues you have found in him.  We human beings have many sides to us, Blofeld, after all, exhibited a fondness for cats.

 

I am probably more in agreement where our custom transfer friend is concerned. Visit his website, it's a giggle as it lists all the things he isn't prepared to do for customers (like make custom transfers, IIRC).  Let that dog find a bone and he'll gnaw at it until Kingdom come.

 

Anyway, the Rocket topic has become tedious.  perhaps I have helped make it so.  Last I saw there was some pointless debate about fiddly breakable detail.  I don't suppose this model is any more or less vulnerable than many modern models, but I don't recall anyone experiencing issues of this nature.  The vulnerability is in the tender wiring and the problem is that the ruddy things don't run!

 

 

 

And in a spirit of reconciliation here is a pic of cctransrail's expensive Clan (his own definition) and he did do a lovely job on it, including the rear truck.

 

 

And yes the breakable nature of RTR Hornby is not overwhelmingly of interest.

[Edwardian]

In like spirit ... 

 

[robmcg]

On a completely different tack and something to assuage any feelings that your cold wet weather is permanent, we discovered in our garden today our FIRST AVOCADO after nine years and two trees... one still barren.

 

 

I/We grow most of our own vegetables and this summer is verdant...    apples, peaches, nectarines, grapes, various leafy green things and micro greens   tomatoes     and since we can easily buy excellent grain and make our own bread , life is somewhat different than many years ago when I could drink most of a large bottle of whisky and still be (I thought) coherent, erudite and witty.... I/we is me and female friend who helps me sometimes.

 

I used to have great long term dogs, one at a time, mostly lab cross, and the vet on an annual visit described one, a lab alsatian cross as having 'high mileage paws' me doing 10-15km runs with him, me in my manual  4-wheel modified wheelchair and 'Fang' galloping alongside where roads permitted. ...  I thought it was lovely to see your beautiful healthy dogs Edwardian or is it James?  How dare you take my second name!

 

Anyway, summer celebration,  our first avocado,

 

I presume your winter will end, just as it did in '63.  

 

Our cat is happy  too...    'Tiddles', if you absolutely must know. 

 

 

She knows all about Midland boiler swaps but just keeps it quiet.

[Nearholmer]

Winter here has been a funny old thing, Rob.

 

I don’t know about further north, but where I am it’s been raining, very windy, and leaden-skies since early October. Odd bright hours, but that’s about it. No truly hard frosts, just a few ‘surface’ frosts, and the small amount of snow has been wet and quick to melt. In short, it’s been warm by usual standards.

 

So, plants that haven’t got overly wet feet are a good 2-4 weeks ahead, weeds are doing splendidly, and the grass has never really stopped growing.

 

It will probably proceed to get really cold at Easter to make up for it.

 

Last winter was exceptionally mild too, but nowhere near as wet and windy.

[Edwardian]

With apologies to any nocturnal bovine herdsmen whom this might offend ....

 

I'm staying where the wind keeps howling
Through the pouring rain
Staying where the weather suits my mood

Blown about by the cruel east winds
Trapped by winter flood
And its chilling me right down to the bone

Wah, wah wah-wah wah
Wah-wah wah-wah, wah wah-wah
Wahhh