Wright writes.....

[Oldddudders]

I think "The Little Bytham Story" has a great deal of merit, but perhaps needs a particular slant to ease it past the "not my prototype" barrier for some.

 

And that is maybe how it should be pitched - as an exercise in modelling a prototype. That doesn't make it unique, but the OP's substantial knowledge of and data for the prototype is better than most, I suggest. Thus the thesis might be based upon gathering data, assessing the feasibility, finding the space etc etc, before timber is cut, track laid.

 

Only today I was reading a thread on RMweb by a modeller who has much more talent and energy than I do, yet seems to stumble over building layouts that lack a true purpose. LB has been an exercise in planning for the long term and getting the details right. Again, not unique in that - certainly among ECML layouts! - but the stuff of a book is all there, I feel, waiting to be drafted.

[corneliuslundie]

It reminded me of the three volumes by Stephen Williams "Great Western branch line modelling". Volume 1 looks at prototype layouts, track and signalling, volume 2 at prototype buildings, fittings and traffic operations, and volume 3 at Stephen's particular model of Faringdon covering all sorts of practical aspects. I am not suggesting three volumes or this particular structure, but rather the way he used the prototype and his model to illustrate his themes. You might want to make such a book a joint effort by the various contributors to your layout. So perhaps "Main line modelling" or something related.

[Tony Wright]

IMG_3044.JPG

Yes, a most enjoyable 24 hours at Little Bytham enjoying Tony & Mo's company. And delighted that Tony is delighted with the conclusion of the 'horse trading' and pleased to be able to leave with all the signals working - mission accomplished.

 

IMG_3051.JPG

I haven't been for a while so was interested to see the various scenic details that we've been seeing on this thread.

 

IMG_3053.JPG

It really is beginning to look lovely. With the careful use of space and none of the details overdone it all has the air of an unhurried, country location (even with some of the fastest trains in the land racing through)

 

IMG_3054.JPG

An oft-overlooked feature of any railway - drainage. But not overlooked at LB.

 

IMG_3056.JPG

The sleepy M&GN has not been forgotten.

 

At this point, I was hoping to show a little bit of video (proving that the signals do actually work!) But all the world and his dog is obviously on YouTube at the moment and I can't get on. I'll keep trying...

 

Ah - as last. The Master's Voice can be heard on a couple of occasions!

http://youtu.be/49Heu-If8yU

Thanks once again, Graham.

 

Thanks, particularly, too for posting the pictures. As usual, and I'm not starting another 'argument' about photography here, the shots have highlighted errors and anomalies in the modelling. Tension-lock couplings - how ghastly that they're still on a large number of my freight vehicles? Fencing which to the naked eye looks all right but isn't joined up. And, that pointwork on the M&GNR where there are no crossing timbers at the track joints!

 

Picking up on other comments, perhaps there might be a book in the future; I'll see when I meet with a few publishers in the next few weeks. Certainly, if I collate the information, there are several disciplines where the contributors can offer advice to a very high standard. 

 

These would/could include..........

 

Planning, interpretation of information, trackplan, how to approach building a prototype main line location, research etc by Ian Wilson, Rob Kinsey and me.

 

Baseboard construction by Norman Turner.

 

Trackwork by Norman Solomon, and a piece by me on how to lay fiddle yard track and wire up points.

 

Wiring by Rob Kinsey.

 

Architectural modelling by Ian Wilson (Ian was the founder of Prototype Models) and Paul Bason. I had asked Bob Dawson to build the Willoughby Arms for me but Paul has visited again and is keen to make it. I'll build him a loco in return.

 

Scenic modelling by Rob Davey, Ian Wilson, Richard Wilson, Gilbert Barnatt and me. 

 

Signalling by Mick Nicholson and Graham Nicholas.

 

Locomotive and stock construction by me (with a little help in the freight department). 

 

Loco conversions by Graeme King.

 

Painting locos/stock by Ian Rathbone and me.

 

Weathering locos/stock by Tom Foster and me. 

 

Planning an operating sequence by Rob Kinsey and Ian Wilson.

 

Dare I say it - how to photograph the model (my way)?

 

Painting backscenes by me.

 

Have I missed anything/anyone out? Obviously, this is just off the top of my head, and I'll have to introduce the idea to those mentioned (some of whom might not be interested to be fair). 

 

What's the term? Has it got legs?

 

Edited to include the last category.

Edited January 18, 2015 by Tony Wright

[Oldddudders]

Tony Wright, on 18 Jan 2015 - 14:06, said:

Has it got legs?

 

 

Yes! While you have been in the fortunate position to engage with such a list of highly competent people, the fact remains that you cued each of them in as required, and the result remains yours. But each of them has a chapter within him - even if you, as a seasoned writer, have to ghost their contribution, not least to ensure a homogeneity of style.

 

Your post demonstrates that you are thinking about it, and we can ask no more.

[Focalplane]

Tony, I think it was Paul Theroux (in the Old Patagonia Express) who wrote that the journey is often more important than the destination.  How very true.  I do wonder what I would do should I ever finish a model railway project.  Right now one of my two projects is still in the research stage and I am enjoying every minute of it, from taking photos of the remnants of the S&MJR to searching the web, reading out-of-print books, deciding on which track to use (OO-SF designed on Templot is my chosen gauge) and slowly accumulating historically representative stock. It's probably generating as much fun for me as actually building the layout, though to be honest I can't wait to start assembling the pre-cut baseboards now I have a track plan.  I have also accumulated a number of model railroad (US mostly) guides but rarely does the research side get much of a mention.  So your outline's first chapter is, in my opinion, essential.

[micklner]

Tony 

   Looking at the list thats about two books or more !!!  Look forward to it !! 

[Grafarman]

The first section alone on planning, interpretation etc could prove a goldmine of information and lure many modellers away from the guesswork of fictional railways towards adopting a prototype location...

 

But please, create books, not magazine articles (however much they offer you!); they last longer and are so much easier to reference!

 

 

David

[The Stationmaster]

The first section alone on planning, interpretation etc could prove a goldmine of information and lure many modellers away from the guesswork of fictional railways towards adopting a prototype location...

 

David

I quite agree - that is an area of explanation and development which has never been tackled really well in my view in a UK outline situation.  Alas LB does not provide the ideal follow on about how to incorporate representative prototype features because they are automatically included for the location but if possible it would be useful to explore that angle and help layout planners avoid the most common mistakes such as facing points all over the place on a steam era layout.

[New Haven Neil]

Tony, I think it was Paul Theroux (in the Old Patagonia Express) who wrote that the journey is often more important than the destination.  How very true.  I do wonder what I would do should I ever finish a model railway project.  Right now one of my two projects is still in the research stage and I am enjoying every minute of it, from taking photos of the remnants of the S&MJR to searching the web, reading out-of-print books, deciding on which track to use (OO-SF designed on Templot is my chosen gauge) and slowly accumulating historically representative stock. It's probably generating as much fun for me as actually building the layout, though to be honest I can't wait to start assembling the pre-cut baseboards now I have a track plan.  I have also accumulated a number of model railroad (US mostly) guides but rarely does the research side get much of a mention.  So your outline's first chapter is, in my opinion, essential.

 

 

I think Robert Louis Stevenson said it rather earlier!

[St Enodoc]

I quite agree - that is an area of explanation and development which has never been tackled really well in my view in a UK outline situation.  Alas LB does not provide the ideal follow on about how to incorporate representative prototype features because they are automatically included for the location but if possible it would be useful to explore that angle and help layout planners avoid the most common mistakes such as facing points all over the place on a steam era layout.

I think the late David Jenkinson went some way along this path with Rails in the Fells, Modelling Historic Railways and Historical Railway Modelling - A Personal View, but to follow the continuous story from beginning to end would be taking the idea to the next level.

[coachmann]

I think the late David Jenkinson went some way along this path with Rails in the Fells, Modelling Historic Railways and Historical Railway Modelling - A Personal View, but to follow the continuous story from beginning to end would be taking the idea to the next level.

David was very active and enthusiastic when it came to railways. In our final chat, he told me he had achieved his aims and was building a model boat! 

Edited January 18, 2015 by coachmann

[Tony Wright]

I think the late David Jenkinson went some way along this path with Rails in the Fells, Modelling Historic Railways and Historical Railway Modelling - A Personal View, but to follow the continuous story from beginning to end would be taking the idea to the next level.

Thanks John,

 

Before anyone jumps to conclusions, I will state most categorically that anything I've written or might write in the future has never been nor ever will be in the same class as the writings of David Jenkinson. I know that your statement does not imply parity, but just in case there's a misunderstanding with regard to 'taking the idea to the next level'. 

 

It was my privilege to work with and for the great man as a contributor and photographer. I remember my first commission began something like this - 'I'm told by Geoff Holt that you can take model railway photographs to the standard I require. This being the case, I'd like you to go to North Wales and take pictures of three 'Royal Scots' in O Gauge which Geoff has built for himself and me. Please complete the commission on medium-format transparency and send me the results'. I did the job, and sent the pictures off. Two days later I received a typical Jenks telephone call - 'Geoff was right, I'll be sending through further commissions. Many thanks'. And he did. 

 

I think the notion of a book taking a project through all the procedures of building a prototype model might work. I know Little Bytham is entirely site-specific, but all the methods and techniques are applicable to most model railways. Of course, I can back-up the work from my vast collection of model railway pictures (including several of DJ's Kendal). 

 

If I have a concern, it's just that with an input from one or two professional modellers, it could possibly be perceived that to build an accurate depiction of a prototype needs professionals to do it, or at least in part. As I've said many times, the greatest merit (to me) in railway modelling is to do things for oneself. Little Bytham certainly doesn't qualify entirely in that regard, and, without the substantial help of those guys mentioned it would still be no more than a pipe-dream. 

[Oldddudders]

Tony Wright, on 19 Jan 2015 - 11:35, said:

 

If I have a concern, it's just that with an input from one or two professional modellers, it could possibly be perceived that to build an accurate depiction of a prototype needs professionals to do it, or at least in part. As I've said many times, the greatest merit (to me) in railway modelling is to do things for oneself. Little Bytham certainly doesn't qualify entirely in that regard, and, without the substantial help of those guys mentioned it would still be no more than a pipe-dream. 

I think at one time I'd have agreed with you - simply quoting this or that acknowledged expert would be a turn-off. But this is 2015, and we have the Internet. Thus anyone can read online about the modelling exploits of ordinary folk, some of whom who make extraordinary models with full descriptions of their travails. RMweb is the classic contemporary source of such "stuff" but there are others, no doubt. So a book needs to offer something extra, and recording the input of seriously capable modellers - be they professional or just super-talented - with copious illustrations helps to set the standard that can be achieved. Andy Y has used the term "Modelling Inspiration", and LB is a classic example, surely.

 

Perhaps it all comes down to this : If you believe, as many of us do, that LB sets a particularly high standard in many aspects of concept, design, construction and operation, then documenting that should be rewarding for you and eminently readable for the modelling masses. And maybe a chapter on model photography would ruffle fewer feathers than has unfortunately been the case here...

[LNER4479]

I think there's another point to be made here and it is along the lines of documenting your efforts for posterity such that they are available for others to draw subsequent inspiration from. A well-produced book is arguably (indisputably?) the best medium for this.

 

I'm glad the works of David Jenkinson have got a mention in this context. Unlike you Tony, I never had the privilege of meeting Mr Jenkinson but 'Rails in the Fells' and 'Historical Railway Modelling' are two well-thumbed books in my modest library and I would cite these and other writings of his as being amongst the most influential on my own modelling efforts. Foremost amongst his thoughts on the subject (of modelling based on the prototype) is that a model railway should convey the presence of the location it purports to represent without the need for any train being present. His modelling certainly 'shouted' Midland Railway (S&C) and LB does the same so far as the ECML is concerned (and that's about a whole lot more than just having the word 'Bytham' printed on the signal box).

 

I do think that the putative book has great merit in that regard (and I am honestly saying that irrespective of your kind recognition of my limited involvement); whereas 'Historical Railway Modelling' covers one man's approach to many layouts, the LB book looks like covering a team of modellers collective approach to one layout. That should therefore give it its own niche - but more importantly (IMHO) it's out there as a reference work for the future for subsequent generations to be inspired by (should they be so moved!).

Edited January 19, 2015 by LNER4479

[coachmann]

You have acknowledged that Rob Davey, Ian Wilson, Richard Wilson, Gilbert Barnatt and yourself did the scenics, that Mick Nicholson and Graham Nicholas did the signalling, Graeme King did the loco conversions, Basil Rathbone did the loco and coach painting, Tom Foster and yourself did the weathering of stock, and Rob Kinsey and Ian Wilson did the planning an operating sequences. So if we leave off the motive power, Little Bytham is quite like Peterborough and maybe other fine layouts whose owners have enlisted assistance. Whether that assistance has been paid in £££'s or in kind matters not really. What makes Little Bytham quite unique is you clearly love building locomotives when many layouts these days are populated with RTR locos, but this is not to take away your vision and planning as regards the overall 'blueprint'.

 

As I said some years ago on RMweb, Little Bytham was an inspirational layout to me and this was due to your use of space. It mirrors the uncrowded nature of lines out in the open country where land was probably cheap at the time the real railways were built. This contrasts with areas where land was expensive and the railway planners did their utmost to cram in all the necessary facilities into the space available. It is just one facet of railways in the UK that model builders would find useful to consider.You got it right.

Edited January 19, 2015 by coachmann

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

David was very active and enthusiastic when it came to railways...

And a great educator of the young, based on my two experiences meeting him.

 

His 'Little Long Drag'  project has influenced all my thinking about what a model railway could be - or possibly should be. I am sure he would find it amusing that the concept seems to have flowered most strongly on the right side of the country.

 

There's a story to be woven out of the creation of Little Bytham. Tell it in your own way with due credit to all who contributed in whatever way, and it will stand on its own merit.

[LNER4479]

Basil Rathbone did the loco and coach painting...

...whilst being chased by the evil professor Moriarty? An elementary mistake, my dear Coachmann

Edited January 19, 2015 by LNER4479

[45568]

As a small and then larger boy, ( who then grew up???!!), I read DJ's 'Marthwaite' et al in the 'Modeller'.

 It was a great surprise, and pleasure, that many years ago, he graced AMRA in Perth, WA with a visit!

 I attended as a guest, along with several friends, and had the pleasure of both his presentation, and being able to joke with him about perceived modelling 'musts'!

 I feel that, still here in Perth, WA, should I meet TW, LG, GB, and many others, we would find common ground over a glass or cup of something, that makes the hobby what it is.

  It really is all memories, and a hell of a lot of FUN!

Cheers from Oz,

 Peter C.

[coachmann]

...whilst being chased by the evil professor Moriarty? An elementary mistake, my dear Coachmann

Red face time! I have little memory for names so I seized on the Welsh habit of giving everyone nicknames instead. Who can forget Basil R. as Sherlock Holmes! Apologies to fellow gentleman painter Ian Rathbone.

Edited January 19, 2015 by coachmann

[Tony Wright]

I think at one time I'd have agreed with you - simply quoting this or that acknowledged expert would be a turn-off. But this is 2015, and we have the Internet. Thus anyone can read online about the modelling exploits of ordinary folk, some of whom who make extraordinary models with full descriptions of their travails. RMweb is the classic contemporary source of such "stuff" but there are others, no doubt. So a book needs to offer something extra, and recording the input of seriously capable modellers - be they professional or just super-talented - with copious illustrations helps to set the standard that can be achieved. Andy Y has used the term "Modelling Inspiration", and LB is a classic example, surely.

 

Perhaps it all comes down to this : If you believe, as many of us do, that LB sets a particularly high standard in many aspects of concept, design, construction and operation, then documenting that should be rewarding for you and eminently readable for the modelling masses. And maybe a chapter on model photography would ruffle fewer feathers than has unfortunately been the case here...

Many thanks Ian,

 

Food for thought, indeed, and I take on board entirely what you've said. The only thing I'd add to the comment about the input of professional modellers is the question of cost. If one sets out to model a prototype main-line location and cannot do the work for oneself (for whatever reasons), it would be disingenuous to suggest that it can be achieved without considerable cost (not that you did). Yes, it might be inspirational, and inspiration carries the meaning to me of giving someone not just a happy feeling but the planting of an idea to emulate that inspiration. I recall seeing pictures of the Norris layout as a boy, and boy were they inspirational in terms of the brilliant photography. The captions suggested the layout was the 'apotheosis' (I had to look up the word, aged 12) of things that had gone before. And it was! But, as I learnt later, a very large amount of cash was needed to create such brilliance, employing the likes of Bernard Miller and other such masters. I could only dream of such wonderment in the future.

 

I'm lucky, I suppose, that 'my' layout has not 'cost' me the full professional rates to create, and apologies if I've mentioned all this before. The planning and design were done 'in house' by team members and the baseboards were built for me in return for my building locos in exchange. Though I had to pay Norman Solomon for his outstanding trackwork, this was offset by the production of a DVD. Rob Kinsey's superb control panel was made in exchange for my building a loco, as will be the case with the cement train. I laid all the fiddle yard track and did at least 50% of all the wiring. All the buildings are done in exchange for my building locos and stock and, though I paid for Mick Nicholson to make most of the signals, the making of the last one and all the installations were paid for by my building two further locos. Even the cost of Ian Rathbone's wonderful loco painting was initially offset by my providing pictures. Loco and stock weathering, other than my own work, has been achieved by assisting folk in their loco building and having mates round and feeding, watering and accommodating them. Much of the scenic work has been achieved by the last-mentioned process. Obviously, locos and stock (other than a few carriages and most of the freight vehicles) I've taken care of myself, though even complete goods trains have been provided in exchange for a few weeks' board and lodging. Yes, materials have had to be bought, but much in the way of locos and stock has been acquired by my assisting RTR manufacturers and kit manufacturers in research, advice, test-building and the writing of instructions, as well as providing pictures. This is continuing with Dart Castings, where I've provided pictures and am making display models for the MJT/Hornby conversions in exchange for more sides and components. I couldn't possibly have got the layout by paying professionals or super-talented people. I just don't have that sort of money. 

 

But, with all that understood, I'll set about creating a working synopsis.  

Edited January 19, 2015 by Tony Wright

[PGC]

Many thanks Ian,

 

Food for thought, indeed, and I take on board entirely what you've said. The only thing I'd add to the comment about the input of professional modellers is the question of cost. If one sets out to model a prototype main-line location and cannot do the work for oneself (for whatever reasons), it would be disingenuous to suggest that it can be achieved without considerable cost (not that you did). Yes, it might be inspirational, and inspiration carries the meaning to me of giving someone not just a happy feeling but the planting of an idea to emulate that inspiration. I recall seeing pictures of the Norris layout as a boy, and boy were they inspirational in terms of the brilliant photography. The captions suggested the layout was the 'apotheosis' (I had to look up the word, aged 12) of things that had gone before. And it was! But, as I learnt later, a very large amount of cash was needed to create such brilliance, employing the likes of Bernard Miller and other such masters. I could only dream of such wonderment in the future.

 

I'm lucky, I suppose, that 'my' layout has not 'cost' me the full professional rates to create, and apologies if I've mentioned all this before. The planning and design were done 'in house' by team members and the baseboards were built for me in return for my building locos in exchange. Though I had to pay Norman Solomon for his outstanding trackwork, this was offset by the production of a DVD. Rob Kinsey's superb control panel was made in exchange for my building a loco, as will be the case with the cement train. I laid all the fiddle yard track and did at least 50% of all the wiring. All the buildings are done in exchange for my building locos and stock and, though I paid for Mick Nicholson to make most of the signals, the making of the last one and all the installations were paid for by my building two further locos. Even the cost of Ian Rathbone's wonderful loco painting was initially offset by my providing pictures. Loco and stock weathering, other than my own work, has been achieved by assisting folk in their loco building and having mates round and feeding, watering and accommodating them. Much of the scenic work has been achieved by the last-mentioned process. Obviously, locos and stock (other than a few carriages and most of the freight vehicles) I've taken care of myself, though even complete goods trains have been provided in exchange for a few weeks' board and lodging. Yes, materials have had to be bought, but much in the way of locos and stock has been acquired by my assisting RTR manufacturers and kit manufacturers in research, advice, test-building and the writing of instructions, as well as providing pictures. This is continuing with Dart Castings, where I've provided pictures and am making display models for the MJT/Hornby conversions in exchange for more sides and components. I couldn't possibly have got the layout by paying professionals or super-talented people. I just don't have that sort of money. 

 

But, with all that understood, I'll set about creating a working synopsis.  

 

My feelings about this, Tony, are that fellow modellers, whether amateur or professional, but all of high quality working standards, will work with somebody who has a proven track record of modelling, such as yourself.

 

If someone such as myself, went to modellers of the same level and  asked them to help me with a similar project to LB, I would expect them to be sceptical, and rightly so, as I don't have the credentials to calm fears of failure, lack of payment etc.

 

In another life, I know that if I ask people to help me, they will because I have a proven track record and their good name will not be damaged by working with me, and this is how I see you have been able to get these people to work with you, because you have built up a reputation over the years, and they are prepared to trust their good name in your hands. That, to me, demonstrates a very high level of respect, and one that LB demonstrates quite clearly is fully deserved.

 

Phil

[Tony Wright]

My feelings about this, Tony, are that fellow modellers, whether amateur or professional, but all of high quality working standards, will work with somebody who has a proven track record of modelling, such as yourself.

 

If someone such as myself, went to modellers of the same level and  asked them to help me with a similar project to LB, I would expect them to be sceptical, and rightly so, as I don't have the credentials to calm fears of failure, lack of payment etc.

 

In another life, I know that if I ask people to help me, they will because I have a proven track record and their good name will not be damaged by working with me, and this is how I see you have been able to get these people to work with you, because you have built up a reputation over the years, and they are prepared to trust their good name in your hands. That, to me, demonstrates a very high level of respect, and one that LB demonstrates quite clearly is fully deserved.

 

Phil

Thanks Phil,

 

You're very kind. 

 

I've no wish to labour the point but I see four distinct methods of producing a model railway of real 'merit'. 

 

1. The builder makes everything him/herself. Names such as Ken Northwood, Frank Dyer and Peter Denny from the past and the likes of Barry Norman, David Amias, Jason Thomas and Gordon and Maggie Gravett of today spring to mind. Their creations are brilliant and represent, to me, the pinnacle of personal railway modelling. There are many others. Even if the aspiring modeller can never hope to emulate the work of those just-mentioned, the fact that they'll have a go is meritorious in itself, and nobody has the right to 'look-down' on what's been achieved.  

 

2. For whatever reason, the 'owner' cannot do everything him/herself and works in a group, but also might pay for some of the work, or horse-trade (at least in part). The 'vision' might be that of the individual, and it takes that individual to see it through. I think David Jenkinson fits into that category. It only really works though if the 'leader' is capable of building large elements of the creation him/herself (Jenks's peerless carriages, for instance) and has a clear idea of what needs to be done. Roy Jackson also fits into that category in my opinion. Both have produced layouts of outstanding quality. I don't count myself in the same company as those two greats, nor do I class LB anywhere near as highly as Kendal or Retford, but this is the category I'd like to feel I fit in

 

3. Also for whatever reason, the 'owner' can do very little of the work him/herself, but pays someone else, either on commission or retains their services, to do it for them. As long as the 'vision' is right and the person has the resources to see it through, then the results (like the Norris layout) can be stunning. The 'problem' with this method of achieving such a layout is that the owner is always (or can be) beholden to those who've made things for problem-solving, maintenance, on-going work, etc. 

 

4. The 'group' project, where like-minded individuals pool resources and combine their skills to produce an outstanding layout. They do not, though, pay for professional assistance. The group which built Biggleswade fits into this category in my view.

 

I suppose there's a fifth, if you include the 'club' layout. However, in my experience, this can result in too much democracy, producing a layout (often vast) which has no sense of time or place. However, members of the Shipley club have proved that (with layouts such as Evercreech Junction, Tebay and Leicester South) a club layout can be the equal of anything seen anywhere else. 

 

Edited because how could I miss Dave Shakespeare out of category 1?

Edited January 19, 2015 by Tony Wright

[corneliuslundie]

Tony, I think you are worrying too much about the way the layout came together in terms of people. The important thing is HOW it came together - the research, the planning process, what it was intended to achieve, the decisions that were made about practical construction issues, possibly in some cases the nitty gritty of how it was done, and of course the areas of prototype practice which needed to be emulated (even down to the positioning of fogmen's huts!). I am glad David Jenkinson was mentioned because his book on Historic railway modelling must be the most thumbed book on my shelves, simply because he got me to think about what I was trying to achieve and took me through the processes I needed to decide

 

Who did the various aspects of your layout doesn't in the end matter.

 

And I don't agree that having a "professional" writer need put readers off. Do people shy away from books by Guy Williams on scratchbuilding locos because he is a "professional"? I think not. People buy such books to be inspired and encouraged and helped to do their own modelling better. If I could build models as well as your colleagues I wouldn't need to read any books or magazines.

 

Jonathan

[Andrew P]

Tony, Worry not my friend, please, just do it, there's a lot of Modellers who would love to see it.

[Anglian]

Tony,

 

In Little Bytham there are two measures of success that I think many would love to read about. Firstly, the simple fact is that you have created a slice of the East Coast mainline, that presents us with a historically plausible vision of 1958. That alone is no mean feat. Secondly to realise your vision has required strong degree and application of single-mindedness. To be the creative director responsible for delivering this project is a story well worth telling. In an age where we are increasingly tempted by more and more higher quality R-T-R models, for those who can afford it, I think it all to easy to end up loosing the way and the model railway its identity. It's well worth presenting the holistic and rather more interesting view of historical railway modelling that doesn't begin with 'shopping' but 'in-the-field'.

 

I never met Jenks and was genuinely sad when I read of his death, however, I'll suggest that if he were still with us, that he'd be on the phone urging you to begin the manuscript.

Edited January 19, 2015 by Anglian