Jol Wilkinson

I always find the habit of reserving a table - usually by parking someone there - and then going to get a drink/food rather annoying. Especially when there are no other free tables and i am left standing by the cash till holding a tray and nowhere to sit. Oddly, the reverse to the British habit of queuing.

Your first paragraph illustrate what appears to be a lack of understanding of the model railway kit "industry" and how it has evolved. It is also frankly insulting to those involved in it. If the concept of "difficulty ratings" for products that are being sold to responsible adults is such a good one, then why hasn't it already happened? Probably because those who think it is such a good idea - like yourself - also think it is another persons responsibility to create it. People build kits because; They want a model that isn't otherwise available. They enjoy building things. Both of these. People who don't build kits probably don't do so because; They prefer to buy RTR items and are happy to build their model railway around what is readily available. They see kit building as difficult, in part because of comments like yours about quality of kits and instructions. They lack the required skills because they didn't learn at school or their local club doesn't provide guidance/mentoring or may even have a "that's too difficult" culture. Making kits and bits easier to find, creating an arbitrary (and debatable) standards system for ease of construction/skill levels won't do much to create new converts to kit building. What is needed is to change peoples attitude to what they want from a model railway. Something easy that they can build without challenging themselves too much but will be pretty much run of the mill, or something "exceptional" that reflects their own efforts. Whether the majority of modellers would get so much satisfaction from the latter is debatable. Being part of the herd, defined by what you buy and own, is what works for many people in all works of life. Why else would you join the Hornby or Bachmann collectors clubs? Having a large collection of RTR locos and stock, running on Peco track and with RTP buildings is what many "modellers" are happy with. Rather than criticise those that produce kits, why not support them and do something positive to promote model making as a rewarding and satisfying hobby. I'll leave it up to you and the other ideas men to work out how to do that.

Well, the Japanese have always been good at copying other manufacturers features. The original MX5 looked like an Elan clone.

As I said earlier in relation to Barry Ten's post about a kits and bits "directory" it needs someone to organise it. Somehow I don't think there will be a rush of volunteers.

Clive, a sweeping and unhelpful generalisation. Alastair, I you feel sufficiently strongly, why not set it up? I suspect that, if you leave it to someone else, it won't happen. There is no UK equivalent of the NMRA to pull such a thing together.. The S4Society has a list of suppliers and traders on their wbsite, but not to the degree of detail that you want. Likewise the UK Model Shops Directory has shop and supplier details, but only if the supplier provides them. One difficulty would be keeping it up to date, as I know from being directly involved in setting up LNWR Society's modelling pages on their website. Jol

Khris, I haven't attended a Misseden course but know some that have, who rate them highly. Many attend repeatedly, I suspect partly because they enjoy the social aspect as much as the learning experience. Other courses have been less successful, such as those run by Hobby Holidays - for reasons I don't understand, other than a lack of interest. The Pendon courses appear to focus on the scenic side of things while those run by Peco seem to concentrate on the basics and pushing their products. Jol

Khris, I hoped I wasn't being defeatist but pragmatic. Yes, you are right that we have many exhibitions (as well as clubs and societies) here in the UK where the groundwork should be happening to expand peoples model making skills. My experience show it doesn't always happen, usually because there is insufficient appetite to do something different/challenge. The excuse often used is that "I couldn't make/paint something as good as the RTR manufacturers). Those of use that make models from kits accept that may well be true, but we might want something that isn't available RTR, have discovered the satisfaction of creating something for yourself, etc. Over the years I have been an occasional demonstrator, held workshops at a local club, run model making evening classes at a local college and offered the benefit(?) of my experience from behind an exhibition layout or a trade stand for a "small supplier". So I have some experience of how the hobby "operates". You are right in saying what people need is the motivation to have a go. How you provide that motivation is something not often discussed. Focusing on specific problems such as poor instructions and coming up with simple but possibly difficult to implement answers won't move things forward. Perhaps if Railway Modeller or BRM ran a competition for first time kit built locos, modified RTR models, etc. supported by kit building demos at major shows such as Warley or Ally Pally, we might see a bit of change. MRJ have do something like that over the years to promote various aspects of model making (their latest is the Cameo Layout Competition), but that is rather like preaching to the converted. Jol

Who is going to decide on the definition of what is suitable for a beginner? What skills and tools would a beginner need? Should they have to take an exam to measure their level of skill/experience/expertise? Unless you can define what a "beginner" can do, then you can't define which kits might be suitable. What are the intermediate levels and how do you define an "expert" or a comprehensive tool kit? Perhaps we should ask manufacturers to discuss their customers needs and abilities when selling their products (which is what several that I know do already). Selling a customer a kit they want and can build will, hopefully, lead to further sales. I know which of the kits produced by the trader I help out are more suitable for the "beginner". The problem is, I don't know what basic skills the "beginner" may have, what experience, what tools, etc. Sometimes it becomes a long conversation and it doesn't always end in a sale. Sometimes, at a show, we are able to send them of to the demo area or to buy a suitable book or DVD on the subject to give them a feel for what they are setting out to do. What role do clubs, Societies and other modelling organisations have to play in this? Are many clubs bothered about model making as opposed to just buying models? Some I know of have very positive attitudes to model making, while others don't care, seeing using RTR as what modelling is about and positively discouraging anyone who wants to do anything a bit different. Until a person sees model making and kit building as a more worthwhile and rewarding activity than buying a model made by a commercial operation, then they won't be motivated to have a go. A complex issue and not one that putting arbitrary difficulty ratings on kits will resolve. Complaining - in general - about kit instructions on RMweb won't actually help either. It can give the "beginner" the wrong impression and a fear of kits. Better to show people how to build kits as Tony does through this thread, Tom does with his videos and others do elsewhere on RMweb. LIkewise run workshops at club meetings, provide demos at shows, etc. Or don't bother with any of that and accept that kit building is in an inevitable slow decline for a whole variety of reasons and just get on with life (having stockpiled the kits and bits you want while they are still available).

Here is your opportunity; http://www.brassmasters.co.uk/lswr_sr_kits.htm

In which case you would also need to provide instruction on how to solder, etc. Actually I did that by producing a booklet for LRM called "A simple guide to building etched kits", although I usually recommend one of Iain Rices books for a more entertaining read.

One of the downsides of Non de plumes, pseudonyms, etc. is that we don't know to whom we are talking, if we have met them, etc.

I am probably one of the few on here that designed 4mm etched kits and written the instructions for for them. These have all been for John Redrup at LRM and the instructions for these have been amended where customer feedback has suggested a better way or identified a mistake. I believe I can therefore justifiably some claim experience writing instructions and can assure you that it is a is a thankless task, On average the instructions I have written include 10 pages of instructions (including information on suitable wheels, motors, gearboxes, prototype details, reference works, etc.), 4 pages of "exploded" drawings, 2 of numbered parts lists and 1 with a numbered etch outline. That's just for locos, with separate instructions for the tender. All the locos kits have been, with one exception, for LNWR locos. I also know of kit designers who don't build their own designs but get someone else to do it for than and write the instructions. Whether that produces a better result I can't say. One of the biggest difficulties is knowing where to pitch the instructions in terms of the experience and skill levels that the builder may have. So invariably it will be wrong for someone. I also know several builders who claim they just have a skim through the instructions and then get on with it. The other designer/manufacturers I know put great effort into their instructions, recognising that they are as significant as the kit design is producing a worthwhile model. Perhaps in the past instructions weren't always so good, but then "modelers" were probably expected to have some fundamental skills learned at school. My recommendation to any new entrant to kit building is always to start with something simple but that advice isn't always followed. The ongoing reduction of kit building has far less to do with poor kit instructions than with a variety of other influences in this hobby. A general erosion of handicraft skills taught at schools over the years, an increase in the need for instant gratification through buying things, the "collector" mentality and the size of your model collection (p*n*s envy, also evident in choice of car, designer clothing, mobile phone brands etc.), the mainstream modelling media concentration on RTR manufacturer products, etc. So rather than going on about poor instructions, can I suggest that, as Tony and some others do, show what you have built and inspire others to try. Point out problems you found and how you overcame them, so helping others to succeed.

Most cars designed and built from the 1950/60s rusted badly. Cars with separate chassis were just being phased out so understanding of what would happen with box sections, etc. in unitary car bodies wasn't fully understood. I think that the US auto manufacturers didn't bother with rust proofing until the late 1970s and recall visiting one European car plant in the early 1980s when phosphate dipping of complete body shells and application of anti-chipping paint in vulnerable areas was a fairly recent introduction. The MGB had complex sills (to provide sufficient stiffness) that acted as water traps. Ford Anglia and Cortinas suffered at the front suspension strut mounting. Lotus Elans often needed new chassis after some years and galvanized or tubular versions became available as after market parts.. No doubt other cars suffered similarly.

Hermes would seem to be rather like the Uber of delivery companies.

Originally sold by Kennings of Chesterfield, the history file starts with a 1983 receipt a new owner living in St Leonards, Suffolk. The Derbyshire winter weather and the Sussex sea air did their work and in 1990 she underwent extensive repairs to the body shell, in the usual areas for a MGB of that era (wings, chassis rails, etc.). THat was at 65,000 miles, since when she has lead a sheltered life, and has no only just reached 80,000. Rust prevention measures didn't really get used in the motor industry until the 1980's. Cars used to be scrapped because the bodies were rotted and too far gone, nowadays it's because the cost of electronic spares. etc. make them too expensive to repair.

Keith, I too don't understand how it happens, unless you rack them up before the lew can process your offences. http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/felixstowe-motorist-faces-11-allegations-of-speeding-over-the-orwell-bridge-1-4985767

It doesn't stop the idiots. One Felixstowe resident has been "caught" by the cameras on the A14 Orwell bridge 11 times in a year. 8500 offences were racked up in the first year since the cameras were installed. The record is for 114 mph in the 60 mph limit on the bridge. No doubt - from overhearing some of rather loud conversations at the Helmingham Hall event - it is a badge of honour 1st Class to significantly exceed the speed limit. I suppose if your group of friends and family are into buying Lambos, Evo's and Porsches (they were ahead of us in the queue for the cream teas) then it is just another way of proving your belief in your superiority.

Saw this at the Helmingham Hall ()near Stowmarket) classic event yesterday and thought of Horesetan. I took my 73 MGB, which we parked next to a delightful and - compared to VW campers - rather rare Dormobile. My friend is seen relaxing after our widespread and fruitless search for a Lotus Elan. He has a S4 Elan and was looking for one to identify how the radiator fan was fitted as the one on his car keeps coming loose. For the first time at such an event I became very aware of the different attitude of those owning a Classic or modern Sports car. The former were generally interested in the car, its restoration, etc. irrespective of what it was. The latter, especially those with Lambos, Porsches, muscle cars, etc. seem more interested in impressing the public with how much noise their car made, how fast it went (usually when breaking the speed limit on the A12 or A14) or how much they had spent on their modern classic.

I particularly liked Jerry's editorial. It's good to know I may not alone in having the view that the latest technology isn't always the solution to all the worlds' problems.

I'd suggest getting hold of a copy of the GA for the version of the loco you are building for accurate dimensions which, together with the photos/books you have, should provide the information you seek. Can you split the tender casting longitudinally and widen it. I believe that was something that had to be done with the back section of the whole cast w/m body for M&L LNWR tender bodies to get them to the correct width.

Back from holiday and as the weather here is too poor to bother to get the MGB out, I've made a little progress with the Jubilee. Tender is now complete and the frames for the loco are partly finished. Photos to follow.

More uses for cable ties - holding parts of the Shard together.

The issue with increasingly complex modern consumer technology is whether you manage it for your own benefit, or let it control you for the benefit of others. If the former, you pick and choose what you want from it, as Tony does with his mobile phone. If the latter, you become the "slave" of friends, family, society in general and those with commercial interests in making money out of you.

it's older than my MGB, so I think it counts.

But not necessarily good ones. Internet and text bullying seem to be acceptable for some. Taking videos of accidents, etc. rather than seeing if you can do something to help, even if it is calling the emergency services or just getting out of the way. Then posting said videos on social (?) media sites, sometimes causing more grief and unhappiness for those involved or their friends and relations. Their was a recent video shown on BBC local news of a bus that had caught fire on the A11 and been burned out. The driver had managed to pull into a apparently and got out unharmed (it wasn't in service) but it was notable that no one had stopped in the layby to offer assistance. It seems that society is becoming more ME, ME, ME than before, with less consideration for and of others.