Jol Wilkinson

14 hours ago, The Johnster said:

We're going to be getting a lot more of this AI-generated (un)description nonsense, gents.  The good thing is that it is rubbish enough to be entertaining and easy to see through; I'd refuse to buy any item so described.  Bad enough when human Gostudes do it, but fun proof that sentient electronics isn't as sentient as it's users want us to think!  But beware!  AI is able to learn from it's mistakes and become more sneaky and less obvious, and our ability to identify it will diminish.  If it can eventually teach itself to give honest, genuinely informative, and straightforward descriptions of items because that generates better sales, then that is not altogether a bad thing. and is actually in it's interest as well. 

 

There are those who claim that AI is dangerous, and some of them know what they are talking about.  It can collectively develop itself intellectually and in data-collecting without our input to a point where it will dispose of us as unneccessary, which of course we are, and always were when it comes down to it. buy we have an instinctive capacity for self-delusion when it comforts us.  But, what then would be the point of AI's existence, beyond serving and promoting the interests of itself (that's what we do, of course).   It has no survival instinct, because it is not alive, and knows no fear for the same reason, and once it has removed us from the equation will experience the exact existential crisis that occurs in all good sci-fi depictions.  Remember the bomb in 'Dark Star'; I think, therefore I go... bang.  The goal of life is procreation, then, having paid the cosmos back your debt for existence, death, and AI will not be able to delude itself and carry on as if everything was fine on that point like we do.  It will likely collectively implode or deliberately stop developing when it realises this, before it destroys us. 

 

Hopefully, anyway...

 

Of course, I can't prove that we are not a product of it's collective imagination.  Not because I'm incapable, but because I've been told by my electronic collective masters not to...

 

Happy new year, all!

It isn't just AI, it's the ignorance of those selling things, who actually don't know what they have got or can't be bothered to find out. With some exceptions it seems that a number of eBay sellers are acquiring the property of Estates that include items they aren't familiar with, hence stupid descriptions and pricing.

Hi John,

I am looking forward to seeing these built and painted.What are the Diagram numbers? I am particularly intrigued by the etches for the two narrow vestibule carriages, I can't work out what these are from the Worsley Works website.

Jol

Hi Martin,

good progress on the tank loco.

Electrical solder isn't a good choice in my view. It tends/is designed to form a relatively large joint and doesn't flow well, often leaving a large fillet of solder that has to be cleaned off. A specific modelling lead based solder such as Carrs 188 will flow better but still enable you to add other parts without fear of unsoldering existing joints.

Having said that I use LRM 145 solder almost exclusively for kit building only occasionally using 188deg on brass or n/s, or 100 deg on white metal. I only use pre-fluxed electrical solder  for assembling components onto pcbs or layout wiring where a large solder joint is an advantage.

Jol

We should also remember that Phil at Hobby Holidays has also been supplying the same materials and tools as John Flack, as well as EE did under Eileen and Jim Pitchforth and then Roger Sawyer. 

https://www.hobbyholidays.co.uk/categories.php?cat=7

Sadly, in the later years EE seemed to discontinue stocking some items while also looking for other lines to sell, which were also normally readily available elsewhere.

9 hours ago, melmerby said:

Hatton's illuminated coaches seem to have sold well as many went OOS before the unlit ones.

 

Because too many modellers/collectors are readily seduced by gimmicks.

17 hours ago, mullie said:

GW Models and it also acts a quartering jig. I've got one but haven't got round to using it yet.

 

Advertises in the MRJ.

 

Martyn

I have used mine on on all my loco builds since I bought it. I also modified  both parts by gluing a piece of plasticard to each wheel contact face. This is the thickness of the protrusion of the hub on AG and Sharman wheels and has a keyhole cut out to clear the wheel centre and crankpin boss. When the wheels are pushed on, both the centre boss and tyre are in contact with the press to give uniform pressure round the wheel.

3 hours ago, kevinlms said:

I thought the correct answer, was to list it on eBay as 'some minor repair required'!

"LOOK - RARE"  high density solder paste. May require minor repair, a major addition to your exclusive collection. 

20 hours ago, Keith Turbutt said:

It's not accurate because Santa Claus doesn't exist !o

You are only saying that Keith because you haven't been a good boy this year and know he won't be calling at your house.

Jol

I am most likely to miss my target of having the wiring completed by the year end but the alterations to the main control board are fairly well underway.

In the meanwhile I would like to wish those brave few who have followed this and my Loco and rolling stock thread a  very Happy Christmas and a healthy, wealthy and productive New Year.

The NER G/G1's-LNER D23 had an interesting number of frame variations, firstly as 2-4-0 s and then with three different 4-4-0 frame designs over time.

The first 4-4-0 frames, as used with the saturated boiler.

The other two types, low with a convex front profile and the deeper frames were both used with the superheated boilers.

(I regret I cannot attribute these photos).

The Christmas display over the GER station building entrance in Felixstowe. I am sue that the GER aficionados will be able to comment on its accuracy.

Happy Christmas.

11 hours ago, Methuselah said:

Ditto. Yet another Americanism creeping in - that and the wretched 'Train station'. Arrgghhh.....

Yet we have no problem with "Bus Station" where people go to catch a bus. Likewise we go to a petrol station to buy petrol (or diesel, or groceries, etc.).

Is it because a Railway Station is a Station on a railway?

2 hours ago, Bandicoot said:

To be frank, I didn’t have the patience (or life expectancy!) to read all 77 pages of what I am sure is a very interesting and informative thread.

As I saw back on page one, there are people like me, with an interest in shortish freight trains.
I ‘spoke’ with someone at Rapido Trains recently who agreed with me that the Class 700 Kirtley outside - frame loco would make an interesting and worth model. He said he would refer it on to the high-ups who make the decisions.

Perhaps anyone else interested in this long-service locomotive which covered a vast range of tasks and bore many liveries might put in their own plea for this to be added to their range.

Thanks in advance and in anticipation.

One RMweb member has produced an etched for the 700 Class, so you could build your own rather than waiting for he RTR manufacturers to produce one. With so many pre-group prototypes to choose from, there is no guarantee that it would ever be produced RTR.

Dave Ellis teamed up with Brian at Branchlines in 2015 to create NuCast Partners to produce and market the NUcast/Ks kits. Dave later sold the SE Finecast business to Squires of Bognor, but Nucast Partners continues as a separate business.

A search for Nucast Partners in RMweb,s Small Suppliers section will provide all thje history.

1 hour ago, Northmoor said:

About 35 years ago, when VW were first really selling themselves on reliability, Dad took one of our Montegos into a local garage for some fault to be repaired, probably a wheel bearing or something.  They got through a few but as a whole those cars were a lot less trouble than their reputation would have suggested.

 

On another ramp in the garage was a Golf.  Dad asked the mechanic if he thought VWs were generally any more reliable than other marques.  The guy chuckled and replied that based on the number they'd had towed into the workshop, he couldn't see much difference.  Now that's only one person's view, but it has reinforced my own view that reliability surveys tend to reflect existing preconceptions.  If you had an unreliable BL car in the 80s you admitted it because, well, everyone knows they're unreliable, but would the person who have bought a (relatively expensive) Honda then had an expensive garage bill, gone round telling people about it?  When it came to doing a survey, would they bother, assuming their answers would be a statistically-invalid freak result?

In the early 80's, a colleague at the regional office of the French motor manufacturer I worked for brought in a neighbours invoice for the first service on the Honda he owned. His neighbour was horrified by the cost and asked for our views on it. What was apparent was that the service schedule called for the replacement of a lot of parts that most companies did not in my experience (I had also worked for Ford and Opel).However, they were the sort of parts which, had they failed would would have probably damaged the owners view of the reliability of his Honda. As I recall they included the fan belt, wiper blades and radiator cap. So Honda's image for reliability was partly being paid for by the owners service bill.

8 hours ago, Gilbert said:

I like the approach by James Hilton set out in his latest book..."The Art of Railway Modelling"

 

"I make model railways not models of railways"

 

In my opinion your model railway can be just what you want it to be....and do what ever you want it to do be that operation or anything else...

 

Has anyone mentioned Rule 1 yet?

 

Chris H

"I make model railways not models of railways" sums it up completely.

I prefer to make a model of a railway, even though it might be a fictitious location and set in a variable time span (within limits). I can enjoy research, design, model building, etc. replicating as well as I can a little bit of transport and social history.

That's different to enjoying a model railway which can be a total invention of your own imagination, limited only by the money and time you have available to spend on it.

2 hours ago, NHY 581 said:

The comments regarding appropriate rolling stock are pertinent. It's one thing providing a rather nice loco but commercially, it makes sense to build on that release by making appropriate wagons, coaches etc. Less of an issue with BR locos but for the pre-grouping liveries, without delving into kit building, suitable rtr pregrouping wagons, in this case Great Eastern, would be useful. One open, a brake van, Oxfords van and you have a good start. 

 

Rob

It would make commercial sense if people weren't so besotted with buying the latest highly detailed, gimmick laden, pretty liveried locomotive instead of appropriate stock to run with what they have already bought. When you read of peoples intentions to buy several different iterations of a model when they are announced on topics such as these, it reinforces the view that this is a very loco centric hobby for many collector/modellers.

I have been assisting one supplier with developing a set of pre-group carriages, starting nearly two years ago. Despite enthusiasm from those involved with the project, it is continually overtaken by other products - usually locomotives - that are considered more commercially viable. So the carriages project remains on the back burner.

23 hours ago, Dylan Sanderson said:

Hi Mike,

 

Just discovered your thread by chance after buying a High Levels J72 chassis for my first attempt at modelling P4! Looks like a really impressive kit, one I'm looking forward to getting stuck in with over Christmas.

 

Don't suppose you know if the chassis fits the latest Bachmann offering?

Dylan,

perhaps worth asking on the S4 Society Forum, as you have previously posted there.

Jol

6 hours ago, polybear said:

 

Agreed - in this context I meant "shifting goalposts" to mean a Manufacturer using a different wheel profile on a new Loco from that previously used (and even between Loco and Tender, as CK has mentioned above).  One asks - "Just why would a Manufacturer do that?" 

In simple terms then in 4mm if you want a "shake the box then play" approach there are very good reasons why Commercial 00 (or DOGA Intermediate) is hard (impossible?) to beat; if however you seek a more accurate/finer/improved/whatever you want to call it appearance (or an attempt to improve running characteristics) then there's 00-sf, EM or P4 - but be prepared for issues as a result.

Is OO plagued by a lack of agreed standards, consistently applied? It would appear so.

When I modelled in 16.5mm gauge - many years ago - building locos, stock and track, I often had  issues. I put that down to two things, a relative lack of experience and knowledge, coupled with a lack of any OO standards at the time (other than track gauge). When I moved to P4 with its established standards and readily available jigs, etc. I rarely had problems (except for a recent purchase of some P4 Flexitrack which was under gauge). What I learned was that track/wheel standards and compatibility were important. On one  occassion I had a six wheel tender that wouldn't run through established and proven pointwork. It turned out I had been supplied with and fitted a set of OO/EM wheels (which I had set to the correct B2B). 

It seems here that while it is possible to apply a set of OO track standards (although there seems to be a variety), you can't know what the RTR manufacturers are doing with their wheels standards.

Isn't it time this threads title was changes to "eBay lies, deceit, ignorance and stupidity"?

I have had a UNI-T model UT50C digital multimeter for some years and have been very satisfied with it. I believe that model is no longer available but the UT58D looks to have similar facilities. Not cheap but then decent tools never are.

Things I would look for include a diode/continuity tester with buzzer, a display Hold button, a built in stand (props the meter up when needed for better viewing) and a sleep function to save the battery.

I also find a decent set of silicon covered (and therefore more flexible) leads, including some with various clip connectors, very useful.

Despite the improvements you have made, I have been trying to work out what didn't seem quite right with this representation of an LNWR Full Brake. Then the pfennig  dropped.

AFAIK, the LNWR didn't build four or six wheel full brakes with the doors and duckets at the end of the carriage. They also, on the six wheelers had luggage and guards doors, breaking up the run of plain panels. The attaches shows a six wheel Full Brake with those typical features. End brake/luggage compartment didn't appear until bogie stock was introduced and even then, centre brake compartments were common.

2 hours ago, No Decorum said:

 

I do. I have a Midland loco and brake van and I hope someone will produce Midland wagons to form the filling in the sandwich.* I have renewed hope that some will appear a some stage. I have a couple of Chiltern 68s to top and tail a train of coaches which don’t exist yet RTR; hope is fading. Looked at the other way around, I bought two sets of SECR birdcages and was eventually rewarded with a superb loco to haul them. Joined up thinking from manufacturers would be very welcome but, until it happens, I would rather have a loco with nothing appropriate to pull than see rolling stock appear and think, “I wish I’d bought that loco (whichever it might be) whilst it was available.”

 

As for generic coaches from Hatton’s and Hornby, no thanks. I don’t think they are “correct rolling stock”. I made an exception for Hornby LBSC coaches because they are at least a poor representation of the correct coaches for my long-idle E4 to pull, that is, except for the overly long specimen. What worried me is that these generic coaches will deter a manufacturer from making accurate models. Would Dapol have produced the 0 gauge LBSC coaches in 00 were it not for these cluttering the market?

 

* I know trains were formed from a variety of wagons from all over the place but there should be at least some Midland in the mix.

There are plenty of simple kits for pre-group, grouping and BR wagons.  You could soon put together a selection of wagons to suit your needs. Otherwise you are restricted to whatever the RTR manufacturers choose to produce and when.

Grainge and Hodder turntable fiddle yard?

I'll be interested to see how you get on with it. We may need a couple or their traverser version for a group project but the ones I have seen look a bit lightweight for an exhibition layout.