Ian Simpson

The problem is that Kier / Labour aren't exactly enthusing voters either. I'm usually fairly optimistic about the resilience of our political system, but I do think we're in a pretty bad place at the moment. The Conservative membership seems poised to select a second fantasist in a row and the main opposition party is unwilling to come up with any interesting or inspiring policies. I don't think the next two years are going to improve our dwindling trust in the political process.

Thanks, Reg. I think we probably are in agreement on this, it's just the sloppy language I used makes me look obsessed with the economy. I do think equality and fairness are economic issues as well as political ones, but they aren't completely separate spheres and in a mixed economy there's got to be a lot of overlap. The theoretical argument that free markets always maximise social benefits looks like smoke-and-mirror rubbish, so I don't have any problems with democratic governments using economic tools to achieve politically desirable outcomes like greater equality. In fact they should be doing this. As an aside, Marx thought the tendency of free markets to concentrate wealth in fewer and fewer hands made the eventual collapse of capitalism inevitable, so there's a left-wing social policy perspective that argues the State has no choice but to keep redistributing some of the dosh to the rest of us to keep the show on the road. So there's an economic argument for redistribution as well as an ethical one. Oh for the days when well-read Conservatives knew their Marx (and well-read socialists their Hayek)...

Taxation's just an economic tool; sometimes it needs to go up a bit, sometimes it can come down a bit. I'm sure most of the leadership contenders know this, but it seems only Sunak is willing to hint at it in the debates. How did we get to such a ridiculous position? I've always thought New Labour made a strategic mistake in the 1990s and 2000s when the Blair / Brown governments preferred to fund public services through stealth taxes and dodgy public accounting instead of making a strong political case for a high tax, high welfare regime. It might have been electoral cowardice by the Millbank policy wonks, it might have been intellectual dishonesty by the politicians, it might have been a pragmatic response to the household-economy rhetoric of the Thatcher years; it was probably all of them. Since then, the Labour Party has always preferred telling us that other people should pay for our improved services. No wonder the comfortably-off now have a baseline belief that they (we) somehow deserve tax cuts, and that paying our taxes is a burden rather than an investment. So when the Conservative Party (who are basically the weirdly dysfunctional family across the road that holds noisy arguments between itself over batsh:t stuff no one else cares about) tells us that we need tax cuts, Labour can't offer a coherent counter-argument to the economic stupidity.

I suspect I might be more sympathetic if Bozzo made DMUs out of wine crates, rather than buses: Boris Johnson says he makes models of buses to relax - YouTube

Yes, of course it can, and not just because London is one of the great cities of the world. It might be unfair to modern Rwanda to harp on historical events, but I don't remember any major genocide in London during the 1990s. Okay, I admit I fled London myself around this time. But I was a refugee from high house prices, not machete-wielding bigots.

A remarkably good recording, if it really is from 1894: Ed Favor was a popular singer in the 1890s and 1900s, so it probably is an accurate date.

I guess no town is going to impress you if you're judging it by its conference centre. Certainly not Brighton: Anyway, here's a cheery little railway story to help us get over it: 'Caring' Great Western Railway conductor lets Ukrainian refugee girl on train without ticket in brilliant gesture (msn.com) Now I have to go and fake up a Ukrainian passport. Have a good weekend, everyone!

That is very nice, Javier! Is there a commercial chassis that could be bashed for this loco?

I'm going to second Johnster here. Although I see it's possible to apply on someone else's behalf, so I suppose none of us is completely safe.

Next time Bodge gets caught out doing something dodgy, he'll probably suggest going back to £ s d. I expect we'll be back to groats and hides of land by 2025. If I sound a bit grumpy today, it's because I've just found out I model in a scale of 0.1378 inches to the foot.

NSWGR Class N67, [Class N67 No.71 locomotive] | NSW State Archives Looks as if the class was even more flexible than the Terriers:

Yes, absolutely (apart from it being an important point, of course!) If the Glorious Revolution was about anything, it was about Parliamentary Sovereignty. Whereas a hundred years later the American rebels had become suspicious of both the Crown and Parliament. Hence the Constitution and the separation of powers to take away the pre-eminence of parliaments.

This probably doesn't add anything to the debate, but as a pedantic tangent our own Bill of Rights did contain a right for Protestants to bear arms. (I think it got in because Charles II and James II had previously disarmed some individual Prods who were unfriendly towards them, plus it was seen as a way of avoiding a standing army at a time when some folk could still remember the English Civil War). The difference being that it wasn't an unconditional right, and Parliament could set the limits on it as it chose: " 7. That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions, and as allowed by law."

That does look very nice! I wish I could cut cobbled sheets so well; and the wooden knob for point control looks very elegant and effective.

Although even Angus Taylor isn't a complete fan of electoral advertising, it seems:

Also, Robbie's Wagons does some POW rectangular tank sides, listed at the bottom of this page: http://www.robbiesrollingstock.co.uk/Tank_Wagons.htm

Ditto for me, I'm afraid. Hey, at least it makes me more woke to my background of "Gold Privilege". 🙂 Edit: Thanks, that was quick! Much appreciated.

Please don't stop, George! The blog exists for everyone to share their thoughts and ideas on early modelling (or just early railways), and I'm sure most of the value comes from the comments. I certainly learn a lot from them. That is a very nice model! I don't know any way to add fluted sides to an existing tender, although very thin plasticard glued onto the tender top at an angle might work for anyone with an infinite supply of dexterity, patience and stoicism. Does anyone have any suggestions?

Funnily enough, I was looking at some photos of Woolston yesterday and thought, as I always do, "I wonder why Hornby / Bachmann haven't made a model of that station!" I guess I might be a bit biased, but it's a lovely little building. (It also reminds me of some of the LBSCR stations as well, such as London Road and Seaford.) As far as I can see, Tite didn't do any work for the SER. I'm not sure who designed the Tunbridge Wells station, but the 1846 building is still there:

I love these glimpses of your modelling, George! That looks very nice.

Thanks, Northroader, that is a wonderful website! I loved the other models as well. The classical architecture used by 1830s railways is one of the attractions of period modelling for me. The Tudor and Gothic trends that followed are architecturally interesting, but to me the clean lines of classical designs look much more elegant. The Dublin and Kingstown Railway did have some wonderful architectural features, as shown on this lithograph from 1834: The Dublin and Kingstown Railway would be relatively easy to model, as it was originally a standard gauge line and the Bachmann John Bull loco (shown in my diorama photos with its leading bogie removed) could be bashed into one of the line's first locos. The atmospheric extension to Dalkey was actually quite successful for a while, and early steam locos would have struggled to cope with the gradients on this section of the line. The Kingstown station is quite attractive: On the subject of early railway architecture, I've always thought the SER's first Tunbridge Wells station (drawn by John Bourne in the 1840s) would make a wonderful compact model:

Yes, there's a good case for a bit more width, especially for scenic development! Y points keep to the length down, but they need more width than other points, hence the skewed angle of the pointwork relative to the baseboard. Having said that, it is possible to run small 00 stock on the layout, e.g. LBSCR Terriers & L&YR Pugs and short wheelbase Hornby wagons.

Thanks, George! It's taken from a panoramic aquatint of Brighton seafront made in 1833: This Panorama – Historic images of Brighton and Hove (regencysociety.org). There's a lot of coloured townscapes and street views from the early 19th century, so it's possible to photoshop a quaint pastel backscene that invokes the period - and of course that's easier if you only need two feet of backscene for a microlayout!

Many thanks, Mikkel! Yes, the plan is to carry out some experiments with couplers first, then move onto rope shunting. The only problem I can foresee at the moment is the light weight of the tiny wagons, so I'll also experiment with optimum weights. I'll post updates on the results.

Bigger isn't always better. Allegedly. So I thought I'd post a couple of photos to show how little space an early layout can need. Okay, an early diorama, to be honest, simply a tuning fork with a kick-back siding that can be operated by rope shunting or a second loco. When doubling up as a French layout, I'll probably call it Pasunmetre instead. At 61 x 10 cms the total footprint is slightly less than a sheet of A4 paper. It's an animal-friendly layout: that "leather" trim is just sticky-backed plastic. Too late for a Blue Peter badge, I suppose. The wagons are by Nigel Hill (scratchbuilt plasticard bodies on commercial chassis) and Chris Cox (white metal kits at 5 & 9 Models).