MJI

My 1982 deck is very robust despite being a portable.

Also great picture quality.

One problem is that with vcrs they got quite poor build quality by late 80s.

I still have a working 1982 deck.

Was not too bad, just pad by a few minutes.

57 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

I like my clocks to show the right time if possible, and flashing LED displays drive me nuts (back in the 80s I seemed to be the only person in the known universe who bothered to set the clock on his vcr).  There are two battery analogue clocks that don’t though, the layout ‘Cwmdimbath Time’ clock, and one laid on it’s back with the 12 pointing due north, set to 13 minutes after GMT, astronomical time for this longitude; the real time, just to show that I know what the real time is and of absolutely no practical use whatsoever, just because I like that sort of stuff.  

My VCRs had the correct time on them, but I hated when one drifted a few seconds out, had 3 on the go (all used).

9 hours ago, Downendian said:

No they’re not - I’ve recently purchased 3 sets direct from Dapol - the cheapest option.

I used to use them as they WERE my local model shop.

I got my Baby Warship from there.

1 hour ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

 

https://www.dccsupplies.com/shop/class-52-oo-lifting-eye-fret/

 

Mike.

Are they still selling as shop has shut.

29 minutes ago, BVMR21 said:

The Bachmann model isn't really that good, detail is very clunky, the mechanism is not the best, DCC ready variants are rarer than hen's teeth, and generally speaking, the model is rather elderly now.

 

If a new Small Prairie and 57xx Pannier are viable RTR, one does find it unlikely that a 2251 class loco, with provisions for DCC (sound or otherwise) plus a range of other things, would fail to sell.

 

The same goes for a new tooled Hall class, quite frankly the Bachmann model sucks, and the Hornby model is again not worth the paper the price tag is written on. And whilst I echo sentiments that an Aberdare would be good to see (there is a kit available for said model) how many people actually need an Aberdare on their layout? Compared with say a 2251, or a Hall?

 

Though I do not see a 2251 as an immediate imperative, unlike say a Stanier 8F with the Swindon variants, or a Hawksworth County, it is still something that needs to be pointed out as having a rather dated tooling.

This is not me saying that 2251 must be done immediately (same again with the Hall), or that the Aberdare shouldn't be done (I honestly believe to the contrary that it should be done), but more me saying I fail to see how it wouldn't sell if produced to more modern standards.

 

However, now Accurascale has 2 Great Western locos, some passenger carrying vehicles surely cannot be undesirable? The Sunshine stock seem to the coaches crying out in my mind, given Dapol are working on the Toplights, and with Hornby having other Collett coaches as well as the Hawksworths in their range, it would certainly provide a good variety for GWR rakes of coaches, mish mash stuff together.

First spend a day at SVR, then Didcot.

I would push for early 30s flat ended stock due to no one has every done it, plus 6913 was mainline registered.

Another mineral wagon source.

https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:5878139

https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:5760328

11 hours ago, Reorte said:

Not sure if this is really for the game thread but there's an obvious link - anyone else watched the Fallout TV show? Without giving anything away I think they did an absolutely cracking job of it. I've seen some of the criticism and whilst I don't think some of it's entirely invalid personally it didn't really get in the way for me, and overall it deserves the very good reception it seems to have got.

Not yet, I need to resubscribe and pay the £3 fine.

I did try VPN but they cost a lot.

31 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

No, but knowing that the C77 has a fictitious number might be...

I had to look up to find that, 1155 was highest number.

13 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good evening Al,

 

Seen before a few weeks ago, but maybe forgotten by now............

 

 

Is this the same diagram as one of yours? 

 

Built by Peter Lawson from a BSL kit, I'd originally asked £50.00, but now I'm asking £40.00.

 

 

Another ex-GWR carriage from a BSL kit, also now £40.00.

 

 

And a much-detailed/modified/weathered RTR autocoach, now £30.00.

 

Anyone interested, please PM me.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Is knowing

D95

C77

A33

Sad?

40 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

Be aware that part of shank was inset into the streamlined body; if fitted with the full shank length visible, they are to long.

 

Hence Lima's short shanked buffers.

 

CJI.

Thanks , i will try mjt first tomorrow and get a few other bits.

It got left due to fiddly windows, cutting slide covers, and my ongoing eye stuff.

BTW need laser zapping now.

3 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

Normal GWR coach buffers with the square shank. I take it they are the type with 18 inch buffer heads.

 

Comet and MJT do them.

 

https://www.dartcastings.co.uk/mjt/2334S.php

 

https://www.wizardmodels.ltd/shop/carriage/c38/

 

Some photos of the one being restored here.

 

https://kesr.org.uk/donate/gwr-railcar/

 

 

 

Jason

Thanks and i will move somewhere safer

17 hours ago, PhilJ W said:

The things motor mechanics find in cars.

https://www.boredpanda.com/interesting-car-mechanic-finds/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Newsletter_April&utm_term=April_21

9 looks like a Discovery

Does anyone know what buffers were fitted to later GWR railcars?

I have just broken off 3, 2 missing. So need new ones.

I was waiting on brighter weather to finish glazing.

Heads came off, only fell a little way as well, was parked up waiting for better light to complete glazing and transfers

If anyone has a STL I can 3D print as well.

I have had an accident and broken all the buffers on a GWR railcar.

Any recommendation please?

I think I will get some for my next BC rake, rather than mess with Lima or Airfix.

But when doing

ABC

CDEF

BDEF

Getting them matching is important

13 minutes ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

Applies to all 'good books', even the most sensitive filmed adaptions are likely fail at some point, because we all bring our own interpretation of the text. After the Beeb's wild  stab at CLAVDIVS, I was glad  that they didn't proceed to attempt 'Count Belisarius'. That one is safe in my and Asimov's imaginations only...

Book adaptions vary.

I don't like obvious changes which derail believability (streamers do this), like changing gebders, ages, locations. Unless influenced rather than adaption.

A good recent one was The Martian. My internal version was not ruined by the film version.

After posting this it appeared

Some threads are missing from last posted.

Notably Wright writes.

Any idea please?

2 hours ago, 1471SirFrederickBanbury said:

I did once see a class 37 that had some character and an impressive "presence" on the rails.  I do fear though, they seem to be the last/latest locos that I get that feeling from in Britain. 

 

In America thankfully, many are old, loud, if unrefined locos, but some even have enough character that I take their number down.  they mostly serve as shunters, but those old EMD engines are great under the load of massive trains.  My favourite of these is an SD-40, CSX 8351, which seemed louder and more sprightly than the others. 

 

Newer locos (especially big GE ones) feel rather soulless, similar to some of the newer locos and passenger trains in Britain.  At least French TGVs still have some character, if not consistently.

 

Isn't it odd that newer locos are less exciting than older ones, by increasing amounts each time something gets replaced?  Maybe its because they're quieter and less idiosyncratic. 

Diesels which really stood out from first time.

Of course Deltics.

50s

First time on a HST.

Most EE stuff is good.

But Deltics, something else. More presence than almost any other locomotive.

I could hear 19 leaving Cheltenham race course while parked just south of Toddington.

One 1 power unit.

10 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Good afternoon,

 

'Streak', of course. Shouted at the tops of our voices when one of those famous front ends made its presence felt at Gamston, Retford, Botany Bay, Bawtry, Doncaster, Selby, Riccall, Thirsk and Darlington - all the places where I saw an A4.

 

I suppose the epithet was a 1950s/'60s schoolboys' phenomenon - Eric Fry once chided me for using it in his presence; 'Streamliner', he said, but he'd seen them in their pre-War heyday. 

 

Though I rather doubt it, wouldn't it be nice to hear '91'!, '91'! shouted in a pre-voice-breaking squeal at Retford today? 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

We always miss the old trains when they have gone, but I do feel we will not with the current ones, more like domestic appliances.

Look at the love shown towards the last few HSTs.

1 hour ago, Willie Whizz said:

What baffles us with our Samsung TV with Sky dish is that when watching “ordinary” programmes in real-time the sound volume is fine if set around 20. But watching a recorded programme needs turning-up to about 28-30 to be satisfactory, and using our connected DVD player means having to go right up to a volume setting of 40. Weird. 
 

I suppose I might be able to find a rationale and a remedy in the Instruction Manual - except that these days all you seem to get is a Quick Start guide …

With dvd i turn the tv sound to 0, or I get strange echos.

2 hours ago, Chuffer Davies said:

Whilst I would have to agree that the clarity of dialogue on many recorded broadcasts is poor we should recognise that as we age our hearing also deteriorates. In particular it is typically the high frequencies that are increasingly attenuated and it is these frequencies that are required to decipher consonants.  Although I can still function day to day quite well without hearing aids I decided I would invest in a pair none the less.  I now not only hear birdsong and music clearly once more, of relevance to recent comments here, I can better decipher tv dialogue than without them. 
Perhaps it is time for some on ‘hear’ to consider a hearing test?

 

Now back to some modelling…

Regards,

Frank

I find I can hear BBC OK most of the time, but ITV is not easy, because their bit rates are too low, and too much background noise under speech. Especially daytime TV.

2 hours ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

I too will be in that position soon enough, but no worries. So long as the TV speakers manage effective solo voice production, that's good enough for news and serious documentary productions.

 

Everything 'entertainment' is routed through the stereo system, the primary role of which is music reproduction.

 

(I tried surround systems years ago; rejected because there were too many weird artefacts, which it appears those involved in production simply cannot resist. The resulting garbage made of what might have been fine theatre and opera perfomance recordings was a great disappointment.)

I am not running a subwoofer, just five full range speakers. Hifi is the front stereo pair. For films full DTS or DD. Normal TV is just TV speakers.