PatB

Not to mention unfortunate gangsters. Or was that a purely north-eastern thing .

Which rather suggests that Elizondo has a bit of a vested interest in keeping the whole gravy train rolling.

I used to have a not dissimilar shot of my maternal grandparents. I'm pretty sure I've still got it, but it's "somewhere". Probably next to the photos I know I have of my paternal grandparents, father and aunt aboard the much more imposing outfit that my grandfather had c1950. A V-twin Matchless Model X with almost double adult sidecar (it was built to contain my grandmother and aunt, neither of whom were large), the body of which was built in the front bedroom of No 2 High Jobs Hill, Crook, and extracted via the window. More prosaically, stuff like this would have been common in those pre-Mini days. I know the Busmar ad is 1960s, but I'm pretty sure that egg shaped design had been around for a decade by then, though possibly with larger, spoked wheel.

ISTR finding that the few remaining ones are listed structures.

Many things were done in Queensland in the 70s that probably should be left there .

Not to mention a set of sidings apparently divulging straight onto a running line. Totally unrealistic.

Well his rather frequent visits seemed quite well received, to the extent that I started to wonder if we'd be continuing the Australian tradition of being a convenient hiding place for members of the British aristocracy too embarrassing to keep at home.

On 50s Road vehicles in general, something often neglected on layouts (presumably due to a dearth of rtp models, is the utilitarian sidecar outfit. I'm aware it's possible to get AA/RAC combos, but the window cleaner's "float" or the massive, double adult saloon used as family transport, both attached to some wheezy sidevalve workhorse would have been relatively common. Given that the aforementioned AA outfits will provide a ready made BSA M21 "tug", and a sidecar chassis, much of the modelling work is already done. 1950s sidecar bodies, being made largely of plywood (oh yes they were; contrary to what the classic bike world would have us believe, elegant torpedo shaped Steibs were a rarity) , would not be a challenging scratchbuild in styrene sheet.

Ah, but you'd need to open it up to everyone with the British monarch as head of state, and the Aussies seem to rather like him, which might even things up a bit.

Nothing that can't be sorted out by traditional means. Or, in this day and age, perhaps by reality TV show, if we really want to give all that messy fratricide business a miss.

Speaking of which, has anyone noticed that we have an ageing monarch, a rather unpopular heir to the throne, followed in line by two estranged brothers, one of whom is living in exile and attempting to build a following? And we've not had a decent war of succession for centuries. If the media play it right it'll be a licence to print money for decades.

I'd guess because it covers models as well.

Finding out that an actress, who you considered an attractive older woman when you were 17, died 3 years ago at the age of 78.

Given that dining trains operate successfully and profitably elsewhere, I think we can safely assume that difficulties with the WSR operation are WSR specific rather than due to the inherent challenges and limitations of operating dining trains.

Given that centre throttle pedal arrangements were de rigeur on very sporting machinery in the 1920s and 30s, methinks the little Fordson had ideas well above its station.

I vaguely remember an article, in one of the classic bike mags in the mid 80s, about an aftermarket electrically operated front brake from the 1930s or 40s. Someone had found a NOS kit and, in the interests of research, had fitted it to his Model U (I think it was). It was, predictably, utterly dire but, IIRC, not really any worse than the standard unit.

There's an enormous 16T wagon thread somewhere on RMWeb with loads of photos, many from your era. It should be possible to track down enough info from there alone. Here's the link

I take it they're having trouble finding a Triang motor bogie with the original 2-start worms .

Many of Freezer's rather appealing tailchaser designs assumed a maximum train length of 4 (or even 3) coaches, so the layout in question was not so very far from the norms of the time.

The most junior and expendable engineer in each of the respective manufacturers.

They may, but I'm having a hard time thinking of a reason, unless the axle loading was something silly. After all, as long as loading gauge restrictions are met, one unfitted 4 wheel wagon, running at unfitted train speeds, is going to behave much like another, given reasonable bearings and maintenance. Given the Scottish penchant for antedeluvian mineral wagon designs, surely the Caley wouldn't have any practical running problems with a reasonably up to date implement wagon.

Maybe they had a reputation for not giving wagons back . More likely might be a loading gauge issue. Did parts of the Caley have particularly restrictive clearances that would be exceeded if the wagon was loaded with any of the portable engines manufactured in GER territory? If so, perhaps a blanket prohibition was the simplest means of dealing with the problem.

I had a not dissimilar experience when toiling up our local railway trail; not especially steep, but a bit relentless. I'd just been overtaken by a group of riders on serious machinery, when we were all passed by what I can only describe as a handsome lady of late middle years, vigorously pedalling a sit up and beg roadster that was probably made for "The Empire" 30 years before I was born. Yes, it had a basket on the front. She breezed by with a cheery "Lovely day for it", in the sort of accent that has caused my memory to insist that she was clad in tweed twinset and green wellies, although this seems unlikely. Well, more unlikely than the rest of it anyway.

Realistically, though, whilst still too frequent, fatal collisions with obstacles are, thankfully, quite rare events. As such, resources may be better spent on projects to improve road/rail separation (elimination of level crossings, basically), and improving crash worthiness of locos and stock. Indeed, in this day and age, how critical is it for the driver to be right at the pointy end? If looking at aircraft tech to improve driver safety, maybe the sort of VR gear that makes drones feasible would be a better option. Indeed, AIUI, driverless train technology is already able to achieve exactly this.

Reading some of the reasons for rejection has bent the needle on my irony meter.