Wheatley

I think it's a more than a little churlish to complain that a competition set up by, administered by and presumably paid for by the author and publisher of a book requires you to buy a copy of the book to enter. It's like complaining that the 18.83 Challenge was discriminatory to non-P4 Modellers. Yes it was, that was the whole point.

That. I'd rather post it through the door of the nearest charity shop than faff about with that.

Ah, that's a good point actually, mine is firmly in LNER territory.

Conversely my local retailer has sold out and re-ordered twice now, I had to wait for my BTK to come back into stock. The equivalent Comet kit is 45 quid plus maybe a fortnight's worth of free time to build it. Life's too short for that - my two Thompsons will go in the rake almost 'as is' with some re-profiled Hornby Gresley coaches, the time saved means I can concentrate modelling time on building things that RTR doesn't do.

I believe (at least some of) the trains ran whether there was a load for them or not. Given the state of industrial relations in the car industry at the time* you might get away with empties in both directions. (* Or was that all a bit later ? I was 4 months old when the Waverley closed)

Stunning flush glazing, the correct (and very noticeably different) roof profile, proper vents rather than representative blobs, full complement of buffer beam and coach end appendages including optional buckeyes and vac/steam heat pipes, full underframe detail including longitudinal vac pipes, part of the brake linkage represented under the floor and a first class paint job.

Nothing crude about it either, looks like a bog standard Thermit weld.

Exactly, the 'rule' in this case is your conditions of service, not the Rule Book ! It's not doing things like discretionary overtime, working your booked rest day, agreeing to having your shift swapped at short notice etc. If you suddenly start working to the Rule Book when you haven't been before you'll very quickly be on the carpet. A straightforward example in this context would be agreeing to be 'stepped up' to work a slightly earlier service than the one you've booked on for to cover for a missing colleague. Someone else is then 'stepped up' to cover you and so on until either the traincrew supervisor runs out of bodies or the errant colleague turns up having mended his puncture, remembered what shift he's on etc. It happens all the time in normal working.

.

No, I think I've been consistently anti-anti-rivet-counter. Dave(1562) is entitled to his opinion of the model, it's certainly very pretty. What grates is the view that because he's satisfied with it then no-one else is entitled to express a contrary opinion. If he had said "I'm very happy with it and XYZ doesn't trouble me" that's fine, but his inclusion of the word 'bitch' twice in that context suggests a certain lack of tolerance of those doing the criticising. I'm not for a minute suggesting that any other manufacturer is perfect, every RTR release does indeed have issues (possible exception of Hornby's Peckett which seems to be heading for some sort of model railway sainthood) but I'm grateful to the rivet counters and subject matter experts who point out any issues and allow me to make an informed choice on purchases. Some 'issues' bother me, some don't, I can either ignore them, correct them, or build my own. I can overlook the fact that Bachmann's BR cattle van is a scale foot too long for example because the rest of it is very nicely done, but their squashed LMS van really annoys me despite its correct length underframe. But it's my informed choice, and it's only informed because someone took the trouble to cast a critical (in the literal sense) eye over it. It's just a pity that so many of those prepared to critically evaluate products (even the slightly annoying ones) have been routinely shouted down on here so often, for so long and by so many that they've taken their bats elsewhere.

That'll save manufacturers a few bob in the future. "Accepting whatever-you-care-to-throw-at-us Standards".

Good. For Kenton's benefit, the offence was "endangering the safety of persons being conveyed upon a railway" contrary to Section 34 of the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act. It is an absolute offence, there doesn't need to be a complaint from an aggrieved party.

In a working model, surely function has to be a given and everything else a nice to have ? There were similar comments about the O2 that the weight was too far back.

"A beam of light projected onto the plate ensures accurate positioning..." and it's accurately positioning it onto a mark made by two blokes with a bit of chalked string ! Love it !

Just after someone suggested there was no need to panic.

It's very noble of you to explain to these societies which you won't join exactly how they should protect your access to things they don't own or control. I'm sure they'll fall over themselves to comply.

Why not ? the alternatives are that either I as a society member provide the initial capital up front to supply the shop and keep it stocked (via my membership fees) or that a private individual provides the initial capital to supply a shop and keep it stocked, on the off chance that you might want to wander in occasionally and buy a packet of chairs. That doesn't seem fair either. The Scalefour Society clearly show that selling to the public can be viable but it doesn't follow that the other societies should have to follow suit. All the scale and line societies began because like minded individuals got off their a**es and did something about something they cared deeply about. It's entirely up to them whether they share that with outsiders or not, and how.

Go on then, where does one obtain tungsten from, and what do you cut it with ? Will my junior hacksaw do ? For anyone who fancies a go, here's a guy taking more than two minutes and using half a grinding disk to get through a bit of 6mm tungsten rod. Compare with the 10 seconds it takes to get through 8mm iron afterwards. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDlRqIZH7Js Evidently.

Maybe both the people in Balloch/Alexandria who wanted one had bought theirs and he was wondering what to do with the other dozen cluttering his shop up ?

Laminated glass has been specified since 1997,[Edit - on heavy rail] initially with two or three toughened units per vehicle to allow escape. GM/RT2100 currently mandates laminated glass in all publicly accessible areas for exactly the reasons you describe. The 'break glass' hammers should all have gone too. As well as the risk of ejection there was also a risk of uncontrolled evacuation by passengers onto adjacent open lines as demonstrated at Maidenhead and I think Ufton Nervett ?

Because the former exists and the latter doesn't, which makes the name, number, and number of pins somewhat academic. Depends how badly you really want a King I suppose.

The station building is the same basic "small" design as the Lyddle End one, with an extension at the south end. Home Farm is clearly different to the S&C SM's house but if you repaint to match then they would all look part of a whole. Dent is stone but is a brownish/greyish sandstone, not quite sure what the Hornby one is trying to portray ! Even the stations further south in the limestone dales aren't that grey !

But unless someone has posted a link to this topic from the N-Gauge Society forum, for a crowd-funded model it probably does. As far as I'm aware DJM doesn't advertise anywhere except here and his own site, and anyone reading Hattons' and Kernow's ads and the odd bit of supplier news in the mags could be forgiven that he was OO only. Impluse buys from people seeing a model sitting on a shelf or in a dealer's ad are not an option for crowd-funded models, you have to know about it up front. Agreed though that the "no" option is a bit pointless without being qualified. "No because I model the LNER in OO" has no relevance whereas, as you say, 80% of N-gauge modellers voting "No" would be more useful.

I notice this hasn't been answered yet. I.e. by someone who actually knows the answer as opposed to someone speculating wildly and with no more clue than the rest of us.

If that's the intention then I missed the point, apologies. Presumably each 'family' of coaches has its own chassis sprue - it would be relatively straightforward to make a generic Stanier chassis for example with different trussing for the 57' and 60' versions as the battery boxes dynamo, bogies and brake gear etc are common, but more difficult to then include all the various different bits for other companies' 57' and 60' designs. A bit like Parkside where so far I've managed to make 4 free BR Standard vans out of all the spare bits ...