HowardGreen

I think the expected number of Hunslet sales to NGS members is rather less than the potential sales of a similar (but currently hypothetical) locomotive to the world in general, so the numbers being bandied about should make some allowance for amortization of fixed costs over a greater number of potential individual models which could be produced.

...or could it be the number of prospective sale that gave it the "thumbs down"? NER & Scottish prototypes seem to have a reputation of not appealing to many modellers. Undeservedly, I suspect.

I have some Z Gauge models that have rather small motors that would surely fit. Unfortunately, I don't have sufficient rolling stock to test their haulage powers, but the actual J72 was not noted for speed, so appropriate gearing could surely produce a model that would have comparable haulage & speed capabilities to those of then original.

I find it difficult to believe that producing a J72 in N is any more difficult than producing a "Terrier". Didn't Dapol promise a J72 that never materialised?

Not a problem for me. Whilst I prefer maroon to crimson & cream on full-sized coaches, in model form the maroon ones look rather drab & muddy to my eyes. I eagerly await the crimson & cream ones.

I cannot remember ever having seen model coaches with Scottish number prefixes. I'd certainly like to have some - perhaps I should indulge in a little renumbering with decals.

Surely the CC Companies are obliged to comply with the regulations, so how can any payments/reimbursements they may make under Section 75 be "ex gratia"?

My credit card statement doesn't mention Paypal at all, nor does the invoice

Thanks to your contributors' drawing my attention to the fact that Volume 2 had been published (despite my earlier research's having indicated it wasn't yet available), I ordered a copy last week. Disappointed to be informed receipt could be delayed until June (despite the fact that there were supposed to be 2 in stock), I resigned myself to a long wait. Imagine my delight when I was subsequently informed it was on its way, and it arrived yesterday. Somewhat concerned to find 2 typesetting/proof-reading howlers within a couple of minutes and a potential third when looking further into the bnook. Despite what it says on page 7, this volume is NOT divided into GWR & LNER sections, and the text from line 3 of paragraph 2 of the section on numbering systems has been repeated unnecessarily on page 8. OK, so no real harm done, except to my faith in the rest of the printing, but what about the assertion in the photo caption on page 127 that the Diagram 2663 "Tavern Car" No. S7893S was built at Eastleigh in January 1910? I see no justification for this statement in the detailed descriptions of the Diagram 2663 cars in their original guise or as rebuilt to Diagram 2668. I am no expert on the Southern, or on anything else, for that matter, so can someone please give me some reassurance on this?

Hello, Dave. Very sorry to learn of the prospective hiatus in the development of the Class 17. I very much hope that you have been able to secure the tooling that has been produced so far and that you will soon be able to get the project under way again and thus recoup your losses. Reading between the lines, it would appear you have fallen foul of the sometimes ruthless business practices of some of our new partners in the Orient. If this is the case, it might help others avoid the same pitfalls if you were to inform the Department of Trade & Industry (or whatever name it goes by this week) and/or the Chamber of Commerce (whether or not you are a member).

The way I heard it, it was an Englishman, a Scotsman and an Irishman. But I don't think they're allowed to drink together any more.