aardvark

I've just posted an open question about track weathering colours, as they are currently available in Australia, under the Weathering, Painting & Transfers forum, here. Any contributions would be most gratefully received.

OK. Finally, here's the pic of the three-way turnout at Banff station, thanks to and copyright by GNoSRA. I must stress that they delay was not theirs, but mine. Since making the decision to wait for the DCC Legacy track to become available, I find a general decrease in enthusiasm, and an inclination to put most things into the "do it tomorrow" list. This post has been on of this things on that list. Recently, I have noted a pic of a three-way at Peterborough North, on post 227 of the Peterborough North thread. So it seems that such turnouts were not unknown in practice, but were perhaps uncommon. It seems likely that a three-way will not be high on the DCC list of trackworks to release, and so I will probably wind up using a Peco code-75 asymmetric three-way turnout to model this feature. Time will tell.

Thanks Gordon: I was sure I could rely on you. I plan on following your lead, now that I know what it is. It all makes sense, and the photo is brilliant - I can actually see the 7/8" strips now, It also makes sense of the Charles Cantrill website, which says that the chamfered strips are "chamfered at 45 degrees down the centre", which previously made no sense to me at all! Good luck with the golf and the pond leak. Good to see you are making the most of the northern summer.

Hey Gordon: Love your thread: my favourite place to learn stuff! Can you give me some info about the cork underlay that you're using. From the previous 100+ pages, I think you use Charles Cantrill products, and from the colour, I'm guessing their Chamfered Cork for Tracklaying, but there are two sizes: 1¾" x 3/16" and 1" x 1/8". I would guess the 1/8" or 3mm option, but that really would be a guess. Their website says "this product is ideal for straight track laying", but you seem to have no problem making it go around corners. Between these strips, do you use their Cork Sheets for Tracklaying? Many thanks in advance!!

As a beginner in this sport, I've been convinced to consider waiting for the DCC Concepts offering to get to market. Adoption for me will depend on how long that actually takes, and how bored I get waiting, and when the dimensions are published so I can do some planning in AnyRail or XTrack or similar The alternative seems to be C&L flexitrack + Peco code 75 turnouts. Of course, non-beginners already have a layout to be getting on with, so the waiting would be less arduous. Just one person's viewpoint. I don't expect it to be shared by others.

I lied. I've done one other thing in the last month: been to my first model railway show in years, quite possibly 15 years. My son, who is now 24, was in short pants, so it has been a while. I attended the Brisbane Model Train Show, in Brisbane, about 2 hours drive (each way) from where I live. It seems that winter is the season for model shows, It was an experience, that's for sure. The show's promoters said that there were 45 layouts there. I'm not sure the show was big or small, or whether the count was correct, as I wasn't counting, and wasn't at all interested in the kiddie stuff or Lego layouts. Most of the layouts at covered Australian locations, with US locations coming second. I don't think I saw one UK location. Australian models are all HO, not OO. There was (for me) a surprising level of support for modeling Australian railways, but then I am remembering the state of the hobby 15 years ago. The one UK-related stand was the British Railway Modellers of Australia (Inc), which had a single bored looking chap sitting on a stool reading a book, a couple of static models, and no layout. An intelligent person would have gone to a UK show while I was wandering around your country, which means I didn't even think of it at the time. An unrelated thing worth noting at this time is that I have re-decided to avoid building turnouts for this first layout. Yes, I said that before, but some of the preceding posts have sent me off in a paroxysm of confused thought, which ran something like this: I don't want to build turnouts: I wouldn't know what to do, I haven't soldered anything in years, don't have any gear, and it's all way too hard. But RMWeb posters say it's not that hard. Maybe I could try just one turnout and see how it goes. I'm going to need to buy a soldering station anyway to solder droppers. One that I won't use on the layout, so it won't matter when I screw it up. That's stupid: what if I don't screw it up? One for the fiddle yard maybe, where it wouldn't be visible. But then, if it was any good, it should be in the scenic part. Ok, just one turnout for the scenic bit. As a trial. I could do the 3-way turnout, as there aren't really any good symmetric 3-way turnouts in code 75 anyway. Building a 3-way turnout is probably considerably harder than building a 2-way turnout, so maybe not. Maybe I could do a 2-way turnout as a practice, then the 3-way. I could build all the 2-way turnouts I need, then the 3-way. There aren't that many turnouts in the layout anyway. I haven't soldered anything in years. I don't have any gear. It's all way too hard. I don't want to build turnouts. Honestly, I suspect that there will be more than enough challenges to get the layout built and engines are rolling stock rolling smoothly over it, and probably quite a period of time required. And that's before I tackle scenicing. I think a relevant point is that I'll expect to be doing all this solo, with only the populace of RMWeb as a safety net. I'm still searching for a club within a reasonable distance of where I live, in the hope that there might be someone within reach who might know what they're doing and be happy to share some pointers (or help fix my blunders). Anyway. The current decision (which could change tomorrow) is either C&L Flexitrack + Peco turnouts, or DCC Concepts flexitrack and turnouts. I suspect the choice will come down to how quickly the DCC products get to market versus how bored I get waiting for them and/or how hard is it to model them in any model CAD software like AnyRail or XTrack. Does anyone know where there is any validity in my understanding that initially DCC will only offer B6 turnouts? (edited: just discovered that DCC Concepts will offer flexitrack as well as turnouts)

A beginners attempt to model 1950's Banff, based on the design in Ian Futers most excellent book Modelling Scotland's Railways, described here. The layout is still in the thinking stage.

Must be about time I shared the amazing progress on this layout, Or maybe I should just share what I've actually done Following on from post #46, I've acquired the non-corridor composite and brake that I was looking at. Yes, still no track, and yes, that's the missus photo-bombing the shot. The other major activity was to join the GNoSRA. Those wonderful gentlemen have provided a CD with years of back issues of their publication Great North Review as well as a goodly collection of images of the Banff railway station. Some of these images are very interesting, most noticeably one of the goods sidings showing a 3-way turnout. I'm still a rank beginner at this sport, and had the understanding that 3-way turnouts only existed thanks to modeller's licence and the need to squeeze as much as possible into limited space, so I was really surprised to see one in real-life! I suppose that the 3-way at Banff existed for exactly that reason: the need to squeeze as much as possible into limited space. Some of the other images have caused me to re-think the Ian Futers-based layout shown in post #9. For example, there is a significant distance between the goods shed and the preceding turnout at the end of the goods sidings: so much so that the goods sidings might easily have been used as a run-around without the need for the loco to endanger the wooden shed. Of course, Ian Futers artwork is his impression of how he might have modeled Banff without actually having done so If I can, I will post some of the pics here, but I need to check with the GNoSRA first about copyright.

Thanks Andy: really appreciate your input to my deliberations. While I still suspect that building points from kits is still one step too far for my first layout, I do find myself weakening, just a trifle. Should I presume you are talking about copper-clad? If I was going to retain Peco points but use something more realistic for plain track, I think that C&L would get the nod over SMP, just because they offer a thick-slippered version that (I guess) would mate well with the thick-sleepered Peco points. It would seem that C&L thick-sleepered product is the market that Peco is attacking. On the other hand, SMP track is thin-sleepered, and would require packing to mate with Peco points, Otherwise, my readings suggest that the difference between C&L and SMP flexitrack is pretty marginal, and probably religious, Choosing a RTR loco and coaches was relatively easy as there were far fewer choices that were provably correct. Choosing RTR track seems to be a more subjective thing: how much do you want to spend to achieve an arbitrary degree of realism? If you're really keen on authentic-looking track, then you're probably not doing OO anyway. However, the bottom-line cost of the various options is measurable (excepting Peco's BH flexitrack), at least for a specific layout. Mine has 8 points and 8 yards of flexitrack (thanks AnyRail): Option #1: Peco FB code 75. £120 Option #5: C&L Finescale. £916 (RTR), £352 (kit) Option #6: C&L BH flexitrack with Peco FB points. £148 Option #7: SMP Scaleway track with Marcway points. £267 (RTR), £107 (kit) Hmmm. (edited for English)

So, that's RTR loco and coaches all sorted. Next on the list is RTR track. Originally, when I first started thinking about a layout, I just figured I would use Hornby track, since that was what I had when I was a kid. Some reading soon showed that nearly nobody used Hornby track, so I switched to Peco SetTrack. More reading identified Peco Code 100 as more realistic, then Code 75, which is what appears in post #1 of this thread. As a beginner, I really want to stick with RTR track rather than kit- or scratch-build custom track. I am sure I will have more than enough challenges as it is, so RTR track is one corner that I am happy to cut, I might well tackle hand-built track on the next layout (presuming I make it through this one). Recently, one RMWebber asked whether I was going to wait for bullhead track, and this has propelled me to investigate the whole bullhead vs flatbottom rail question: a question that I was previously blissfully unaware needed to be asked, much less answered. My head still hurts. I am certainly convinced that BH is the way to go if I wish to be even vaguely accurate in my intended modeling of Banff in the 1950's, while the track offered by the major manufacturer's is all FB, and therefore technically wrong for me, I'm also aware that there is a major thread here discussing the pros and cons surrounding the Peco announcement of BH track, but I have not gone there in an attempt to preserve what little of my sanity remains from the religious arguments that lurk there. As with the loco and coaches, the following is meant to be a pragmatic analysis of what is available and from where, what it costs, and whether it is worth it. Of course, that last bit is a purely subjective judgement, and there will be readers that will not agree with my summations. Also, it is highly likely that I have missed something, or misunderstood something, Please correct me on all counts. Option #1: the existing Peco FB code 75. The pros are that its readily available, even in Australia, cheap and well-known by all including CAD software. The big con is everything about it is wrong: profile of the rail, sleeper width, length and spacing. From what I've seen in comparison photos, the rail profile is not that big a thing, but the other problems remain, Option #2: Peco FB code 75 with adjusted sleeper spacing using a jig from PH Design. I had previously thought I might take a swing at adjust the Code 75 sleeper spacing. It sounds a bit tedious, but otherwise feasible with a jig. However, the resulting track would still have sleepers that are too thin and too short. Option #3 is the announced Peco BH code 75. Sadly, Peco won't be doing points anytime soon, and I'm not sure I buy Peco's assurance that the flexitrack will be available in late 2016. Hornby and Bachmann never seem to be able to meet their promised availability dates, so I have trouble believing Peco, but that's just me. I am really unsure how obvious the difference between Peco BH flexitrack and FB points would be once ballasted, but I have to guess that the sleeper spacing will still be fairly obvious. Option #4 is Peco BH code 75 flexitrack with DCC Concepts points. As I read the DCC announcement, they will offer B6 points, which are roughly equivalent to Peco long points. As with the Peco BH flexitrack, this is promised real soon now, or perhaps sometime this year. DCC currently sell pre-cut, etched and pre-tinned sleepers for A5, B6, B7, B8 or B9, plus crossings and slips, so perhaps kits for all these might not be too far behind. Option #5 is C&L Finescale. C&L provide both BH flexitrack and RTR points, but the points are seriously expensive, and probably outside my budget (whatever that is). Option #6 is C&L BH flexitrack with Peco FB points. Similar to option #3, but without the indeterminate wait. Option #7 is SMP Scaleway track with Marcway points. While Marcway points are dearer than Peco points, they are significantly cheaper than C&L RTR points, and are probably affordable for the likes of me. This seems to be a no-brainer option for any skeptic of Peco and DCC delivery schedules. The con is that Marcway points are not included in the AnyRail libraries, so it would seem that I cannot plan my layout with them. Paper templates are available for purchase, although I don't understand why the templates aren't available for download, but I suppose it's their business and they are free to do as they wish. I have read that Marcway 60" points are roughly equivalent to Peco long points, but have no idea about the other sizes. No idea what to do as none of the options are particular brilliant. Perhaps I should just go with Peco FB Code 75 after all. There would be few in Australia that will be able to tell the difference anyway. (Edited: added details of DCC Concepts pre-cut timbers)

Well, knock me down with a feather ... who would have thought I'd get something right Actually, it's not that surprising as I had a pretty good hint from Ben Alder, but it is good to understand what I am talking about (sometimes). Thanks Andy: I wouldn't have thought about the need to renumber coaches, but now that I understand a bit about the renumbering, it does make sense.

As promised: here's a photo of the progress on my layout ... Well, it is progress, of sorts. And yes, I don't have any track to sit it on as yet, but that's another story. Now that the choice of a RTR loco is sorted, it's time to move on to RTR coaches. This is actually more difficult. The lifecycle of locos is well documented on this internet thing, but not so with coaches. Moreover, while the loco numbers are prominent and easily read in many photos of Banff, coach number are considerable less readable, and that's when you can see the coaches at all. I read here at the Scottish Railway Preservation Society, that Those clever, economic Scots. So I did a bit of a search for non-corridor coaches and came up with the foilowing list of possibilities for Banff in the 1950's, all of which are Hornby product. I skipped the Dapol Staniers, 1st class-only coaches, and anything in teak, crimson & cream, LMS crimson or with a lavatory, since I don't think any of those made it to Banff. R4577B Thompson non-corridor brake third E87231E in BR crimson R4650 Gresley suburban brake third E86099E in BR maroon R4653 Thompson suburban brake third E87092E in BR maroon R4658 57' non-corridor composite M16623M in BR crimson R4659 57' non-corridor third class M11703M in BR crimson R4678 57' non-corridor brake third M20769M in BR crimson R4678A 57' non-corridor brake third M20770M in BR crimson R4689 57' non-corridor composite M16574M in BR crimson (pre-order) R4690 57' non-corridor third class M16574M in BR crimson (pre-order) R4691 57' non-corridor brake third M20787M in BR crimson (pre-order) R4691A 57' non-corridor brake third M20787M in BR crimson (pre-order) Feel free to make correction and additions. The ones in bold are probably my preferred options, but then again, what would I know?

As someone who has worked with the internet from the other side, it is a truly amazing place. The information that is available to anyone that wishes to look is one of the greatest democratic forces at a time when our political processes seem to be becoming less and less democratic. Look at what is happening with the Panama Papers right now. But I think the greatest think about the internet is that it allows me to form solid friendships with people that I have never, and probably will never, actually meet. This ability to construct our own personal links to people in other countries and other cultures, outside of sanctioned government or media channels, must make the world a fairer, more honest, more compassionate place in which it is worth living, Getting off my soap-box, not only do I have the information that allows me to do an analysis of locomotive classes relevant to the location of my choosing, and to find manufacturers that provide models of those classes, I can research retail sellers around the globe to find one that has the best price (including p&h), the best post-sale services, and to track the delivery. Readers might like to know that I have finally settled on a Bachmann 32-360 BR Standard Class 4 tank for that first-ever RTR loco. Pictures will follow

Can anyone help me understand this diagram? It would probably be a great start to understand the symbols Is that a catch point outside the engine shed? Are the two points in the goods sidings and the one outside the engine shed manually operated? Why are there two numbers besides each point? (sigh - so much to learn) See also: https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/156403-signalling-for-banff-scotland/

Most definitely.

61792 should be a Gresley K2,allocated to Keith from 07/07/1954.

Dang! I was aware of the different Standard class 4's, but still managed to mess it up: thanks for the correction. And I think I agree about the B1's. Combine both of these, my options are considerably reduced.

Continuing on with my search for an initial RTR loco for the layout (and my non-existent collection), I have collated the following information. It seems possible that there are other relevant locos and/or loco classes, or that there are other manufacturers that I am not aware of. If you see any omissions, let me know and I will amend this post. Locos allocated to Banff: Manson D42 4-4-0 (1888) - 6872 (observed 7/1938, until 5/1939), 6810 (observed 5/1939, until 08/1951) Johnson D41 4-4-0 (1893) – 62230 (observed 8/1951, until 07/1954), 62231 (observed 7 & 8/1950) Worsley Class S kit (3mm) Pickersgill D40 4-4-0 (1899) – 62272 (observed 7/1954, until 11/1954) Worsley Class V kit (3mm) PDK 54 kit SE Finecast (Nucast) kit CDC Design McIntosh BR Standard Passenger/CR 439 class 0-4-4T (1900) – 55185 (observed 4/1953, 11/1954, 7/1955 & 10/1958, until 07/1960), 55221 (until ????) Alba Railways kit DJH Model kit Locos pictured at Banff: Pickersgill D40 4-4-0 (1899) – 62262 (Keith until 10/1955), 62277 (Keith between 07/1951 and 06/1958) Worsley Class V kit (3mm) PDK 54 kit SE Finecast (Nucast) kit CDC Design Johnson D41 4-4-0 (1893) – 62251 (Keith until 06/1951) Worsley Class S kit (3mm) McIntosh BR Standard Passenger/CR 439 class 0-4-4T (1900) – 55185 (Keith between 11/1952 and 07/1961), 55221 (observed 7/1960, Keith between 05/1952 and 07/1961) Alba Railways kit DJH Model kit Riddles BR Standard Class 4 Tank 2-6-4T (1951) – 80114 (Kittybrewster between 05/1957 and 07/1960, Keith between 07/1960 and 07/1961) Bachmann Standard Class 4MT 2-6-4T 32-354 (late: 80002), 32-357 (late: 80079), 32-359A (early: 80092, pre-order), 32-360 (late: 80121), 32-360A (late: 80104, pre-order) Riddles BR Standard Class 2 2-6-0 (1952) – 78053, 78054 (Keith between 12/1956 and 7/1961) Riddles BR Standard Class 4 2-6-0 (1951) – 76104 (Kittybrewster between 07/1957 and 07/1961) Bachmann 32-952 (late: 76079), 32-953 (early: 76020), 32-954 (early: 76058) Locos reported at Banff (haven't seen any pictures yet): Thompson B1 4-6-0 (1942) – 61348 (Kittybrewster between 06/1949 and 02/1957) Bachmann 31-712 (early: 61000, split chassis), 31-713 (late:61003, split chassis), 31-716 (late:61180) Hornby R2998 (lner: 1040), R2999 (early: 61138), R3000 (late: 61243) , R3114 (late: 61270), R3338 (lner: 61310), R3451 (early: 61032, pre-order) Fowler 2P 4-4-0 (1928) – unknown (reported in 1959) Hornby R3028 (late:40663), R3315 (late:40602), R3316 (s&djr: 44), R3459 (early: 40626) Holmes J36 0-6-0 (1888) – 65297 (observed 8/1957) PDK 11 kit Ivatt 2MT 2-6-0 (1946) – 78045 (observed 6/1963) Bachmann 32-826A (early: 46460, pre-order), 32-828A (late: 46526), 32-830A (lms: 6418, pre-order) Additional loco classes that were allocated to Keith: Worsdell G5 0-4-4T (1894) – pre-1948 Bachmann 35-258Z (early 67327; TMC; pre-order) Holden B12 4-6-0 (1911) – pre-1948 Hornby R150, R3430 (lner: pre-order), R3431 (early: pre-order), R3432 (late: pre-order) PDK 41 kit Gresley K2 2-6-0 (1913) – 07/1954 Reid C15 4-4-2T (1911) – 08/1954 McIntosh 3F 0-6-0 (1899) – 08/1954 Reid Glen 4-4-0 (1913) – 02/1956 Worsdell J72 0-6-0T (1898) – 02/1956 Bachmann 31-060 (lner: 8680, pre-order), 31-061 (early: 69001, pre-order), 31-062 (late: 69028, pre-order) Reid C16 4-4-2T (1915) – 10/1956 Reid N15 0-6-2T (1910) – 12/1957 Barclay 06 0-4-0 (1958) – 10/1958 (diesel) It seems that there is a lot of choice available, or there will be, once all the models that are in development actually come to fruition. Ideally, I think I would prefer an LNER or BR early that has been photo'ed at Banff, but I see that that is asking a lot. I suspect my best options are the ones in bold. Edited: removed Hornby R2714 R2716, R3016, R3016A as these are all BR Standard class 4 4-6-0, not 2-6-0. Thanks pH. Edited: adding Bachmann 32-953, 32-954. Edited: added SE Finecast D40 kit. Thanks uax6. Edited: added CR 439 class 55221, Alba Railways kit, DJH Model kit. Added reported section. Thanks Orange Cat. Edited: added allocation information from http://shedbashuk.blogspot.com.au Edited: added Bachmann 35-258Z Edited: added observations from Steam Days #395 July 2022 p62

Thanks to you both for your input. It will come as little surprise that I have yet to spend anytime thinking about operations: I'm sure that the staff at Banff figured it out years ago edcayton's post propelled me to read the signalbox forum page referenced through a broken link from the page given by Ben Alder (here: http://forum.signalbox.org/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1461), which explains that locos would never have entered the (wooden) goods shed because of fire risk, indicating that neither passenger or goods trains used run-arounds, and that both must have used gravity shunting. Greenock and District Model Railway Club used a Beetle in their Inverboyndie layout (Hornby magazine, Aug 2015). Putting the Beetle in a brake carriage and a High Level motorising kit in a brake wagon would add some authenticity to the result. However, I'm pretty sure I will start with Hand-of-God gravity shunting, assisted with DCC-implemented automated decoupling. I have had moments where I have contemplated a sloping layout as a scenic feature, but a) I don't have any info about what the slope should be, and b ) the slope might be hard to notice in the model and hence really not worth the effort involved. Maybe I could just jack up one end of the layout

So, I did my research, but there are probably e-zines and providers that I'm not aware of. If anyone cares to fill in the gaps in my research, I will amend this post. I think what I wanted was to be able to download PDFs, but clearly that isn't possible, probably due to avoid people copying without paying for the copies. Next best for me would have been on-line access, as I have a Windows 7 laptop and don't much fancy trying to read a whole zine on my smartphone. My wife has a tablet and an iMac, but I would prefer not to have to use them, if at all possible. Sadly, on-line access seems to only come through pocketmags.com, and does come at a bit of a premium. Zinio seems a great deal for the next couple of weeks, if you like Model Rail. BRM Itunes.apple.com Single: £2.99 6-month subscription: £16.99 Annual subscription: £32.99 Google app: android Single: £4.04 ($7.49) Monthly subscription: £2.96 ($5.48) Annual subscription: £32.61 ($60.43) Pocketmags.com: apple, android, windows 8.1/10, online Single: £4.31 ($7.99) Monthly subscription: £3.23 ($5.99) 6-month subscription: £19.42 ($35.99) Annual subscription: £36.69 ($67.99) Hornby Magazine Itunes.apple.com Single: £2.69 ($4.99) Monthly subscription: £2.05 ($3.79) 6-month subscription: £13.49 ($24.99) Annual subscription: £25.36 ($46.99) Google app: android Single: £3.23 ($5.99) Monthly subscription: 2.41 ($4.47) Annual subscription: £24.98 ($46.29) Pocketmags.com: apple, android, windows 8.1/10, online Single: £3.23 ($5.99) Monthly subscription: £2.69 ($4.99) 6-month subscription: £16.72 ($30.99) Annual subscription: £31.29( $57.99) Model Rail Greatmagazinesdigital.com: apple, andoid 3 issues: £9.00 Annual subscription: £29.00 Itunes.apple.com Google app: android Single: £ 2.78 ($5.15) Annual subscription: £25.86 ($47.92) Pocketmags.com: apple, android, windows 8.1/10, online Single: £3.23 ($5.99) Annual subscription: £33.99 ($62.99) Zinio.com: apple, andoid, windows 8/10 – less a 40% discount until April 16 Single: £2.99 Annual subscription: £29.99

Sure glad you're back with us again.

Yes, there were quite a lot of changes made over the years. I see this early version not only has a line down to the quayside, but also only a single passenger platform, with the loco shed only reached from that platform via a turntable. Must have made for interesting operations. I might guess that after disembarkation, that the loco pushed the carriages back up the hill for gravity shunting, then nipped into the loco shed spur while waiting for the coaches to return to the platform. However, I will contain my excitement. As in my previous, I am still looking for a reasonable RTR loco to begin with for a 1950's era layout, Moving to 1866 might make things just a tad more difficult (edit for typos)

Where's the "that's totally awesome" button? I thought the loco number looked like 80x4, but wasn't thinking about a 5-digit number. Makes sense now. This is quite exciting for me as I have been wondering which loco I might start with. I know that a D40/41 would be the prototypical smart choice, and that these are available as kits, but being an absolute beginner I really would like to start with RTR and work up to kits, especially loco kits. I'm pretty excited to see that this seems to match the announced Bachmann 32-360A Standard Class 4MT 2-6-4T, meaning that there is at least one RTR loco that was actually in Banff, despite it probably not quite being my era and that the Bachmann loco isn't actually available. Close, but no cigar - but most definitely exciting! cheers!

Just seen two pics here of locos leaving Banff that I haven't seen elsewhere. The pics are copyright, so here's a link to the page so you can see for yourself. http://tour-scotland-photographs.blogspot.com.au/2014/07/old-photographs-railway-station-banff.html The first pic looks like a D40/41 to my beginners eye, but the second one I'm even less sure of. Anyone?

Thanks John! There's always the danger of a little knowledge being dangerous, so I am really grateful to get your feedback. cheers!