AY Mod

If it includes the name Mallard, yes. Other A4s are available.

Revolution offers WIA car carriers in 00 and N Revolution Trains is offering the imposing WIA 5-piece articulated car carriers (UIC code: Sefoorss) as its next wagon model in both OO and N. CAD work is complete and once sufficient orders are reached tooling will begin. 60 five-piece sets were ordered by Railfreight Distribution from Arbel-Fauvet of France ahead of the opening of the Channel Tunnel in 1994. The full covering not only offered protection from stones and theft, but also saved time and money because new vehicles did not require wax protection. Although impossible to see from the outside, the units are double-decked and the pale blue covers are raised in unison on self-contained jacks to allow easy loading and unloading. The characteristic angled roof profile is designed to maximise use of the British loading gauge. The WIAs were initially under-utilised, however they operated on various flows to Belgium, Italy and France, and also on domestic traffic between manufacturing plants and domestic terminals or docks for export. Current flows include Minis from Cowley and Jaguars from Castle Bromwich to Southampton Docks. The Revolution model features articulation units designed to enable the wagons to negotiate Radius 2 curves and the customer-fit detailing pack includes a representation of the outer control box if the tension-lock coupler is removed. Revolution’s Ben Ando says: “Transporting motor vehicles has long been an important traffic for the railway, and since we’ve already produced the Cartic-4s and IPAs in both OO and N, it makes sense for us to ‘complete the set’ car carriers.” Revolution’s Mike Hale said: “We’d like to thank DB Cargo for their assistance with this model, and it should be noted that these wagons allow modellers to depict fully-loaded car trains without the need to buy any model cars!”

That's not looking like the way it will play out Les. I've just reviewed the Stanier BG, the passenger carrying stock looks as though it will follow soon and the Duchess after that.

Yes. Obtaining licences to reproduce branding, where necessary, is an integral part of planning products.

Yup; the same as if you fancy a ride in vintage stock - head for the Bluebell, Isle of Wight or Foxfield; no point moaning that you can't experience that on the mainline.

Hopefully this link works (but still needs sorting as you say) https://www.google.co.uk/travel/entity/key/ChkI6rm27Li32cJTGg0vZy8xMXN2Zno0andrEAQ/reviews?ei=UKQVZZemCqSI8LAP2o-W-Ao&sa=X&ts=CAEaBAoCGgAqBAoAGgA

Just join in with the existing topics then rather than telling us we're not doing enough. https://www.rmweb.co.uk/forums/forum/369-25mm-scale-tt120/

Sometimes the parent may be less well informed or placed to see where risks and dangers may be. As an example there have been several instances of children killed on bouncy castles after the wind has caused incident or even the inflatable exploding. Should the parent be responsible for making a judgement on the weather or the safety of the operator? Where does a libertarian stand on such incidents? Conversely there'd be an outcry from some parents if headlines said that bouncy castles are to be banned. I don't know how well bouncy castles are regulated (probably not at all) but would a parent consider any of these possibilities? Unlikely, they just want their kids to have fun but ideally they'd like them to come off the castle in one piece if asked.

That's the second time that you've stated that people should be discussing it more. Around here they have a habit of discussing what they want, when they want. To me, it looks like all you want to do is publicise your material here - rather than engage in dialogue (which there is plenty of in TT:120 topics).

Daily. But not the advertising folk as such; more the implementation of it which falls under the IT department and the impact on user experience. At least you have someone defending against it; try and find one of those on a newspaper website.

OK, so how should websites pay the bills?

In each instance who would get sued if things went wrong? It sounds like you'd be happy to get a discount from someone who cuts corners. Your car service? Your dentist or optician?

On that basis we are saying there is a single culprit to the crime?

To make it more exclusive.