Pteremy

Its no longer August. So silly season is over. Lets focus on getting top class Moguls (as specified) and Prairies (as specified) - and only then dream on.

But is it any good?

Fewer books of any kind in (South) London. Must reflect the fact that a bibliophile can source almost anything via Amazon/eBay/other specialist sites, at sensible prices and good quality from reputable sellers.

Out of interest is the clear 'wrapping' compostable? Feels quite crinkly, as if it might be starch based?

Ah! Then I think I have misunderstood the reference to 'blue and grey' in post #330. Thanks for the clarification.

Sorry folks - mea culpa - should have know better than trust a caption/description. But, assuming that the date is correct, is still illustrative of the livery applied by summer 1968 (which was the point).

Sorry, out of sequence, but example of blue/white livery 26/8/68 (arriving at Minehead) http://www.tauntontrains.co.uk/photos/gallery/class116

I think that my (digital) subscription is good value for money. More so some months than others, but that is always going to be the case in a monthly periodical with a customer base that covers a broad range of interests, and widely differing levels of experience and modelling ability. Why digital? Primarily because I have reached the point in life where I am being very choosy about the physical possessions I give space to. But I have also found the embedded videos (and visual extras) better value than the DVDs.

No. If the activity is only amongst the members of a society then it is possible to be in 'mutual association', on the basis that you cannot make a profit out of selling things to yourself. And as such it is not a business for e.g tax etc reasons. Sales to non-members would be sales to 'customers' and therefore a business.

Yes, worth the wait.

As a 'disinterested observer' i do find these photos ambiguous, not least because the main coach colour is so dark. If i had not read it was so I would never have guessed that the main colour was 'painted teak'! No-one seems the slightest concerned about that. But I do hope that no-one is put off by the absence of lining, whether that is accurate or not. It must have been pretty subtle and therefore potentially poorly rendered on a small scale model, or not that obvious except in close up. And it is otherwise a lovely model that deserves to be a success.

Does this unwind the hybrids? Can we infer anything about livery changes?

To be honest there is no simple answer to this. This is because: - tank diameter varied according to use. In simple terms 'Class A' tanks - for lighter, more volatile petroleum products, discharged from the top of the tank, had larger diameter tanks than those for 'Class B' products, which being heavier, and less volatile, were discharged from the bottom of the tank. - the distinction between Class A and B also has implications for the discharge apparatus that has to be reproduced in any model. - wheelbases varied. For example, the RCH 1927 standard went back to 9ft even though 10ft was already common, and continued to be used. - overtime some tanks were undated e.g. to include walkways for those using discharge apparatus. The existing RTR models (e.g. Bachmann) ignore these subtleties providing Class A and Class B liveries regardless of the features modelled on the tank. But you can find examples of models where the livery and the tank features are a reasonable approximation to prototype - but each one needs to be considered on its own merits. From the diagrams published on line the Oxford models look to be based on RCH 1911, and - potentially the key point - with saddle mounts rather than the Bachmann cradle mounts (which are not quite right). If so they are potentially a significant release, particularly for pre war builds, which continued in use post nationalisation. But, but, but...each one will need to be considered on its own merits.

I do hope that they revisit the decision not to do the revised front end versions (6334 onwards). I can't be alone in having all I want of the current version, in the various liveries released. On a positive note I think that it is good that the numbering in this release matches the prototype accurately.

The Taunton - Barnstaple services remained steam hauled - primarily 43xx and 73xx 2-6-0s - until the end of the 1964 Summer timetable, in September 1964. Taunton based engines, for both Minehead and Barnstaple lines. According to Maggs (The Taunton to Barnstaple Line) all Yellow engines were authorised. Blue 2-6-0 and 4-4-0 tender engines were also authorised but Blue 2-6-2 tanks could not go west of Wiveliscombe. SR N 2-6-0s were regular performers on the line until the end; BR standard 82xxx appeared in the final 12 months of steam.

I had an exchange with MRD in March - tried to buy some buffers but was told they were out of stock - so wait or refund? I opted for refund. I was quite happy with the way this was dealt with. So I would not rush to RMweb shame MRD just yet.

There is a good image of a hybrid set at East Anstey in 1965 at - https://www.flickr.com/photos/110691393@N07/12203790194 And some others in an RCTS thread https://www.rcts.org.uk/features/mysteryphotos/show.htm?img=66-95-26A&serial=59&page=3

I interrupt this exchange with some good news - a long box was finally and unexpectedly delivered this morning. Well packaged and everything there. So my order has been fulfilled. I wish C&L good luck in getting back on top of things. But in doing so I would recommend some transparency in communication. Some people will moan whatever a business does, no matter how contentious. But most of us appreciate the difficulties a niche business presents and have the goodwill for it to succeed, providing there is some form of communication that lets us know how long an order will take to fulfil (or how it is progressing). Silence is a false economy, because it will generate additional progress chasing contact and unnecessary concern.

I also paid for my order (in November 2017) by bank transfer. I don't normally do that, but made an exception in this case because I have bought before (at Scaleforum) and knew (I thought) that i was dealing with a business with a positive reputation. I was in no hurry - and I think I was aware of possible delay, because I recognise that niche products are sometimes like that (as with Ultrascale for example). I am still in no hurry - but my order has to be in the C&L system somewhere, not least the bank records and hence formal accounts - and yet my regular requests for updates are met with silence. If what I ordered is 'out of stock' it would be nice to know. In fact, any sort of communication - other than the automated responses at the time of purchase - would be nice. I know that some businesses are just 'hobby businesses', with no ambition to grow in the way we might expect. But if so they should present themselves in those terms and tailor their activities accordingly. So just going to shows, selling to people in the flesh, would be fine by me. But don't provide a website that appears to provide potential customers with an alternative. And certainly don't take their money if meeting the demand is problematic. The fact that a product may be regarded as 'important' to the modelling community is no excuse for not being honest with that community about how potential demand is going to be met. Goodwill is not infinite.

A waste? Perhaps. But how do the factories learn what 'quality control' means without being called out when they fall short? The 'Parkside by Peco' packaging pronounces that 'This is not a toy' in four languages. Quite right. The top dollar we are now being asked pay for quality railway modelling products is justified, but only if the quality control matches the intent. I am not a rivet counter, but I expect my models 'to look the part'. If Accurascale can help shift the mindset around quality control then that is another reason to support what they are doing.

If you are looking at Western Dragoon, D1034, then according to www.brdatabase.info it was maroon with small yellow panel from 15 April 1964.

On a positive note there do not appear to be any post nationalisation modifications of the sort that were present on the e.g. 7 plank minerals?

Yes, they look lovely, even though not for me. But i have bought some buffers today. So we will see. Looking forward to the next product. Need to keep the momentum up if we are experiencing a real game changer.

I am glad someone mentioned the demise of Military Modelling as it is a salutary experience. As a subscriber all you got was a letter from the publisher with the final edition telling you that you would be receiving a different magazine next month. Nothing about the magazine itself suggested that it was the final one. And the website was switched off a few days later, even though it appeared to be due to stay live until the end of the month (i.e. May). I have no idea what has happened to the content. It may yet appear on the website of the magazine that MM has merged with, but the runes are not good. That website's most recent content was dated 2014! I will see what arrives in the post before cancelling my subscription. But I can't say that I have much goodwill towards the publishers. And the way I have been treated as an existing customer is several orders of magnitude more annoying than a misplaced email shot - which I can just ignore and delete.

Yes. But I see (from Hatton's website) that estimated delivery has now slipped from July (as it was this January) to November/December 2018. Oh well. More time to save up.