Chuffer Davies

Hi Tony, Firstly can I just say how much I had been looking forward to seeing you at Stafford this last weekend, but I completely understand that your priorities are elsewhere currently. I had the pleasure of being invited to operate David Woodward's modern image EM layout Woodfield Road at the Stafford show. Hopefully you will be at York as usual and we can catch up in person then. Now then you know some of us are not going to let you get away with the above statement about split chassis and their suitability for DCC operation. I accept that there is a complication if you are trying to convert a commercial split chassis to run on DCC because as built some have the brush housings shorted directly to the frames and therefore require an amount of engineering to overcome. Fitting DCC to hand built models irrespective of whether they have been built with split chassis is very straight forward. You and I have always had different approaches to how we choose to build our underframes. You are of the traditional analogue control, rigid chassis with pickups school, whilst I am from the compensated chassis and no pickups school with an increasing leaning towards DCC for loco control. We are both happy with our record for loco performance and we both get enormous satisfaction from how we model so neither of us are likely to change any time soon. Personally I haven't fitted a single pickup to any of the tens of locomotives that I have built in the last 30 years. All my tank engines are built with split chassis and all my tender engines use the American system (loco collects current from one track and the tender from the other) and no one (and I'd be the biggest critic anyway) has ever complained about the running characteristics of my models. Yes I have to ensure that the frames are electrically isolated from the superstructures but any numpty (such as I) can work out how to do this, it is not difficult. The only problem I have ever experienced was with a particular lubricant I started using where the horn blocks on one model stopped conducting electricity. After a thorough clean of the horn blocks and axles and the application of a more appropriate lubricant all was once again well and has remained so ever since. My personal preference for building models this way is because I hate fitting pickups. Whilst I can usually get them to work I could never make them look as tidy as I wanted. I may be strange but I find the uncluttered appearance of an upturned chassis without pickups esthetically appealing as in the following example of an upturned GW 61xx Prairie. So in conclusion can I reiterate that DCC and split/American chassis are fully compatible. As with all DCC installations to avoid damaging the chip you must not allow any of its components to come into direct contact with any electrically live parts of the model. This is true of any DCC fitted model irrespective of your chosen method of pickup and is easily achieved with a bit of forethought. Best wishes, Frank

Hi, Our resident photographer (Derek Shore) brought his camera to club on Tuesday evening and took the following pictures which I thought you might like to see. The following picture is yours truly working on one of three small boards that carry the spiral under the front scenic boards of the layout. The colleague assisting me is Bill (Wyatt Millington) who is responsible for the design of the digital control system for the layout. Bill is also the recently appointed chairman of the EM Gauge Society. The next 2 pictures are further pictures of Russell's mockup of the station building and footbridge. Regards, Frank

Hi Manna, The ash ballast has yet to be weathered and is still in its initial condition as laid directly onto slow drying matt varnish. The painting I referred to is to represent rust on the sides of the bullhead rail. John indeed used a small brush (probably several in fact) to achieve the task, and it took considerable concentration on his part to avoid getting paint onto the ash. Best of luck with your labours... Frank

Progress on Tuesday of this week was very limited as only one member braved the snow and made it into the clubrooms to work on the layout - well done Andrew, and my apologies for leaving it until after you'd got to club to make the decision that I wasn't going to risk attending in case I could not get back again. Andrew and I are continuing to work on the spiral and I am currently about a third of the way through driving the spiral under the scenic boards so more of this when I can get the new boards from under the layout to photogaph them. I did not waste my time on Tuesday and instead had a productive session on the computer continuing to work on the artwork for the J7 etches. This for me is the only way I can realistically contemplate scratch building a loco with the added benefit that I can make additional etches available to other modellers in the future. The exciting news (I'm easily excited these days) is that Russell attended the afternoon session at club today and out of the blue installed his mockup of the station and footbridge. Amongst the research material we have been provided with are drawings of Thornton station, and now we have aerial views of Clayton to cross reference them to we have determined that the station buildings at Clayton are/were identical to those of Thornton so we now know what Clayton should look like. To mark the occasion I have taken some shots so that I can share them with you - enjoy: View looking up the gradient (down line) towards Queensbury. Please note John's painting of the rails is shown to good effect in this picture. John reports that he has at last finished painting both main lines and has made a start on painting the rail edges in the sidings. View looking at the up platform from (what will become) the station approach road. View from the station master's house looking under the footbridge. A half attempt at recreating a published photo taken during an RCTS visit to the line. The loco is an old Hornby 3 rail loco converted to 2 rail EM gauge which has become the test loco for the layout. Frank

Thanks for the update, they are looking very impressive. I'm really looking forward to seeing them in the flesh whenever that is. Keep up the good work. Frank

Hi, Are you still on schedule to complete the Quint set for Ally Pally? As far as I am aware you are still looking the most likely of those who bought etches from me to be first to complete a set. Regards, Frank

Andrew you are of course correct. We (Hungerford) currently have 5 and 2 x ½ loco's running that originate from the Messrs Mitchell and Finney stables. These are in no particular order: a Mitchell 44xx, a Finney Stella (with moving inside valve gear), a Finney Hall (also with moving valve gear), and a Mitchell 517 and a Mitchell Saint. The 2 halves relate to a Mogul that started life as a Mainline model but which received Mitchell replacements for the cab, firebox and boiler. This model then received replacement frames built from a Perseverance kit. In hindsight this model was utter madness on my part, and as Ian Rathbone commented when he painted it for me it would have been easier to build a complete Mitchell kit rather than modify the Mainline model this extensively. The other half model is a Jap Brass King that has received a complete Mitchell replacement chassis. This has been built ala Guy William's approach so that the valve spindles and inside crossheads move. I have tracked down photo's of all but 2 of these models: Regards, Frank (N.B: Middle photo's courtesy of Derek Shore)

I’m guessing you are referring to the Superquick pre-printed card building range. They were very popular amongst modelers in the 60’s and 70’s. They also sold pre-printed brick papers for scratch builders. The late Chris Matthewman used these papers to great effect on his three exhibition layouts: Striving, Strove, and Striven. He used card from breakfast cereal boxes as the base material and not a bowed wall in sight. Striven is now owned by Val Ashby and is permanently installed intheir house in Leeds. Frank

. Hi Andrew, I’ll bring it to club on Tuesday so you can have a look at it. I now have the correct transfers from HMRS but will need to remove the originals first. Frank

Hi Rich, I imagine there are many ways to secure the motor but my approach is to put some kind of cradle under the motor and to attach the motor down on the cradle using Bluetac so that it can find its own position in relation to the gearbox so as not to introduce any new forces into the drive train. This picture is a close up of an underframe built from a Perseverance kit which illustrates this method. I hope this will help you to sort it. Frank (Hungerford - EM)

Hi Andrew, good to hear from you. I have looked again and you are absolutely right about the apparent difference in the size of the numbers, it is a visual aberration and the transfers are actually all the same size. Whilst that is a good thing you are also correct in that the painter has used gold rather than yellow lettering so not only are the cab sides wrong the lettering on the tender sides are now also wrong so all in all there is a lot that needs putting right. This is a lesson to me to do my research and give more precise instructions to whomever I commission to paint my models in the future and not to assume that they already have this knowledge. With regards the buffer housings does the black extend to the baseplate or is it just the barrel that is black? I can certainly correct this myself but I am not so confident about removing the current transfers without damaging the underlying paintwork. Certainly a disappointment but its nothing that can't be corrected, its just the amount of rework that still has to be assessed. If necessary I can strip the body back to bare metal and we can start again. Happy new year to one and all. Frank

Hi manna, The main issue for me is that the 2 middle numbers are a smaller font than the outside numbers which is more evident in the picture below of the other side of the loco. As someone stilll finding his way around things LNER I will need advice on whether the numbers should be gold or yellow, or did the colour change at a point in time? This is my first paint commission from this particular source in many years and I am slightly taken aback that he has done this so I need to go back to him and give him the opportunity to put it right. It’s a real shame because otherwise I’m happy with his work. I’ll no doubt update the blog when I have this resolved. Frank

The following picture is of the assembled J3 now out of the paint shop. I'm not 100% happy with the finish of the numbering on the cab side and will have to investigate whether this can be redone without stripping back the underlying paintwork, but on the whole I think she achieves my intention to build a model of a hard worked goods engine over the Queensbury line in the early 30's. The back head still requires the plumbing picking out and I have a couple of brass gauges and the coal to install but otherwise she is now finished, so I need to get the Q2 to the same state next. Frank

Hi Tom, you are as usual most kind in your comments, thank you! You yourself have not been idle I see on your own blog and have piped me to the post with the final assembly of your own J3. I see you have also triggered an interesting debate on the correct colour for cab interiors. On the back of this I have contacted my 'go to people' for such matters and hopefully we'll get an answer. Presently my J3 has a black interior to match the outside livery. As to the use of the Woodlands Scenic product for increasing loco traction It has some merit but the issue is a bit chicken and egg. Until we have laid track and tested our locos to see what they can do we wont know whether we have an issue or not, but of course by then it will be too late to use the system without lifting the track again. We have the added complication that the strong magnets utilised by this system will increase the effective weight on any loco's incorporating CSB suspension which could in turn cause issues with wheels rubbing against the underside of their splashers. Rigid and compensated locos would not be so effected however. It looks like the limit for most of our models on the 1:50 (at 54" radius) already laid comes at around 19 wagons which is around 2/3rds of the maximum prototype loading for the line. I think 19 wagons is a reasonable number on a model, more than this and we would probably look to use banking engines anyway to provide added entertainment to the spectator. Hopefully we will do better than this on the 1:60 despite the tighter radius in places which would mean that Up trains could be slightly longer than Down trains. I will however discuss this again with the Clayton team to double check we are all happy with this decision so it is not a done deal as yet. Regards, Frank

And so we are about to complete our forth year of construction of the Clayton project. It is some weeks since my last update but this is not because little progress has been made, more that we have been so busy constructing that we haven't had the opportunity to clear the decks and take some decent photographs. As today is the last day this year that we can get access to our clubrooms I decided the best thing to do was to take some shots on my phone to give you an idea of how things are progressing. The first item to report is that I'm pleased to say that I completed my track building marathon a week ahead of schedule the target being to build at least one point a day. The above image is of the final and most complex formation in the fiddle yard and comprises 2 points, a diamond crossing, a single slip and a double slip. There were just short of 60 points required in total. Meanwhile in the club rooms since our club's exhibition in September we have constructed all the base boards for the fiddle yard and have now started work on the infamous spiral needed to counter the 167mm gained by recreating the gradients of the prototype in our model. The following shot is of a bridging board under construction. This board contains the top of the spiral as well as a lower part of the spiral 360 deg' further on. The gradient on the spiral is 1:60 which whilst better that the 1:50 at the Bradford end of the scenic section, the radius on the spiral comes down to 4ft in places and so we will still be working our locos hard I regret. Construction of the spiral under the scenic boards has unfortunately highlighted my lack of planning for this. The clearances required turned out to be far more intrusive than I had visualised and as a result we are having to perform some rework to rebuild the open framework of three of the scenic boards to achieve the necessary space for the trains on the spiral to run underneath. Two of the scenic boards have also been raised to help make this space and this will also have the added benefit of reducing the depth of the groundwork needed on top of these boards. At the same time the tera forming team (John Anderson and Barry Spink) are starting to build the profile boards around the edges of the scenic boards to recreate the cutting on the approach to Clayton tunnel. John and Derek have nearly completed painting the sides of the rail on the main line and are now turning their attention to painting the rails in the yard. Work is also progressing on the electrical front and all the interface boards for each of the scenic base boards have been pre-wired and are now awaiting the micro processor boards so that they can be tested before final installation under the layout. The electrics are a project in their own and at some point I will get my colleague Bill Wyatt Millington to describe how we intend to operate the layout electrically. The above photo illustrates a typical interface panel. The larger relays control track feeds to isolating sections, the smaller relays control either Tortoise point motors or uncoupling magnets. Meanwhile on the work bench at home I now have the J3 back from the paint shop and hope to assemble it over the Christmas break. Chris Rogers continues to progress the test build of my Q1 etches. He has spotted some minor mistakes in the etches but so far nothing catastrophic and so he has been able to continue the build despite these. Chris is documenting his test build of the Q1 elsewhere on RM Web and so I will leave it to him to post the latest pictures on his blog. With Chris building the Q1 this has allowed me to start work on the design of the next model locomotive for which no kit currently exists, a J7. I have just completed the artwork for the n/silver underframes and am about to start designing the brass work for the superstructure. So what are the plans for next year? The target for me for 2018 is to have all the fiddle yard track laid and the whole layout wired and fully operational so we can at last have the pleasure of running trains. I also hope that most of the groundwork will be in so that we can start to model and install the buildings in 2019. There is still much work to be done but given that there was no track on the layout this time last year I feel very pleased with the progress we have achieved in 2017. Regards, Frank

Hi Tom, Thank you for your kind remarks, they are much appreciated. It is nearly a year ago that I travelled down to Cornwall for the ballast and we are only just now finishing laying it on the scenic section. We couldn't finish earlier because I wasn't quite sure how the track coming off the scenic section would knit into the track in the fiddle yard. The radius of the embankment wasn't quite as I had originally plotted in Templot and so the alignment was slightly adrift at the East end of the layout. Its only recently I have finally sorted it all out so that Chris can finish laying the sleepers and applying the last of the ballast. In answer to the question 'why did we choose to build a model of a not very photographed station?' we didn't know how few photographs of Clayton existed when we made the decision to start. We had every expectation that photos would be forthcoming, so it was not only a shock but also a major concern when we finally concluded we were unlikely to uncover the photos we needed to accurately reproduce the prototype. Very fortunately one of the archivists at the Bradford Industrial Museum has in the last couple of weeks located five fantastic aerial shots of the station in a collection of photographs by C.H.Wood. These were taken in 1948 and 1955 so are a bit later than the period we are modelling, but most of it will have remained unchanged. For those interested the following link will take you to the collection on the Bradford Museum's web site: http://photos.bradfordmuseums.org/quick-search?q=Clayton&WINID=1509055181578 . We have now purchased high resolution copies of these from which we can determine most of the information we need to build the scenery but we still lack detailed pictures of the station building itself, so will continue to search for these elusive shots. It is quite possible Tom that aerial photo's of your chosen location will also exist in a collection somewhere and so I suggest you contact the nearest museum to the station you are modelling and ask them if they have, or know of, such a collection. Meanwhile the track work marathon continues and I have now completed 36 points (in 28 days) and have 2 more part built on the work bench. I was concerned that progress was going to be interrupted when I realised that I was running short of sleeper strip despite having 180 feet when I started this ordeal. Fortunately Marcway's of Sheffield turned round my order in 4 days and another 90ft of sleeper strip has landed on my doormat today. Hopefully this will be sufficient to complete the remaining point work for the fiddle yard. At the same time in the club rooms whilst I continue building fiddle yard base boards (3 down - 6 to go), others in the team are pressing on with the scenery and building up the landscape between the end of the embankment and the tunnel mouth in the deep cutting (Oh, and poor Mr Smart is still painting the rail!). Frank Davies

You may have been wondering why I have been quiet of late. The reason is that for the last nearly three weeks I have been beavering away with constructing the points that we need for the fiddle yard. The attached picture is of the 26 points I have managed to build over this period. These include the points at either end of the yard which give access to and from the 'exchange' sidings. These sidings can be accessed from both the Up and Down lines. The remainder built so far are all those required for the Down side of the yard. Given that the total requirement is for around 52 points, a double and single slip, as well as 2 diamond crossings, I am still not quite half way there but at least I am managing to achieve the 1 point/day target that I set myself. These points are all being built at home and meanwhile at the club we have started building the fiddle yard baseboards. What this does mean is that I have called a temporary halt to the rail at the board joints. I have completed the board joints on the main line and the marshalling sidings so it is only the board joints in the yard that are still to be done. This work will now be completed in the new year. If all goes to plan we will have the f/yard boards and the points built by the end of this year (2017) so can start laying the fiddle yard out in the new year. We will be using SMP Code 75 track for the plain track in the f/yard so that should speed things up a bit.

To answer Mark's point first: the ash on the layout right now is straight out of the sieve and is almost coal black in colour. It has been said many times that colour does not scale and I think Clayton's ballast is an example of this. Of course over the years the ballast would have been subjected to deposits of steam oil and other items which would have affected its colour and so it is our intention to weather our ballast but as yet we haven't worked out how. As to the preparation of the ash we tried all the techniques you have suggested including hammers but it always took a lot of effort to produce a small quantity of acceptable ash ballast. As we said previously we tried 3 different grinders and all self destructed very quickly. Had we hit upon a grinder that was man enough for the job then perhaps we would have persevered with doing it ourselves but as it was and because of the quantity needed we decided to cut our losses and ask for help from Exeter university. The actual trip to Cornwall and back was an enjoyable adventure for me and infinitely more fun than I had had attempting to prepare the ballast manually, so it was a win-win as far as I'm concerned. Frank

Only on the basis it could also have been a BR Western Region layout. You are correct that a GWR diesel railcar was tried out on the line but this was post the period we are modelling. Disappointingly the trial was unsuccessful because of the severe gradients, Mr Brunel's GW lines were generally much flatter by comparison. As to the stock required for Clayton, if I recall correctly the fiddle yard has been designed for around 28 distinct trains each of which will require a locomotive, plus we have the additional storage on the turntable for up to another 10 locomotives. I don't know the exact ratio of passenger versus goods trains we plan to operate but I'm guessing at around 50/50 of which probably only 6 passenger sets are already spoken for and we have around 8 locomotives built or being built so there is still plenty to go at. Frank

Hi, In answer to your question: of the 10 or so members involved in building Clayton we have quite a variety of circumstances. To my knowledge three of the group have 'OO' layouts at home. Only one of these has been featured on RM Web - Bacup. Two of our members have built 'The Mill' which is their first EM layout but whilst this is a private layout it is currently housed at the club rooms as neither has the space for it at home. Three of us own 'Hungerford' which is a Great Western EM exhibition layout also stored at the clubrooms. The goods stock and some of the parcels stock on Hungerford has been built by someone who is primarily an LNER modeller which is why there is so much NE goods stock running on Hungerford although no one to my knowledge has ever queried this at exhibitions. Hopefully this goods stock will form the basis of the stock for Clayton. The locos and coaching stock will be built by several of us and will be bespoke to the layout because we have researched the specific stock that operated over the Queensbury lines. I'm sure some of the stock will find its way onto other EM layouts from time to time but that is not the primary reason for building it. I believe Clayton (as with Leicester Goods and Hungerford before it) will be a great example of the benefit of belonging to a club where members with a variety of backgrounds, specialisations and skill levels come together to achieve something that would be extremely challenging for a single individual. For instance very few individuals will have the space to house a 30ft long layout and very few would have the time to build the quantity of stock needed to populate it even if they spent a lifetime doing so. Our ambition is to build the best layout that we can collectively, in around an 8 year time frame, including the stock although unlike the layout the stock will remain the property of the individuals who built it. I am confident that all of us will be better modellers at the end of the project than we were when we started irrespective of our skill levels at that time and we look forward to sharing our achievements with subscribers to RM Web. It is also our intention that some of our achievements may benefit the wider modelling community through our development of kits for rolling stock required for Clayton where no kit exists currently. If there is anyone out there who would like to become involved in the Clayton project then all they need to do is become a member of the Shipley club. Frank

A couple of weeks ago we completed the temporary wiring of the main line to allow the running of demonstration trains for the first time over our forthcoming 2017 exhibition weekend (Sept 16/17). Chris and I took some stock in order to check things would run OK through the point work. That evening one of our members was taking some video of things happening in the club rooms including our test running session. This has now been loaded to YouTube and so I am including this link for your enjoyment: . Since taking the video we have now completed laying all the rail (on the scenic section of the layout). We have worked out that there are over 10,000 individual chairs all of which have had to be threaded one at a time onto the rail prior to installation onto the previously laid sleepers. I now have to go back over all the track work to complete the installation of the rail over the board joints. This entails soldering the bullhead rail to brass pins previously set into the last couple of sleepers either side of the joint. Next I cut through the rail with a razor saw, narrow the heads of the pins with a grinding disk in a mini drill to align with the edges of the rail, and finally glue cosmetic chairs to match the rest of the track work and to hide the pins. It appears to be taking around an hour per track joint and I have around another 50 to go so I'll be at it for a while yet. Russell and John (Smart) meanwhile have started painting/weathering the sides of the rail. We calculated that on the basis it will take at least 2 coats of paint to complete this work it will require them to paint for a quarter of a mile. Given the choice I think I'll stick with the board joints. Please come and say hello if you are visiting the Shipley exhibition so we get to know whose reading the blog. Frank

I thought it would be useful to clarify the position with regards the bespoke etches that are being produced to enable us to plug the gaps in the stock we would like to have running on the Clayton layout. First and foremost these are being prepared to meet the needs of the Clayton project and where necessary the design is optimised for EM gauge modelling. In reality this only impacts a small number of areas and the etches are in the main equally suited to 'OO' and 'P4'. The artwork has been prepared on TurboCAD and the etches have been commissioned from PPD Ltd. The coaches have been designed to compliment Dan Pinnock's (D&S kits) range which we were already planning to use extensively on the layout. We are grateful to Dan for providing us with the castings and roof mouldings needed to complete these coaches. As I am primarily a loco builder I am also grateful to Russell Whitwam who has painstakingly built the prototypes from the etches and who has then provided feedback on where the etches were either fundamentally wrong or could be improved upon. The first coach etches therefore took several attempts to get to the final configuration but the 2nd coach was much easier to produce because it was basically a reworked copy of the first. The railway modelling grapevine is very efficient and before long we were being approached with requests from other modellers for copies of these coaches which we have been happy to provide. I now keep a small stock of these etches specifically to meet this demand and anyone wanting a set of etches can contact me via RMWeb. I have also included the necessary components to enable the coaches to be built in their original rigid axle format as well as the articulated form required for the project, but castings and roof mouldings must be sourced from elsewhere. Having completed the missing coaches we turned our attention to the locomotives and the Q2 was the first to be attacked because we had a GA drawing from which I could work. As I stated previously first and foremost the etches are being produced to meet the needs of the Clayton project and the design is optimised for my own use. I have endeavoured to take advantage of those elements of kits I have built in the past that I have appreciated and I have tried to omit those elements from kits that have frustrated me. Other modellers may have differing opinions on such matters. I have attached a photo of the prototype build of the Q2 in its near completed state. I was fortunate enough to be able to run this model on Retford a few weeks ago on which occasion it successfully pulled the longest goods train with apparent ease around the layout. I was told that this train is the equivalent of 60 wagons so it should be good for pulling goods trains up the 1:50 bank on Clayton. At the time the photo was taken I had not incorporated the working inside valve gear that the model has recently acquired. Having approached John Redrupp of London Road Models to provide me with the necessary castings to complete the model, John expressed interest in adding this to his range and so at the time of writing it is anticipated that the Q2 will shortly be launched as a new LRM kit. I have now completed the initial design of the Q1 etches and so that I can concentrate on laying track and wiring up Clayton Chris has volunteered to test build the Q1. This will also give me someone else's honest opinion on the design and quality of the etches just as Russell has done with the coaches. In the future we may look at producing etches for a J1, J2 and a J7 all of which ran on the Queensbury line within our time period. You never know, if the Q2 kit is successful Mr Redrupp may decide to add these to his range, but all this is for the future.

I can confirm Mike was in the RAF and an inspirational modeller. I met him and his wife Hilary through St Brendan's College's (Bristol) annual cadet camp. My father was a teacher at the school and an officer in the cadets. I believe Mike was a school liaison officer and this led to his annual attendance at the camp. Although I have had model railways for as long as I can remember it was only when Mike's EM layout was featured on the local television news (Points West) that the penny dropped and I took the first opportunity I could to reacquaint myself to him. I was 15 at the time so this would have been 1969. To my absolute delight Mike invited me to help him to exhibit at the next year's York exhibition when the show was still held at the Assembly Rooms. Mike and Hilary were the nicest couple you could hope to meet, and Mike talked me through all sorts of techniques which was the impetus I needed to start building my own models and was also my introduction to EM. Mike made significant use of tin cans (yes they were made of tin in the 60's). His use of K's motors was because they were small enough to fit inside his diminutive models. I don't know how but he turned the commutators in a lathe and that is why they ran so much better than the off the shelf motor. I tried this once and instantly destroyed the motor. The complex control of the layout was achieved through the use of his 'Great Wurlitzer' which was a revolving arm in the control panel with a set of wipers that swept over a series of studs connected to the H&M point motors under the layout. Having selected a route using several rotary switches a press of a button would trigger one revolution of the Wurlitzer and the points would be set accordingly - absolute magic to a sixteen year old. It was soon after this that Mike launched Mike's Models. I seem to recall that the EM layout was eventually sold to an enthusiast in America along with a significant proportion of the stock. Mike then moved on to modelling a mixed gauge layout to P4 standards and subsequently he did some 7mm modelling. Sadly I've lost contact with Mike and Hilary now but I believe and hope that they are still growing old together somewhere in the south of England. If you read this Mike or Hilary my very best wishes to you both... Frank D