Regularity

Steady on, Annie: that’s bordering on sweeping offence.

Technically, then, those earlier repaints were into chocolate and cream, rather than all over brown, with it amended later to this. Yes, I recall seeing a photo showing cream cab sides, and thought how bad it would be at hiding the dirt!

Not bad, and interesting detail, but in outline there’s not in there that hasn’t been discussed. Also, he has fallen into the trap of applying “Western” thinking to Putin, and indeed some others generally. Putin sees Ukrainian independence as an aberration, and to Putin, Ukraine’s western border is the Russian Western border. So any direct military action by NATO will be seen as a violation of the integrity of Russia’s borders, and by extension, an existential threat to Russia. This is the fourth condition for nuclear response. It is also why NATO hasn’t engaged in direct military action - and President Zelensky will be very aware of this. But NATO is doing almost everything short of that - and President Zelensky will be very aware of that, too. But I don’t think Putin wants to die and take millions of his fellow Russians with him, and has already developed plans: no going into NATO, and just keep the possibility of a nuclear attack in the back of everyone’s mind so that NATO stays out of Ukraine, too. He can more or less do as he pleases in this scenario, but probably wasn’t expecting his own forces to perform so badly and the UA so well. The others? Well, if you are a religious fanatic who thinks that you are holy and everyone else isn’t, and that when you die you will go to heaven and have all your carnal needs tended to, whilst everyone else will go to hell, then mutually assured destruction won’t bother you - it will be an incentive. But back to Messrs Parker and Macron. I understand the sentiment, and from a Western European (and former colonies with the same ethos) perspective, this is praiseworthy indeed and to quote WSC, “Jaw-jaw is better than war-war.” (Although he didn’t say that about the 1938 Munich treaty, did he?) The point is, Putin is not bound by such conventions, and will see France’s statements as a weakness in the NATO position, and will seek to exploit it every way he can. Unless the “West” keeps a solid and united front, then independent major players like China and India will remain neutral, and smaller nations may relax their own stances. Yes, we need to have channels of communication open, but that exists: Stop fighting and say you want to talk, Mr. Putin, and the world will listen. Doesn’t need France trying to position itself as the nation of diplomacy. In any case, Polish was the language of diplomacy in Europe well before - and a lot longer than - French, and Poland is doing a cracking job of helping its neighbour.

Is it known to the contrary? Just because a few people on RMWeb have developed a pet theory without any evidence at all doesn’t make it historical fact. There has been a general consensus about brown for a number of years. All of a sudden, when no one is around who was alive at the time, people start to question things. Whilst I agree wholeheartedly that the consensus can be wrong, shouting loudly in disagreement without anything to substantiate it does count as evidence against the consensus.

Sorry: remiss of me not to thank you for enquiring. Not as bad as many have been: it’s mostly like having a bad head cold. That might be because the double vaccination + booster is working. (And why haven’t we had a fourth round here?) More annoying is that ‘er indoors was supposed to away for a week, and I was going to have time to sort out the log cabin, and hijack the kitchen table as a nice flat surface for assembling ply baseboards with Resin W, a few pins here and there, and weights while the glue sets. Not happening now! Plus, we have decided for various reasons to move, so the log cabin is now a considerable asset to the property: because I did the assembly myself, we saved quite a bit on the cost so it has probably added more than we spent on it, so it’s an I’ll wind, etc. NHS contacted me about being part of the antiviral trials, but that would involve a 20 mile trek each way to Blackburn, given me the opportunity to be a spreader. Thanks again for asking, Kevin.

Phew. Just as well they to Eton, then!

Thank you. I think that’s an extremely good example of how to redact something whilst still making the point - and I am highly delighted by it!

Likewise in reverse.

I knew what you meant, just thought it would be fun to add a like erudition. And yes, you were (inadvertently) using an Americanism. (Sorry.) As for R2, the presenters drive me up the wall, saving Ken Bruce, but the music is usually ok to have on in the background when driving with kids who don’t like R3 and R4. That’s unnecessarily harsh, Stephen.

There is ultimately no solution to this short of either caving in or of Putin and his inner regime going, as Putin will never accept that Ukraine has any existence except as part of Russia. He doesn’t operate any other way. I know what you are saying, Phil, and I really don’t want war, nuclear or otherwise, but the “realpolitik” you talk about will do nothing more at the moment than encourage Putin to carry on with his mission until he dies. To him, western principles don’t apply (fair point, as he hasn’t signed up to anything) so the only thing to do is to say to him, “If you want to trade with us, if you want to be part of the UN, if you want your nation to be part of the planet, get back behind your borders.” Complete trade sanctions - even if they hurt us - are the only way, and President Macron is a sophomore: his actions appear to be wise, but by failing to understand Putin’s mindset, he is acting the fool.

Several 517s were painted in chocolate brown, lined yellow-black-yellow, to match the auto coaches which had been painted in brown. They were known as “chocolate soldiers”. (For example references see the WSP book on the Abbotsbury Branch by Jackson.) To me, this provides rather more evidence that brown was actually used between 1908 and 1912 than does the speculation provided that actually it was red. I imagine that the all-over brown looked very nice when fresh, but looked rather too shabby after a couple of years, and that as repaints became due, it was changed to the red.

Obviously. But Putin is a firm adherent of the bonkers philosopher Ivan Ilyin - to the extent of calling him the “Court Philosopher” (“court”? Putin really does think of himself as Tsar!) - who claimed that Muscovy had only ever expanded to become Russia and welcomed grateful friends who were in need of “Russian protection” from foreign powers into its folds, and that (amongst other things) anyone who doesn’t see Ukraine as part of Russia is an enemy of Russia. He was an advocate of fascism, but with a pseudo-Christian slant which encourages the involvement of the Russian Orthodox Church. His key concept was the “consciousness of law”, which means that being “right” is more important that strict obeyance of the law, especially when it is an external construct, i.e. “international law”. This puts him and his adherents at odds with the two basic principles of Western Civilisation: the rule of law and payment of debts. Until we (collectively, internationally) wake up to this, we are doomed in any attempts to “negotiate” with Putin, as if he doesn’t think the agreement is “right” in his eyes he will simply bide his time and then ignore it. M. Macron is therefore doomed in his attempts to be seen as the intermediary for peace, as Putin simply uses any such moves as a useful wedge to drive into the coalition against him. What we need, of course, is to have a Cabinet with some people who went to the best schools and the best university in the land, who followed a course of study which trained them to be able to see this sort of thing. You know, Eton, followed by Politics, Philosophy and Economics… …if only we had a Cabinet of such calibre!

US or UK definition of “factoids”? Former, a small item of information. Latter, a small item of information that turns out not to be true. Steve Wright on Radio 2 uses the former definition, but frequently the British one applies…

That’s because the goods yard was originally a terminal station for the B&M, and passenger services were relocated to a new station jointly owned with the N&B, creating a through route.

Else you will keep losing yer bird…

Don’t know. Other half tested positive for Covid on Friday; I was developing symptoms. I tested such on Sunday. Great platinum jubilee weekend for us!

Nit-picking about terminology aside, William, there are serious points in amongst this. Firstly, what do you want, and over what time horizons? Secondly, how much does 00 bug you? Thirdly, what are you prepared to spend? If you want something in a short turnaround with scope for complicated operation, then RTR is your solution, because anything else will take longer. You have indicated a collection of stock around which you could do this. If 00 bugs you, then starting with 00 RTR will nag at you, so are you prepared to scrap and rebuild/upgrade in the future, effectively throwing away what went before, or does it bug you enough to commit to EM/P4 now? Finally, not just money but time. You can always earn more money, but you cannot get extra time - it is finite in terms of our lifetimes, and usually we don’t even know when that will end. Earning extra money may eat up the time. Forget about which railway company, which era, what detailed layout plan, use the above three points to decide how much time, how much money you want to spend and to what standards of fidelity you are going to work. That may, in turn, shape your direction. If you wanted to model, for example, the LCDR circa 1880 to the best level of detail and dimensional accuracy possible, then the scale is largely irrelevant: it will have to be handbuilt. Upside is, it won’t cost so much money as you will be mostly using raw materials. Downside is, it will take time. You won’t have much train set to play with, but how many locos can you run at a time? Will you be running on your own? Do you want a “busy” scene? If you want something complicated, and want it as soon as possible, then accept the lack of fidelity in RTR 00, and just build a layout. Otherwise, decide what you want. I have two small layouts, and each runs with basically two locos, one set of coaches, and enough wagons for more than one train. (In fact, one of them has two such sets of stock!) They are both capable of keeping me occupied, with a few brakes, over a two-day exhibition, but whilst operating, the other person gets bored. They both run on a one engine in steam basis. Works for me: may not for you. So, what do you want? Lots of more, or more of less?

Must admit I wondered about that when you complained about the cost of 3 new RTR locos… ;) You just need to decide what you want now, and if you are prepared (or not) to change tack later on. If you are going to be happy with 00, get on with it. If you wish to build your own track, consider how little/more work would be required to change to EM now. Some modellers do move “up” through the various standards, witness Ian Futers who went from 00 to EM to P4 and the 7mm scale, but he built a series of small layouts, some of the stock of which could be re-wheeled (although he may have built new ones). That’s an advantage of the pre-grouping era: no outside cylinders or valve gear for the most part, so relatively easy to change later on. (Even if you model the 50s in a backwater setting!)

Acid rain even back then, eh?

They are both short of the mark. The comparison is (pardon the pun) pointless. If two things are wrong, then they are both wrong. Asking which is more wrong is about as logical as saying you work to finer standards, but ignoring the fact that one of your dimensions is very wrong. I have no problem with what you are doing, I just don’t see how you can call it finescale, that’s all: there is an illogic. If you have to build all your track and rewheel your stock or building from kits, then it’s not as if you are saving time except for a few RTR locos, so why? Better looking track? Better running? Same goes for EM-fine. We can go back over 100 years, before 00 and H0, to Charles Wynne. He didn’t call it finescale, but his “half-one” models to what we now call S gauge were built to within a scale inch of the prototype. I have seen his Midland 4-4-0 from that year, and it stands up well against most models today. That’s my definition, although I admit there are somethings I cannot get exactly right as I don’t own a barn. As I said, we all draw the line somewhere, and in my case, it tends to be with respect to station length. But the rest, as close as I can. It works for me, it may not work for someone else, but I at least work on consistent definitions and tolerances for everything but station length and using electric propulsion. I am not criticising anyone’s modelling, as I have been at pains to state, merely saying that calling “finer 00” “finescale” is illogical by any definition I can see of the word “finescale”. To Robin of Loxley, I agree: it’s a question of defining one’s terms consistently. I am not “offended” by 00 gauge at all. I can just see the difference in certain aspects of its portrayal of real track: the basics are there, but the fine details less so. But that reflects how I want to do my modelling, doesn’t dictate to anyone else.

Aye. Would also need to stick on some mouldings!

As I said, I don’t in any way object to what you are doing, merely that I don’t find 00 - no matter what the standards - to be close enough to call itself “finescale”, at least by the term as defined by CJF. If you are going to have standards of fidelity, then they have to be applied all round. I don’t see realism or authenticity in such a narrow gauge, but you do and that’s ok by me. And yes, to those who think that it is difficult to tell the difference, that’s not the case for anyone who has closely studied prototype track.

Ah. I see. You were using the word “paint” to mean precisely that!