MrWolf

20 minutes ago, Miss Prism said:

Preservationists seem fond of red reverser handles and regulators. Is that wrong? Or was there a change from unpainted to red at some stage?

 

Rustproofing practicality or traction engine bling?

12 minutes ago, Paul H Vigor said:

Interesting! Looks like a G-scale forecourt petrol pump

Whatever you do don't confuse an enema machine with a petrol pump!

Although the pyrotechnic flatulence could be a neat party trick....

5 minutes ago, Hroth said:

 

I think the controller was for its smaller sibling batteries, that were flatter.  I've a torch that took the flatter ones.  Can't remember the Ever Ready number for them...

 

I know the type you mean, I've got a "Bantel" bicycle tail lamp which takes a slimmer version, never had it working and I don't remember the battery number either!

9 minutes ago, Paul H Vigor said:

It's been a long day!

Sorry Paul, couldn't resist!

28 minutes ago, Hroth said:

 

They look reasonably safe, they can't be connected directly to the mains as one is a low voltage (12v aux) controller and the other is a battery controller relying on 4 internal obsolete 3v cycle lamp batteries.

 

Depending on internal condition, the 12v aux controller may be functional. I've equivalent Hornby Dublo and Triang units that still work perfectly.

 

You can now get an adapter to replace those cardboard cycle batteries with a pair of AA batteries, but....

To power that controller with four of them will cost you around £80, plus the cost of the batteries!

I wouldn't be any more concerned than you about firing up those old controllers, I used to tinker with valve radios and as long as the mains side of the sets were made safe, you had little more to worry about than a depressing puff of smoke now and then.

11 minutes ago, Paul H Vigor said:

Misread as 'Enema Machine'! 😲

😉 

1 hour ago, PhilJ W said:

Looks like the motor overheated and melted the plastic body.

Did someone connect the track direct to the mains? 

4 hours ago, John M Upton said:

Someone please explain the logic behind this bundle of two completely unrelated items of rolling stock?!?

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/196220079611?

Such bundles are to encourage you to pay more for the item you want, believing that you can sell the surplus item at a profit, making the item you did want a bargain. 

Of course, if you can't, that's now your problem.

4 hours ago, John M Upton said:

 

And for the love of God, please don't let anyone put these horrors anywhere near a electrical current of any kind:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/355427664161?

Wow, is that an Enigma Machine? 🤣 

3 hours ago, figworthy said:

 

Only one ?

 

As I'm sure Mr. NotEnoughPanniers will confirm, you can't have too many.

 

Adrian

I work to the Wolf-Spiers theorem of vintage motorcycles when it comes to Panniers.

N = X + 1

Where: 

N is the ideal number of to have.

X is the number you already have.

2 hours ago, lezz01 said:

They are like Kirtley, Johnson and Deeley 0-6-0s you can never have too many.

Regards Lez.

Agreed, I do like Midland 0-6-0 tender locos and Aston branching off the GW/LNW joint line at Craven Arms is my excuse for the appearance of an LMS 4F on freight.

I'm also a fan such machines from the other pre grouping companies.

Then of course there's the 2-4-0 tender locos.....

26 minutes ago, Nick C said:

There's also no requirement for the front of the layout to be straight and parallel to the back...

Definitely not, I found that a big help in creating an illusion of space, even in 12' x 2'.

45 minutes ago, New Haven Neil said:

Tankie time, just a bachy one though.

 

That's an impressive bunker, like something from the Atlantic wall...

31 minutes ago, Welchester said:

Wasn't a large Prairie and B set one of the first Airfix train sets?

 

Maybe a large Prairie was needed to keep the tight timings. Oh, but this is Little Muddle.

One of the first 'big' locos I ever had, about £8 from Hattons, seems like a thousand years ago now!

55 minutes ago, Middlepeak said:

One very practical point - make sure your arms are long enough to reach a train at the back without potentially damaging any of the scenery at the front. I speak from experience!

Good point, when I made the 610mm wide station board 150mm wider I found it awkward to work on the back of the layout with the height of the boards at 1350mm, so when we dismantled it to move house, I cut down the legs to 1200mm, which made it much easier to work on.

25 minutes ago, GMKAT7 said:

Good morning 2ManySpams,

 

Just remembering the words of Sir Arthur 'Bomber' Harris.

 "They sowed the wind, now they are going to reap the whirlwind".

 

Or, to paraphrase Shylock, "If you wrong us shall we not revenge?"

 

 The Peoples Front for the Protection of Panniers are watching 👀.

 

Cheers, Nigel.

Also, unlike the obvious targets of buses on bridges, every Pannier comes with its own personal bunker and like the seemingly invincible Tiger tank, Spamcans have a tender behind...

35 minutes ago, JustinDean said:

I’d be going for the greater depth so the railway is properly set within the countryside. That’s gotta be the point if you’re modeling a slice of Derbyshire right?

Im liking the new design Nick!

 

Jay 

What Justin said.

It's going to make the layout seem much larger and allow the trains to disappear into the landscape, better for the illusion of reality.

1 minute ago, John Besley said:

How many of those are going to be donors for kit bashes

Most will get the detail treatment. I have a damaged 2721 that will become an 0-6-4 crane tank, probably Steropes and another which is going to become 4-4-0ST No13.

Why? 

I'll think of something!

8 minutes ago, 2ManySpams said:

 

I strongly support the increasing gatherings of panniers. Makes carpet bombing more effective and efficient., and we all love efficient and effective carpet bombing don't we?

Anticipated, but thanks for the heads up.

Some strange pagan gathering in Shropshire.

2 minutes ago, 2ManySpams said:

 

Whatever next?

Floods, famine, pestilence, sociology students...

3 minutes ago, John Besley said:

Quick we need to remedy this panneiritist, we need a proper engine please bring on a BR Std tank, now that's a real loco

So we've gone from an infestation to an STD?

That's not good, not good at all.....

13 hours ago, KNP said:

Just  the start of another day at LM.

Pannier resting in the shed.

Crane on standby.

Nothing moving

Workmen still sorting door.....!

Just another day

 

That has to be one of my favourite views. I do like the kindling for lighting up, I don't think I've seen that modelled before.

30 minutes ago, PMP said:

That’s not an infestation, now this,

this, is an infestation.
 

(There was at least another four extant at the time of the picture, and they’ve all been in a dark cupboard since, so no telling what they’ve been up to since)

Breeding and evolving into some weird kind of hive mind? 

19 minutes ago, John Besley said:

 

Rob that's a bit big for Ashton On Clun...be fun build though 

I don't think that it would make it over the river bridge, clearance wise, never mind the weight. The Churchward mogul only just squeezes through.

When I win the lottery, perhaps I'll build a stretch of the GW/GC joint line?

I do think that the bitsa loco is rather inspired and ought to pass for a never was BR Standard with the tanks fitted.