chris p bacon

Welcome Dave.

What time frame & region are you modelling, or are you looking at freelance ?

I ask as at my local station (Sandy) until the 1970's there wasn't an overhang but when the platforms were rebuilt one was added (as well as some more height). When it was just brick it did have the WW2 white edge painted as the night lighting was pretty poor (gas lamps)

My pharmacist pickup a conflict between two of my medicines getting one changed during a review so in my mind there a good thing, But my flash point at my old chemist befour I moved was putting my script in early according to them, it not being due as a month wasn't up ! Fair enough but when there telling you, you have had a month's worth of pills but you receive 28 pills in a pack that means only one month in four years do you actually receive a month's worth, rather than three days short changed of the potential 31 pills needed, this short fall builds up but try and get the pharmacy to understand that their ain't 28 days in a month! Very often

IIRC prescriptions and tablets are set around a 28 day period. they cannot work around the vagaries of how many days in a month and so repeats are 13 to a year rather than 12.

North Coast Electrics/Electronics 

Or something similar.

For those interested in Hotel curve and it's junction with what is now Thameslink there's this pic showing the start of the tunnel /curve

Now I think this is already somewhere else on RMweb, but I couldn't find the original posting of it so unable to credit it to it's owner.

Just a little off topic.  I can see why reviews would be a good thing.

Some time ago a neighbour used to collect prescriptions for a friend and drop them off, every 4 weeks there was a supermarket carrier bag of drugs and he was amazed at what was being taken. To cut a long story the friend eventually passed away and when the house was cleared there were 3+ years of unused drugs in the house, it seems the friend was one who 'didn't want to bother the doctor' so a review by a pharmacist might have uncovered the waste of drugs and NHS monies.

I had an enjoyable day visiting this show. Thank you Charlie. It was good to see Lloyd, Jim, Iain and Ken. I had a nice time reminiscing about bunking Bedford shed with a chap who was a driver there. The model of Bedford shed looks like it has quite a bit of potential. It needs a BRCW Type 2 Bo-Bo sitting outside. 

 

Didn't get to meet up with my brother, he went off to see St Neots Town play a away game, I hope he enjoyed it especially as the beat Gosport 1-0. The end of teh day was good in having tea with Mum and her partner.

I popped over during the day (got stuck in the traffic to interchange retail park) and parted with some monies on the LCGB stand courtesy of Bill Davies. Couldn't stay long as work had to continue.

As well as looking at York Rd for a cameo (ish) layout, I also thought about doing KX loco with Hotel curve platform.

 

That's the original KX loco.

 

 

I ought really to put some dimensions to it to see whether the idea floats or not.

Did a bit of research this evening (along with 2 Cambrian wagons) and it would have a scenic length of just under 2M and a width of 700mm (6'5" x 2'4")

I might investigate this further.

I Hope this isn't too far off topic.

As well as looking at York Rd for a cameo (ish) layout, I also thought about doing KX loco with Hotel curve platform.

That's the original KX loco.

The idea was to use the end wall of the suburban as a backdrop and battle bridge as a scenic break,  I thought it might be interesting with loco's coming on/off shed as well as passenger and cross London freights climbing the curve. The reason for it was so I could utilise my stock over 2 layouts.

I ought really to put some dimensions to it to see whether the idea floats or not.

I see the ignore button lasted 9 minutes!!

 

Mike.

A person not the topic.

I've been toying with this idea but in the GN era and that track plan is nearly the same.

 I was thinking of doing something small to use at our club exhibition and to try a few techniques out before I cock  use them on 'Sandy'

Now will it fit in a cake box....

I agree with you, but we've already given honours during careers (Murray, Farrah, Redgrave etc)

With the benefit of hindsight, having read through the responses to my earlier post I'll freely concede the the suggestion doesn't stand up to any level of scrutiny, and the phraseology created an unintended level of ambiguity and on these points I'll apologise. The suggestion of scanning the kits was only intended as a throwaway idea.

 

Jonathan 

You have no need to apologise. We all make statements and posts that initiate other discussion and this was one. Everyone  has different opinions, just depends how open you are to them, or not.

I've said before that the ranges have effectively gone, you can't purchase a lot of them and no doubt the moulds are beyond recovery  for those not used for some years, if they've not been stored correctly. Better to look to other suppliers or make your own/get together with others. 

Apologies to those members who didn't want to read the exchanges above.

Gents 

 

This is not the first time or thread in which you have differences of opinion and tone which has not gone unnoticed by other members. Please preserve what little strength I have in my left diodes by ceasing such perceived argumentative behaviour. 

 

Thank you 

I think you're right there. I'll find the ignore button for my own sanity & blood pressure.

Just a thought but, would be feasible to have the sprues from all the wagon kits 3D scaned, to preserve the range digitally at least for the time being?

 

Jonathan

Please re-read the first post in this sub-thread - #1126 - nowhere is there any suggestion that the 3D scans would be used by third parties for production purposes.

 

The suggestion was that there should be a record of what the product range comprised of, via the most accurate digital process currently available. How that digital record might be subsequently used, or by whom, was not mentioned.

 

It would save a great deal of debate if people actually read what a post says, rather than what they think might be implied. The volume of argument that bloats this forum, relating to things that weren't actually posted in the first place, is incredible.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

I often wonder if you could start an argument with yourself in a toilet.

I DID read the post and because it used the phrase "for the time being" it opens the door for someone to suggest copying, before that came up I suggested that it was not a good idea and that much as some might not like CC or its owner, it is his property and any images created of copyrighted items belong with the copyrighted item. 

If you'd like to invest in some very expensive scans of plastic sprues that you can do nothing with, then no ones stopping you.  It would be easier to just buy a kit though. . .oh hang on. . you can't 

It is a shame when it is not possible to put forward a perfectly sensible suggestion without the usual suspects relaunching the interminable circular argument concerning copyright.

 

 

 

For my own use I'm doing some graphics to produce some GN wagon transfers, I could easily extend the range by copying some existing ones of yours, as you're obviously not bothered by copyright of others work I assume it applies to yours. 

 I've also found the contrary to what you suggest, in that the locos I've built which are 'sloppy' get dirty wheels more quickly than those with a fixed chassis.

 

Some might say that's because all the wheels are on the track. . . . 

I'd light the room for another purpose (bedroom) and add additional free standing lighting for working and a rig to light the layout.

In the UK an item that has copyright extends to any images taken of it**, therefore if you take an image of an item which is owned by CC with the purpose of recording that item then the copyright belongs to CC.

As a group we're having to research Copyright and how it extends to items that have been gifted to us, it's a minefield.

Quite simply put, the fact that in the first post there was a suggestion to scan a companies products so that they would not be lost for future production mean that the intention is there to infringe upon a companies products. If CC wanted to burn the lot on the 5th of November then he's at liberty to do so, and if he wanted to he could pursue anyone who had copied his products.

Regarding the GBL, how do we know there wasn't an agreement or payment in place ?

** completely different in the USA, there an image taken, has it's own copyright different to that of the subject.

No mention of reproducing in Gt. Shefford's post.

 

3D scanning is no different from taking a photo - it simply records what the object looked like, but in rather more detail.

 

IF the moulding tools deteriorate or are destroyed, and the intellectual property was transferred to another party, then an existing 3D scan of the original product could make it easier to reproduce the kit - IF it was deemed desirable so to do.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

A lot of 'ifs' there. 

But missing the vital point that Dunn has no intention of selling or passing on the ranges, I tried to contact a couple of years ago to that end and got nowhere. I see why now, he makes money by doing nothing.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/11/02/farmers-urged-bury-underpants-improve-quality-beef/

 

OK, so maybe it's clickbait, but even so... 

Now I know why mine are full of holes.  . . .they're being eaten.

But is that from the inside out or outside in?

Just a thought but, would be feasible to have the sprues from all the wagon kits 3D scaned, to preserve the range digitally at least for the time being?

 

Jonathan

I'm not sure if you're moving into the area of copyright and intellectual property.  The items aren't yours to copy and produce.

My parents' estate would go over it anyway.

Oki doki, I'm guessing they've made tax provision.

​As for the Deltic Preservation Society, what are they going to do with my attempts at steam loco EM conversion? 

 

My white metal kits are going as ballast weight. 

(155bS) 55021 Sandy 31-07-75 (T Ermel) .jpg

55021 heads north through Sandy on 31st July 1975 under clear semaphores. The disused trackbed on the left was the route of the old L&NWR line from Oxford to Cambridge which crossed over the main line behind me

Excellent ! You're on Cambridge road bridge, the footbridge you see is 'Alley Bridge' which was the most popular spotting location for us as kids. The Down main signal the Deltic has passed under is on a post in my back garden.

But also as I said it seems that the inestacy rules means it would go to who I'd leave it to anyway (parents, then siblings if my parents were gone), and it doesn't add up to above the inheritance tax threshold. Sure, those circumstances could change, but then I'd have to change a will anyway.

What about the scenario that you have an accident and depart early so your estate goes to your more elderly parents, you don't cross the IHT threshold but with your's and their estates now combined it does. They then depart within a couple of years after you and the siblings then get hit with a tax bill.

A simple will splitting it across the family would do (50/50 parents/siblings). . .or give the lot to the Deltic Preservation Society. . .you know you want to.

I purchased 58 from C&L, it was a couple of years ago under the previous owner but worth checking with the new owner Phil.

I emailed several suppliers asking for a quote on the 58 motors and C&L came back with a discounted price if I purchased as one lot. The others emailed offered a small amount off, but no where near the same as C&L.

All i remember about him was he didn't say very much..

That'll be the one. He did come from Ashwell so wasn't used to humans