Captain Kernow

So, unless someone is proposing to reintroduce arsenic flavoured crisps or lead sandwiches into the catering mix, I suspect that most crusts will be eaten...

Pasty folklore indicates that you have correctly surmised the reason for the crust!

48 minutes ago, Hobby said:

 

I like the way the radiator is heating up the cat and the CDs!

No ill effects on either!

'Please don't turn the volume up'...

10 hours ago, Huw Griffiths said:

 

I always thought one test for "proper job" pasties was what people do with the crust (running along said pasties like an external spine).

 

Of course, it's always possible that this might have more to do with where / when / how the pasties are consumed ... .

 

 

At the RMWeb dos, there's not usually much evidence left to inform the Pasty Consumption Investigators...

I have recently re-numbered a pannier, so the old plates for '8750' class pannier No. 9678 are 'free to a good home'.

Meanwhile, in the real world of South Brent, the Packhorse has had a make-over, on the outside at least:

8 hours ago, NZRedBaron said:

Here's a thought exercise if anyone's interested; is it better to start a layout with a trackplan and build from there, or start with the history and backstory for the layout, and try and adjust a trackplan to fit?

As someone who only has space for small layouts, I don't model actual prototypes, but use prototype influence on my imaginary scenes.

As such, the track plan is wholly dependent on the amount of space I can devote to any given layout project.

Once I've arrived at a track plan that I'm happy with, I'll then invent a back story to suit (bearing in mind that the most effective 'lies' are those with a hint of truth about them...)

28 minutes ago, Barclay said:

Oh, Sir - wash your mouth out !!!

 

 

Lovely scene above!

I really wish, sometimes, that I had the space for a large roundy-roundy, but it never happened and never will now. Instead, much shorter layouts, built for shunting are what I build. I will admit to liking shunting, with a well-mannered loco and wagons with impeccable manners. Steel end links and magnetic shunting poles have transformed this activity, by the way.

Having said that, it's still lovely watching continuous run layouts at shows etc.

8 minutes ago, Wayne Kinney said:

I've been working quietly in the background, recently on kits for the societies. I've just finished a P4 Gauge A6 for the Scale Four Society, and a 2FS B7 Standard Crossover for the 2mm Scale Association.

Sounds very interesting, Wayne, a P4 A6. Is that only available from Scalefour Stores (I am a member)?

In the meantime, awaiting the delivery of my first Finetrax kit - an OO A5, which I will build to see how I get on with it and for comparison with my existing method of using copper clad for point construction. Eventually the A5 will be used in another (very) small cameo set up.

It's probably easier to just phone Brian on the above number. Try again if it doesn't get answered first time, but as far as I know, Branchlines are still trading OK and should have stocks of the kits.

I was considering getting a 2021 kit myself and if I had done so, I would have phoned Brian with my credit card number to hand. More expensive from Canada, I grant you, but probably an effective way of communicating with him.

13 hours ago, BWsTrains said:

I beg to differ.

 

To me the final section of this epic video, from 12:50 on to the end, as 6024 races into Yatton at full steam, captures the real passion of steam. Footplate and fireman lit up by the glowing firebox, an effect crying out to be emulated.

Yes, that's true and I've seen my fair share of cabs illuminated by the firebox at night, which it will be, provided the main firehole doors are at least partially open and it's dark enough to see the glow.

But how many of us operate our model railways with a night time scene? It's very effective, if done well, but for the majority of us, for the majority of the time, it will be a 'daylight scenario'.

Great video, though.

7 minutes ago, NHY 581 said:

 

That's a lot of bananas. 

 

Yes, we have no bananas.

2 hours ago, Fair Oak Junction said:

This is one of those very much going over well trodden paths arguments/conversations, and as always it goes back to you can't please everyone.

We all have our opinions, and we've all aired them many times in many threads over many years....and it isn't going to change any time soon! 😄

End of the day our personal opinions don't matter as much as our wallets do, and so the market ebbs and flows with how we spend our money.

Can't argue with the above, expect that personal opinions do control access to our wallets (well, they do here).

1 hour ago, Ian Hargrave said:

So at the end of a dreary,wet day,maybe it would be good if we turned to the top of the page and read the heading title that Robin initially posted there and restored the friendliness and frivolity…….if you please gents.

I may struggle with the frivolity, being a miserable old g1t, but I am always friendly. Just ask my panniers.

1 hour ago, RapidoCorbs said:

Corbs has reminded me what I can do tomorrow, if it's raining again - buy an example of the new wagons and support one of the few remaining actual model shops in my area.

And shortly I shall return to tinkering with a 50 year-old whitemetal kit of a pannier tank, which is proving to be an utter delight.

1 hour ago, westernviscount said:

Thanks Captain. Do you have any special procedures for motorised points? I havent had many problems in the past but wondered how others go about things. 

I am just very careful when spreading the glue and depositing the ballast. If there's not much room where the tiebar goes, between the respective sleepers either side, I tend not to ballast that, but simply paint it a track colour.

58 minutes ago, polybear said:

Occasionally we see posts asking what tools are required when kit building…..

And tea! Lots of it!

Don't forget, to paraphrase that wonderful BTF file 'Snowdrift at Bleath Gill', 'the railway runs on tea and bad language!'...

3 hours ago, McC said:

Sorry, that sounds a rather trite and cynical platitude? There are many models in the market at varying levels of detail, and it is a simple statement of fact that the more competition and choice  in the market, the better for the customer who can then choose what price point and level of detail they prefer.

47 minutes ago, gwrrob said:

One of those has just swept the board at the Model Rail awards.

Well, I have never been one for 'Emperor's new clothes' and I stand by my comments.

3 hours ago, McC said:

The fact remains and is supported by evidence that adding detail, and indeed technology to a model, does not substantially increase the price above and beyond models, which do not feature additional detail and or technology. 

I have made no comment in all of this about the price of models. The model will cost what it costs and you have to make some kind of a profit. No one (well, certainly not I) disputes that.

I appreciate that the current price of some new models with lots of detail is above what some might be comfortable paying, so I agree with your comment about competition leading to models of the same prototype being offered at different prices.

I have always made it clear on this forum that I am happy to pay an appropriate premium for quality. But that means 'quality' as I measure it.

What I don't consider 'quality', is models that have so much additional, delicate detail, that said detail becomes extremely vulnerable to handling in everyday use.

Also, some people (in some cases, the vast majority of modellers) may consider any given model to be of 'quality', but if the model doesn't run properly, then any perceived 'quality' simply evaporates in my eyes. I have had such poor experiences with the running of recent, so-called quality models (which granted, look lovely), that I now have virtually zero expectations that their future releases will run smoothly and slowly, unless by virtue of the alchemy of DCC.

Some of the longer-established 'competitors' are capable of producing good models that run smoothly and slowly under DC control. I fail to understand why any of the newer companies are not capable of selling me a model that does the same. It remains an abiding mystery.

One newer company that has managed to produce a consistently smooth running, slow-speed loco is Planet Industrials. I have not heard of anyone complaining about their loco. That, to me, is an example of 'getting it right first time'.

3 hours ago, McC said:

if you would rather manufacturers do not comment, either personally, or officially then, that’s also fine, too.

I have at no time asked any manufacturers to desist from commenting or communicating. My personal opinion, for what it's worth (not much, I appreciate) is that there are some manufacturers may like to comment too much, whereas others maintain a more dignified silence.

3 hours ago, McC said:

I was simply providing some insight.

Again, sorry. Your original statement :

4 hours ago, McC said:

Some companies will make toys. Some make models. Some make very detailed scale models. Choice is golden. 

...sounds (to me) like one of those company 'buzz phrases', couched in 'corporate speak'...

1 hour ago, westernviscount said:

Thank you Captain. I am unsure at this point bit I have seen excellent results using the method you describe. 

I am going to start painting the track next I am there. Do you jave a preffered method? I am toying with airbrushing with acrylic which I have not done before. 

Well, I normally spray Halfords red oxide primer on the track first and rub the rail tops clean when dry (I use cellulose thinners for this - takes no prisoners).

I then spray (from another rattle can) a generic 'track colour', from the likes of Precision or Railmatch.

After that, it's brush painting most, if not all individual sleepers and also the rail sides, if a different hue is required (brake dust etc.).

Once all that has fully hardened off (I use enamels, as they are in my comfort zone), I start the ballasting.

I mix the appropriate shade, mixing different colours of 'N' gauge ballast (much more scale appearance in 4mm) from the likes of Carrs or Woodland Scenics.

Then, neat PVA (not the quick drying kind) is brush painted with an appropriately small brush in each sleeper bay and either side of the track. I can normally manage about 3 or 4 sleeper bays at a time, before the glue starts to go off too much. I then immediately sprinkle the ballast mix onto the wet glue and leave to dry (usually overnight). I can normally manage about a foot of this, before I start to go mad...

The excess ballast is vacuumed off next day, hopefully saved for reuse by a bit of old nylon tights or similar over the nozzle of the vacuum cleaner.

1 hour ago, McC said:

Some companies will make toys. Some make models. Some make very detailed scale models. Choice is golden. 

Sorry, that sounds like a rather trite and meaningless platitude, but one which also seems to have a hint of self-promotion lurking under the surface.

12 hours ago, westernviscount said:

I spent the evening removing the webs between sleepers ready for the track to be painted and ballasted. The fun bit!!

Yes, I thought I'd spied that you'd done that - well done!! I think it makes a major difference, once the track is ballasted.

As you seem to have used the thin sleepered kind of track (which is what I use myself), will you be adopting the 'paint the neat PVA between the sleepers and then drop the ballast onto the wet glue' approach?

Although very time consuming, I find that the much higher degree of control over where the ballast goes makes for a much more convincing scene...

One of our previous cats - Dill - managed to catch a live squirrel many years ago. There was such a commotion outside the back door that my wife went out, saw what was going on and said, 'Dill, drop it!'

Dill dropped the squirrel, which promptly made off and scrambled up to the top of the neighbours roof, from which he delighted in screeching taunts at poor old Dill!

1 hour ago, Michael Edge said:

I used to collect bits of scrap etch to make these from, all the narrow strips with a right angle in them - although I now have a supply of etches for GW lamp brackets.

I have recently taken to soldering my own version up from three components, two bits of thin brass strip and a small piece of chamfered 0.4mm brass rod on the underside, which is then glued into a corresponding hole on the bunker rear. Very time consuming but they tend not to fall off, if accidentally struck by a shunting pole!

11 hours ago, Andy Keane said:

I would probably vote for passengers. Given these cost from 50p up to ten pounds and more per figure they add considerably to the cost of rolling stock, never mind the effort etc. I have just added some folk to my Kernow Railmotor and they definitely help but added £25 to the cost. I feel fairly sure that they could be built in at much lower cost, but then would we all want our rolling stock to have identical people?

I can't remember the issue number of that MRJ or the author of the article, but the colour 2-D printed passengers created a stunning effect in what were, if I recall correctly, some kind of suburban coaches.

If enough 2-D passengers were available for modellers to put in at random in their own coaches, then we would not have the unfortunate effect of everyone's excursion trains featuring the same passengers in the same seats in the same coaches (but probably not going to the same destinations, certainly not all at the same time...)

2 hours ago, 2ManySpams said:

When exhibiting Treneglos, the light did just catch the mirrors, and they were occasionally noticed by those watching. I didn't fit anything in to the guards compartment, not did I add luggage racks. Deffo would not have been seen. 

If the light catching the mirrors made them visible to a few folk, then I would concede that the effort was probably worth it.

2 hours ago, 2ManySpams said:

I do have some Maunsell coaches for Pencarrow in 7mm and will be doing the same detailing internally. 

But that's fine, it's 7mm and there's much more chance of people being able to discern details within.

1 hour ago, NHY 581 said:

My view therefore is that if our new breed of toy train producers want to push boundaries, then let them. We'll take whatever extra detail you want to chuck in.

I won't disagree, provided that the extra effort is worth it. I don't count flickering fireboxes in that, though. That's only marginally more irritating than diesel locos, where the red rear taillights still come on, even when the loco is running in the opposite direction and hauling a train. The driver would have received a telling off for that and it might even have confused some signalmen enough to warrant the implementation of certain Emergency Signalling Regulations...

2 hours ago, NHY 581 said:

What we don't want is the return of "Design Clever". 

 

We want "Detail, Detail, Detail........"

No, we don't want 'Design Clever' to make a come back, but neither do we (I) want so much detail that it habitually falls off in transit from the supplier to the customer, or is included 'just for the sake of it' and thus ends up being overscale (some - most - RTR lamp brackets fall into this category).

I don't want factory-added detail that falls off at first handling of the model by a human bean, either...

If I were World Oligarch, I would ban all detail that cannot be seen when the rolling stock is right way up, on the track. If you aspire to show all the gubbins under a wagon that cannot normally be seen, then perhaps you also aspire to derailments and other rail-bourn catastrophes, which show off the underside of said wagon. No railwayman aspires to that kind of accident!

Having mentioned lamp brackets, if Rapido or Accurascale are wondering what to wow us with next, how about scale sized lamp brackets, made of metal, which are securely fitted to the model and on to which the modeller can deposit the correct configuration of lamps for whatever train the loco is working? That would get my vote.