Kenton

Or when the seller has shill bidded the second highest bid up to its maximum and then been disappointed that their bid has not tempted out another bid. For example you bid £40 with a start price of £1 (you are going to win the item for £1, but prepared to pay £40) The Seller bids £41 (probably in steps) so is going to "win" it. He hopes you (or someone else) will bid again No one wants it at £42 so he wins it back, all he has to do is declare non-payment then offer it to you as a second chance ... at £40 (which you might still be content to pay) Even though if the seller (or his pal) had not intervened you would have won it for £1 ! The only second chance offer worth taking is when the seller offers it up for sale at the starting price again. Of course not every seller is so devious/dishonest - in all probability only a very small number. And some will say as you were prepared to pay £40 what grounds have you to complain?

Thanks once again everybody. I could get quite emotional - but that wouldn't be true to form. It just simply reminds me why I enjoy RMWeb so much ... the people, fellow RMWebbers. Oh, and maybe, the odd bit of modelling I suppose.

Yes I am sure that there was never a direct offence intended. But thinking a little wider sometimes this entire topic/discussion of eBay "madness" has its own wider issues. I do find it quite often a little thoughtless with its remarks about individual items and their sellers (sure am as guilty as any in that regard).The criticism of an individual selling on ebay some (perhaps once treasured) item or a model that has been perhaps weathered to the best of their ability, or a kit faithfully put together to some poor instruction set and little actual prototype knowledge. We cannot all be expert modellers with absolute and infinite knowledge of everything railway related. Ebay is just a marketplace it has some gems but mostly it is simply a way of disposing of unwanted junk for a few pence. The simple fact that something sells shows that someone - maybe in total ignorance - wants it at a price. Or just is contented by the simple thrill of winning the bidding process. We continue to laugh at their expense - sure in the belief that we are better than that. Laughter, is a great medicine. Being able to laugh at oneself and human misery is something we should all seek to do. There is great benefit is seeking out the funny side of a situation even when it effects us directly. Some of the sickest humour I have heard has been espoused by members of the medical profession. It is a coping strategy a method used to try to understand they are inadequate. People simply get ill and they do not have an answer.

But before we become too PC and disregard all the English language there is a vast difference between the mere suggestive implication or misunderstanding of a single word and the direct use of a specific medical term. The media and not a few so-called experts seeking limelight for their egos has done its best of late to demonise sugar and obesity as the root cause of Diabetes. Sadly, the condition is far more complex - probably like most illness and not down to anything so simplistic.

:D That reminds me, must get some Grecian 2000. That dark black hair on a grey head - just the sort of thing to be recognised in a crowd. Along with a good book to read on the beach.

I'm back !!!! OK stop the boos and howls! I'm really touched by this topic and have had an enjoyable couple of hours reading it. THANK YOU all for the concerns and the resulting entertainment. I have a "special" email account just for RMWeb and have not opened it since I made a hasty departure overseas back in August. So opened it this morning to find it full of emails and PMs and those lovely notifications from RMWeb about all the topics that I have posted to (oh dear so many!) which have been revived. I think I have just about responded to the emails and will have a go at the PM's tomorrow ... then there are all those semi-dormant topics to read! Gordon has it about right - yes thanks Gordon for dropping round and letting me know about this topic. There were no stitches to burst - thankfully. There are probably only about half-a-dozen or so RMWebbers who know me though I've met quite a few over the years who probably know me better for my modelling (or lack of) It has been reassuring to see some of them posting on these pages confirming that I do exist in human form (though it has been quite a while since I rode a bike). I did rather like the image of a ghost, ha ha. Gordon was right way back on page 1. Work is the enemy. The longest trip abroad since the early 70's ... Java might have been warmer. 16 weeks away from home, family, friends (including RMWeb) It is about time I retired. I'm afraid on my return just before Xmas railway modelling and social media was the last thing I wanted. (all right, all right, stop giggling there in the back row) Then after Xmas I find myself being given rather large doses of morphine and being whisked into A&E by ambulance. Two attractive young female paramedics in attendance (ok I did say I was on morphine) Not a pretty sight vomiting blood coffee grounds (sorry about your tea) following a short stay in the Acute Medical ward (not short enough) - I detest needles and machines that go ping - the place was full of old demented souls and drunks (and others on mind altering drugs like morphine) giving the staff verbal abuse. Fortunately, I was soon discharged to the care of my wife, with no rational medical explanation of the cause. Someone I had eaten or a kick by a horse, perhaps. In a very weakened state when Gordon popped round I think I may have just about managed a feeble "hello". Sorry about that Gordon I should have offered at least a drink to toast the new year. Anyway, I am back now. Though it will take time to get back up to speed and I'm going to be away again in a short while as I meet up with some old colleagues from the US to chew some fat on a sun-drenched beach. I need to get some colour back into my skin and some rum in my veins. There's a bike ride to look forward to... Maxi Lexus

  Almost but not as bad as you made it out to be. If the track on the arms my Y leaves close the edge of the board, ie not in the middle then that can be aligned to the two other modules which have track in the middle with much less separation of the arms of the Y. Also remember that those arms of the Y are angled. As I keep saying they do not have to leave in the middle of the end plate and only have to allow another end plate with track in the middle to join them. I reckon that is a saving of at least (18"- width of track) of separation. Sometimes I wish I could draw a picture

Once again we get back to the statement that they do not have to be in the centre of the ends - it is, or should be, only a recommendation. It has nothing to do with practicality and only to do with the aesthetics of the group layout. All that should required to join the board is that there is sufficient purchase for a G-clamp (possibly 2) to hold the boards together. So the end plates on a Y double/single junction do not have to have the separation given above. Again we make thing too difficult instead of just doing it. The key thing in planning is to remember that (and should expect) the module you connect to may be centred therefore the arms of the Y may need to have adaptor boards. Also the in the example given above the reason was given that ALL boards must be reversible - I do not see this as a MUST - A terminus is not reversible and so I see no reason why the component boards of a junction should be. Sure it makes life for all concerned easier if they are but there shouldn't be a law that states it - where's the fun in arranging 20 identical straight through boards. I want to see destinations and route challenges in the group setup.

Don't worry, those of us who are not so uptight about it will still realise that we have a single line module to participate with - and will go home in the knowledge that we have to remedy our inadequacies by measuring more carefully for the next meet. Adapt, adjust, compromise and enjoy the journey. Perhaps that is just the British way.

No the word is not "tangent" because a tangent only applies to a curve and the standard clearly says 90' to end edge. I would like to see track where rails are at 90 and yet somehow on a curve. I was not suggesting the 3" either as a standard or that it was part of a standard. All I said was that somewhere back-along it was given as a recommendation and I was using it. The reasons are pretty obvious once you realise that you cannot have a curve at 90' without at least some length of straight track. £" was never agreed on and IIRC disputed by some of the "we have standards that are best and should be applied without question" folk. But I simply wanted to move on and 3", or something, seemed as good as anything. The important thing was that it wasn't going to cause anyone or me a problem. If it turns out over the years that 3" turns out to be a minimum of 4" I'll have to adapt the modules but at least will get there having seen for myself the reason why it evolved that way.

So yes of course you can and will have curves across module joins. It's not a "big restrictive standard" that forbids that. A track that crosses at 90 degrees to the board simply cannot be anything other than straight at the point at which it crosses. I also thought that was discussed back along in this topic, that this meant that a short straight would be added to all curves at the crossing (3" was mentioned - and is what is used on Kenton's Curve) as this assists the transitioning of curves (with flexitrak in particular) To quote myself (sadly) So if I can do it without a problem and some stupidly small measurement then I guess others can. I have used all sorts of gadgets to line up tracks over board ends - from the Peco gauge, to a vernier, to a mark 1 eyeball all work to an unknown tolerance but work just fine. So my planned double track modules will use the same tools and be tested with my OO gauge stock just to be sure. I have confidence in my abilities, and those of others, which is why I have thrown out all the bibles on standards.

I thought the theory was that what happens between your own layout board "modules" has nothing to do with these module "standards" unless you were breaking up your layout and claiming to use the boards as independent modules - when of course they would then have to conform as a module and that would mean straight sections at module joins. What happens on your layout is your concern to sort out in your own environment - it is only where the track crosses to another module owned by any other member of the group that we need some very basic, limited standards. So curves at module joins will not happen and so the problems they would cause will not happen.

So not a problem then - or no problem at all on single track - a potential problem on double track - so more care required measuring the distance between tracks. (relative to each other and not to the board position) And just where are we going to have curves crossing modules? Or even angled track for that matter. Our simple standards only allow straight track over end plates between modules.

I do wonder why those who love their Fre(e)mo standards so much don't just go away and build their US/European Ho modules to their wonderful tried and all so perfect standards. I would much rather learn to do things the British way than continually have some other set of universal standards forced on me. I get trains to cross board joins that are certainly not to such a tight standard and they do not derail. The board width again is a complete irrelevance yet it seems to be continually brought up by those who seem to want to push end profiles. Yes, the distance between the double track is important but so impossible that we are unable to measure it. And yes it is 50mm not some other distance to suit the Fre(e)mo standards. I'm beginning to wonder why I'm bothering - and understanding why there seems to be so few others contributing modules in the forum. Waiting to learn from the mistakes and progress of others - perhaps? Or just fed up with the growing complexity and lack of innovation at each stage.

So it IS clear then using rail bridges would break the BritishOO Module standard of G-clamping end plates together. I still think we are trying to overcomplicate and design out something that doesn't exist. With single track modules then just where is the problem? The G-clamps take care of both height and location across the width. For double track it is a simple measure - with or without tools which, frankly, if someone is incapable of doing then I would seriously question their ability to lay track at all. It is not brain surgery to measure 50mm, there are tools, and so what if the novice to modelling cannot cope with that - they still bring a disused track and single line module to the meet. Yet again I sense an agenda - it was included in the xyz standards so we should adopt it. Quite a sensible question with a simple solution.

cripes! A model shop not too far away used to hand them out free if you purchase some track - I think the mark-up is pretty close to 250% on those. Mind you if you spent over £100 you also got a 5% "rounding" discount, a cup of coffee and a biscuit! I'm sure most of us are capable of cutting one from a piece of plasticard, having one laser cut in mdf, cast in resin or etched in brass. I even find a steel rule pretty accurate. Just avoid a tape measure (especially one of those where the end stop moves a little to give you a saw cut's width and something to sand down for your trouble)

Do help me understand how the G-clamps work in these cases - extra wide clamps and some form of padding?

We are not talking P4 type of measurements here (+/-0.01mm) the Peco double track plastic gauge thingy I believe is set at 50mm so using that should be adequate. +/-0.5mm (even 1mm) is not going to be too challenging or disruptive. If it is then one track becomes abandoned or a siding and used accordingly. If it really is that critical then I'm sure some enterprising individual could make and sell us a suitable metal gauge. I really would vote against rail joiners between modules - very impracticable. And any short piece of track between modules just leave an unsupported gap for trains to fall down, will buckle under clamping of endplates and defeats the concept of modules.

I don't like soldering to countersunk/other screws as a method of solid fixing of rail ends - I have tried it and found it to be less than satisfactory - I will be using my usual of 3 (or more) copper-clad sleepers with the one at the edge exactly in line with the rail ends. I have found that this provides the most secure and practical solution. The problem being the ease of catching the ends of the rails on all sorts. (but do remember to gap the PCB, both sides, or you may end up with a short that is difficult to identify) BTW I'm not sure it needs a recommendation and certainly not a standard - it is just one of those personal choice items (just like wire colour, etc)

Poor old Andy, what has he done to deserve that?

Fun? Thrill? Sorry it is nothing like a real auction and is just a shopping experience (a none too pleasant one at that - but then I don't like shopping in any shape or form) I have been using the same sniping program for years without any problems. The point was very much along the lines of do not assume that there is a person waiting on the end of an auction, any more than there is someone on the other end of a telephone waiting for your call. Most ebay auctions that interest me end during the night so I couldn't sit there watching them even if I wanted to - quite a number of folk work nights and I suspect their employers do not allow them to sit at a PC waiting to click a mouse to the tune of a countdown timer. ThaneofFife - I do think your use of "Most" is far worse a generalisation then my "Often" as the "Most" in your context is applied to every one who uses ebay where as my "Often" applies to my personal experience (of which you have no knowledge).

Totally unacceptable and illegal - record all conversations with strangers - then report such threats to the police. I think it (just) comes under the heading of "obtaining money by menace". Not that it sounds like they would understand the charge. You obviously do not understand how Snipe bidding works. Those that use such programs have far better things to do with their lives than sitting over a PC staring at an ebay screen. They very often make their bid using the program many days before the listing ends. Often when the listing first appears on their search list email from ebay. They then go away and forget about ebay, the item, and the bid. They are not so desperate that they need the item and are content that another will be along at some point. In the dying seconds before the auction ends the snipe program sends in their trumping bid and they win. When they come back from their holiday/business trip (they are not chained to their mobile phone or wish to pay extortionate roaming charges, or don't even have one, or want the "mobile app") they catch up on their email to find they have won the item and then pay for it. Often having to prompt the lazy seller for an invoice. As for synced accounts - not at all popular.

Got to start somewhere. Glad for the competition, though you didn't have to make it quite so complex just to show me up

Either that or there was a lot of interference / static in defining the proposals. - In reality I think I am to blame for at least a couple of hundred (and they weren't all - not quite - my posts) Whatever the outcome I hope we cannot predict it based on reads or contributors or even the number of topics started in the Modular Forum. (It is a bit lonely in there at the moment)

  :no: Quite different compounds with many different properties but some similarities - eg toxicity.. Trichloroethylene : Trichloroethane :