298

On 21/03/2024 at 11:09, steve1 said:

 

Does the writer of the original piece also do the lottery? They were pretty accurate in their predictions in that article.

 

steve

...or more accurate in the sense that he didn't predict and we haven't got a class 83 and 84. The 81 would have been covered by Lilliput and the 82 by Triang, and although the former was a good model, neither are to modern standards.

18 hours ago, Northmoor said:

If I did see a common theme this year it was a lot of long and narrow layouts representing very little beyond the railway boundary; I find that "width" greatly helps with creating a sense of place so a few of them didn't grab my attention for long, but the quality of workmanship was consistently high.  

Conversely, I've seen plenty of photos from OnTraxs of layouts that regardless of their size, are very much of a scene with a train in and not what you describe, but that is an example of subjective analysis Vs selective photos. I can see how they might take longer to build, be less interesting to operate and more difficult to transport, but it's something that has piqued my interest and am looking at for the future.

Another order of custom decals turned around quickly by John from Precision Labels- I thought I'd messed up by not specifying double pass white as I must have done previously and they look quite thin on the backing sheet, but seem to have sufficient density when applied. I copied the font from a side photo of 965 in the Hershey archives, noting that it lacked the serifs on the lettering. As usual the S was the most difficult, but I found a similar font to manipulate:

The lower car of the three is an incorrect Walthers 40' box, finished before I realised the dimensions and weights I copied from a builders photo pretty much pointed to all Hershey cars being 36', the Accurail inside and outside braced cars being closest in design (1049 is now relegated to test status as I have enough 36' cars).

If I was smart enough I would have worked out exactly where the bracing went and adjusted the artwork to sit over it, instead of cutting it in position and painting over the gaps. 

On 14/03/2024 at 09:34, dasatcopthorne said:

We discovered that the problem with fully solid state juicers is the power rating capacity.

 

One loco mostly seems to be fine but beware of locos that draw more current than the juicer components can handle.

 

Dave.

Similarly, I've known of issues with solid state juicers requiring a minimum current (2a) that is higher than a Powercab with a wall-wart (1.8a).

Something I never figured until I started modelling Cuba is I think (and please correct me if I'm wrong) is there is a certain resentment- for example, one friend described my purchase of a Rapido GMD-1 in Cuban Railways livery as a "Cuban Crisis" and I've heard the word "Communist" used in hushed terms...

The actual era I'm trying to portray is pre-revolution when Cuba was a bit of a playground for the USA, think Hemingway and "Our Man in Havana" from that era and more recently the D-list sequel "Dirty Dancing-Havana Nights" which is actually as good at describing the pre-revolutionary years as "Who framed Roger Rabbit?" is about the demise of the Pacific Electric Interurban. I showed this photo of the Hershey to someone at the layouts debut and they were quick to point out the US Navy Sailor: https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/original-slide-hershey-cuba-102-scene-2076329018 (link opens a slide listing on Worthpoint).

I was hoping the layouts recent outing in front of knowledgeable US railfans in Stokenchurch might make them realise that it wasn't actually an American layout, despite fundamentally looking like one, but complacency still seems to reign and the Hershey didn't seem to be more recognised than at normal shows. I suppose that's the problem when you model something specific, by comparison is @TEAMYAKIMA's Chinese layout a specific industrial city or could it be anywhere? 

On 29/02/2024 at 16:26, Willie Whizz said:

Deepcar is certainly very good, and worth seeing if you haven’t already. The trouble is, being fairly local, over those four decades I must have seen it getting on two dozen times now, and it doesn’t have the underlying “charm factor” that would make me want to see it yet again. Sorry …

So plenty of new entrants to the hobby who haven't seen it then. I think it's only been out a two or three times in the last ten years or so, having been in store in a late member's garage. I believe the old (and occasionally smoking) Kebab van has been presented to his family, hence the new replacement kebab van:

9 hours ago, GWC1 said:

Final arrangements underway for the show. I just noticed that my Wouldham's chalk pit is still listed as appearing. Unfortunately, there just wasn't space to fit it in. Instead we have a new, smaller, layout Wits End coming. 

I'm shocked that you've found a smaller layout..

18 hours ago, F-UnitMad said:

How can anyone possibly just walk right past layouts without a second glance, just because it's "not their area of interest / not my scale / steam / diesel / foreign / can't relate to it" - any or all of these blinkered reasons..???!!!

Something that applies to all layouts, is they have to look visually inviting - I've realised now that some previous projects that fastidiously followed a prototype would have been boring to look at, whereas adding a little modellers licence would have given them an edge. 

It also helps to have proper running, the same train thoughtlessly batting round or running badly isn't going to appeal to me. 

...managed to see it from home, through a gap in the clouds when it departed just after 16.00

This plane-spotting lark is really difficult - I thought railtours were bad for running late, but this was far worse. 

I'm not sure what was rare and what wasn't for Birmingham, although I thought this Virgin A350 G-VPRD might be? The pilot didn't know where to go and had to follow a ground vehicle...

Finally, my own photo of OneAir's G-UNET, currently at Birmingham.

Technically it isn't foreign, but it is an Interurban so ticks all the boxes for me. It was my favourite layout at Ely last year.

One Air's G-UNET has just been on BigJetTV landing at Heathrow....

10 hours ago, PaulRhB said:

I’m sure Andy @298 has probably got more knowledge, he might even have modelled some of them sometime 😁

I'd like to one day, I had a couple of sets of decals that I passed on to @Supaned and still have a Suydam brass B (that you've just reminded me to produce some decals for Central Limones for it before I finish the next white decals sheet).

Statement on the AMB/Laserkit website regarding the closure of the business due to the passing of owner John Hitzeman. 

http://www.laserkit.com/

One of my first overseas purchases when I started US modelling was for the AMB detailing parts and lowering kit for the Cannonball Steeplecab, and I was very impressed with the final result that John created with his Fort Dodge loco. 

At least with it being Monaco they can get away with a single imbedded steel wire and use the Faller system, because all the cars need to do is follow each other round without overtaking...

There is a certain precedent on this, I remember my Dad saying KeilKraft Jetex models were taken off sale because the tablets used for propulsion were also favoured by the IRA, and I bet it wasn't because they liked traipsing over muddy fields or climbing trees to retrieve a lost free flight model though.

Should "Blue Harbour" be Blue Heron?

HO, Pacific Northwest themed inglenook, ~30 years ago.

1 hour ago, sncf231e said:

Some trainsets are model railways, like this:

Regards

Fred

I take it it's S scale and not O? If it was the latter, it'd have a spare rail on the track centreline and that would definitely make it a train set.

@Prof Klyzlr asked me this earlier on my FB group, I've answered and have been mulling it over all day. Personally I like the idea of including the main and having it run automatically at a show whilst switching the mill, but that would require a large fiddle yard to support it. 

For further context, this is the mill looking west(ish) with the main line shown in blue and a rough representation of the mill track layout in red. The problem to faithfully replicating it is the sharp curves onto 4th St that will obviously require more depth than the foot wide boards (and more space means more buildings.

Thinking about the aesthetics, I've seen plenty of freelanced layouts that look right, and plenty of ones that slavishly follow a prototype but somehow look wrong. I tried to do the former with my interpretation of Blue Heron because there were other elements I wanted to include, and in terms of the Prof's concept it is still possible to build just the mill and add the main later...

20 hours ago, PaulRhB said:

Andy, is there any chance of sorting the photos, plus any progress? 😁

To summarise, everyone I know has been on holiday there... ( @long island jack has ridden it today ), I'm still trying to sell the concept to my family...

I'm currently working on the viaduct as a small pizza layout, I've finished the cad for the brake vans but not printed anything recently or the Shortys). 

I'll try to have a go at the photos, but in the meantime here is the terraforming currently going on on the summerhouse, until the family claim it back as apparently it isn't a modelling room....

3 hours ago, 298 said:

There does seem to be an attitude that fuel expenses are there to be claimed, 

3 hours ago, Phil Parker said:

 

That's a pretty serious accusation.

 

In all my years exhibiting, I never over-claimed, and didn't know anyone else who was looking to rip off the organisers. Generally, we ended up out of pocket slightly.

 

 I must have been doing the wrong shows. I certainly never invited the wrong people though as none of that happened at any show I was involved with. And if it had, the layout owner would have found their invites dry up pretty quickly...

I'll rephrase that, obviously many people take a good stand on not claiming expenses, but I'm not associating those who might claim just for their petrol for a 100 mile round trip in the same breath as the extreme cases as mentioned in other threads on here where exhibitors have tried to pull a fast one because the show looked more successful. But there is a point at which someone is bothering to claim for just local miles, when the cost to them is negligible.

Still, I doubt the traders would be complaining, their takings must go up after exhibitors have been paid out...

There does seem to be an attitude that fuel expenses are there to be claimed, when in reality for a local show once you and your mates have got in for free and had food and drinks provided, you probably owe them money-especially if you were going to the show anyway and have still had time to enjoy it, and been given an exhibitors discount as a lot of traders kindly do.

Just to confirm though, expenses is one thing but you'll never be reimbursed for the things you need to bring a layout up to exhibition standard (curtains, spare controllers, wear and tear to stock and increased cleaning and maintenance, etc.), plus the time spent doing so and filling out paperwork and risk assessments, but having seen wads of the folding changing hands for layouts that look like they have just fallen out of a haunted loft, where one train "the best runner" has been doing laps all afternoon whilst the operator has forty winks, there is definitely something amiss with the whole culture of getting paid for it...

Some of @Gilbert's photos from yesterday although I must have missed him at the layout when I nipped out for lunch-thanks for taking them.

Although it was the layouts fourth show, it was actually the first where it's been out and back in a day. One problem with a lack of power in one direction to the frog in front of the 44 tonner above couldn't be traced, so I sprayed some electrical contact cleaner in it and cycled it a few times, and then it seemed to work. It was only a problem for the Cincinnati Car, which is the only vehicle without a stay alive- it didn't completely stall but the ABC programming caused it to reverse.

The show seemed well attended, although there is still the issue that the layout doesn't seem to be recognisable as Cuba, albeit one where everything is American. 

A few quick projects prior to the layouts appearance at Stokenchurch tomorrow: finally fitting licence plates to the vehicles (the array of 1950s Cuban plates came from the internet and we're reduced to 3.5*1.75mm, the Washington State plates are for someone else).

I gave up trying to decide whether the colour relates to the date of issue and whether they would be changed by the expiry date, and just chose the prettiest colours. 

And a laminated card showing how I packed the stock into box files, to save time putting it all away again...

Conversely I brought one secondhand because I found that when I'm trying to persuade the public to operate, not many like to have Powercab with lots of buttons presented to them. I've since gained a second Powercab when Hatton's had them for £168 last year, but still prefer to run with the Cab06. Once disadvantage I've found is it seems difficult to select speed step 1 and have had to re-tune a lot of Loco's performance to improve slow speed running. I'm not sure whether this is because I have the Potentiometer version, or how it differs to the encoder version in this respect.

On the other hand, to me these abominations represent the absolute nadir of 1970s nostalgia. They were in a box from the in-Law's loft and belonged to my Brother in Law (anything useable went to my Nephew), who probably can't be persuaded to re-enter the hobby if this is what he remembers.

My first loco was actually a LNER J50, I wanted a Pannier but my parents somehow thought I had to have something to go with my Brother's Flying Scotsman (no prizes for guessing who the favourite child was...). I later did swap it at school for a Pannier.

I still have my second loco, the infamous GWR Holden tank. I brought another GWR150 one at that time and a GWR175 one in 2010. Hopefully Hornby will still have the moulds in eleven years time...