Taz

The only thing I noticed was the lack of top lining on the MK1 FK. Did it previously have a yellow stripe that has been removed?

Sorry Coach, didn't mean to imply that just because something was P4 that it would be a masterpiece (although of course some P4 locos/layouts can be masterpieces). My inclusion of P4 in my reply was just a continuation after the mention of it in Tony's entry above. I'm not trying to start a gauge war (my favorite layouts on this forum happen to be OO) so maybe best forget I ever mentioned it

I think you do yourself a disservice here Tony. Your individual models might not be highly detailed P4 masterpieces but they are still superb examples of modelling. You also need to look at what you have achieved here. 30+ feet of East cost mainline, 40 + trains and dozens of locos all create a picture of a scene long gone. You have created a classic layout here and although you have many friends who have helped and contributed it is your vision which has driven it forward. Are there any P4 equivalents? This layout represents the accumulation of your adult modelling efforts. If the extra effort of doing it all in P4 (assuming you had the space) was factored in could you have ever built it all? I'm sure it is one of the reasons why there are very few large P4 layouts. As someone who has feet in both the P4 and OO camps I appreciate that all layouts have a compromise. I would never have the time (or the space) to build my planned home layout in P4 so I have to accept the OO compromise. If I wanted to do P4 I would have to compromise on the scale of my plan. So I P4 as part of a group project and OO at home. Also whilst I take your point about the time spent on a computer I for one appreciate your postings here (and your DVD/Youtube efforts). Not knowing you and living in Devon this is the only way I would ever get to see Little Bytham and it is one of my favorite layouts on the forum. So thank you for showing us your 'train set'. It is much appreciated.

Time for a bit of an update. The Phoenix sides lacked detail and relief. The first thing I wanted to do was add the door hinges. I used the jig provided as part of the Comet coach detailing fret to mark out and drill the holes for the hinges from the same etch. However when I compared the hinge positions to prototype photos they didn't look right and would clash with where the lining would be. So they had to go. The hinges were removed, holes filled and sanded flush and then new hinge positions were marked, referencing photos. The holes were drilled and hinges secured with superglue. I also wanted to add droplights so I asked Rod (10800) to produce some on his cameo cutter using measurement I provided. These were superglued into the coach: I was then able to start reassembling all the components. Corridor side: Compartment side: I wasn't happy with the thin aluminum stampings used for the solebars and they were also set quite a way inboard which was presenting problems with bogie swing. So I replaced them with plastic C section. Step boards were also added from plastic strip. The truss rods were fabricated from 1mm brass angle. Battery boxes, vacuum cylinders and dynamo are Comet. The V hangers are David Geen etches. She's since had a coat of paint and was staged (alongside the B set) on the Bodmin boards we displayed at Scaleforum. However the paintjob was rushed and I also wasn't happy with the shade of Precision Crimson so I will strip her back to do properly. More to follow soon.

Have the interiors of the HST standard class coaches been refurbished? I've had a look on t'interweb but can't find any photos.

Thanks Gordon. That means a lot to me coming from you. Eastwood Town is one of my favourite layout topics here. It is where I first heard about OO-SF (or whatever it is called this week). I don't normally comment on the OO-SF threads as I can't be bothered with the politics. I'll just carry on with what seems to work for me so far. I've shown some OO-SF track work to my local P4 group (DRAG) and lent my track gauges out and I think some other future OO-SF projects will be taking off in the future. I'm lucky enough that Brian Harrap is part of our group so although the track work I have built so far isn't quite of your standards I have one of the best to help/guide me as I get round to producing the rest of my trackwork. As I mentioned in an earlier post I've been very busy in my work life recently and haven't really felt like doing much modelling but I'm getting my work/life balance sorted now and starting to do more modelling. However that has been directed more at our groups P4 Bodmin project and I have also developed a liking for brass coach building so I'm afraid progress on the layout itself is still on the back burner. I look forward to more progress on Eastwood Town once you tire of chasing that little white ball about

It just seems like semantics to me. I would be willing to bet what most people actually do (including myself) is model in OO (16.5mm) and then narrow the gauge to 16.2mm (OO-SF/ 4-SF) at the crossings to get improved running and visual appearance. I certainly don't model in 16.2mm and gauge widen my plain track to 16.5mm. Regardless of what it is called I will continue to do what works for me and everyone else is free to do likewise.

Wasn't it ever so? People have always driven too fast and too close in bad weather conditions. It has jack to do with how modern the car is. Unfortunately far too many drivers do not adjust their speed and behavior to the prevalent conditions.

As a BMW owner who also happens to be an IAM advanced driver I could take offense at some of the generalisations here........

All those southern engines look the same anyway, don't they?

I think they are also Parkside. Same page as the link but further down - PC31

The heli is a Puma. Excellent photos as usual Jim. Thanks for sharing.

If metalwork isn't your thing then Parkside also sell this underframe under the Red Panda brand: http://www.parksidedundas.co.uk/acatalog/RED_PANDA_RAILWAY_MODELS.html Not as fine as the Rumney version but can still produce a good model.

I wasn't going to get one of these as I already have an old Airfix one and a Mainly Trains detailing kit squirreled away for a bit of old fashioned modelling. But that looks so good I might just weaken.

Which reminds me Cap'n. Shouldn't we be having another SWAG curry evening soon?

Apologies Ian, I hadn't intended to be dismissive of your post or opinion. I just believe that in order to cater for the trainset end of the market tender locos (including the King) will always come with couplings at both ends. I also believe that most people wouldn't take advantage of a substitute bogie and therefore the manufacturers couldn't justify the cost of its conclusion. A plug in 'blanking plate' type fixture might work. I just think I would rather the manufacturers used their development budget for the models on making sure the basic shape was correct rather than thinking up whizzy ways to make the bogies work for all sectors of the market (it would be nice if they could do both but there will be fixed budgets in play).

The door is always open for you to return Chris. We won't hold your temporary defection against you

What we have to remember is that a fair chunk of sales (if not the bulk of them) are going to go to people with more trainset like layouts (no snobbery intended) where tension locks are required. It's not as if chopping of a NEM pocket and replacing with a bit of plasticard is that difficult. the reverse (fitting a NEM pocket) would be much harder. This is just one of the compromises along with 2nd radius compatibility and 00 that we have to accept unless we want our models to become even lower production niche items with a resultant much higher price tag. Things like this aren't worth getting worked up about. Of far more importance are the difficult to fix issues such as the Hall front frame issue discussed above.

I'm not sure if this would be the same train but in a couple of my photo books from the Plymouth area the author comments about the 'Swindon Fish' which was a train often used by the works as a running in turn. This led to some unusual motive power visiting Laira such as 77xxx 3MT 2-6-0s in the early 50s.

I'm not sure if anyone can confirm or put me back in my box but I always thought that this particular series of bow ended coaches did not have 4 roof handrails as shown in the CADs but only two which were on the roof centreline?

Stubby's loo?

That's an excellent job Brian has done there. Can I ask a question about the original Bachmann Modified Hall? Split chassis aside, what is the general consensus on the accuracy of the model? Does it have any major flaws (boiler / firebox shape etc)? I have one which is a reasonable runner but am not sure if it is worth upgrading to the latest model. Thanks.

I'll see your pink trains and statements of authority and raise you one antipodean monster

+1 for steam please

Ah, I knew those eclipse glasses would come in useful again