Huw Griffiths

I suspect you might be saying that about some other publications in due course ... . I wonder ... which version of the print copy would that be? Joking aside, I'm sure everyone concerned has learnt the relevant lessons - so it's probably time to draw a line under that issue. I also appreciated Steve's offer to email a copy of the "Melbridge" article - I trust this offer is still open. I've intended to email him with my details - but, for various reasons, I haven't had chance to do so. To be fair, though, mistakes have probably found their way into lots of publications over the years - and I'm sure that many have been far worse than this. Anyway, the comments about buying copies of magazines certain months have a different resonance with me. My local corner newsagent (from whom I buy my monthly copy of BRM) has recently started stocking copies of some additional magazines - Model Engineer - and Garden Rail. I wonder what advice I might be offered as to which one I might sometimes consider buying.* (*Don't worry. It's a tough call - but I think I might be able to work that one out for myself ... decisions ... decisions.) Regards, Huw.

I wonder how consistent any livery colours would have been with any railway in this era. Even if the railway went out of their way to have a reasonably consistent paint "recipe", I suspect that a lot of paints would have been mixed in small batches. Also, a number of pollutants common in the atmosphere at the time would have changed the colours of paint on stock - with the result that, even in the same train, there might have been a number of "mismatches". As for preservation lines and museums, I suspect that they probably run into similar problems - although I'm sure they go to great lengths to "get things right", I wonder if they'll be "spot on" either. Huw.

Fair comment. However, some of us regular readers are never likely to take out a subscription - for example, people like me, who'd quite like to see local independent newsagents and model shops stay in business. Although I can't speak for other people, I know that I don't particularly wish to read pages on putting something together that I can't buy. Nothing personal, you understand. Anyway, on a more positive note, I quite enjoyed the remainder of this month's retail magazine. I also look forward to Garden Rail - and Engineering in Miniature - under your editorship. Regards, Huw.

"Go on. You know you want to … ." Seriously though, I don't see any logic in having a layout article only in a magazine edition which only subscribers can see - and an article about something which only new subscribers can get in the "non subs" edition. This move is likely to win few new friends for the magazine - and risks alienating existing readers. Hopefully not again, please. Anyway, some people might wonder if another opportunity might be being missed here - a "how to" article about using a laser cut wooden box as the basis for a microlayout. Of course, if such an article were to appear in a new, unified, "all readers" edition, it would be interesting to see the subscribers / non subscribers split of any layouts built in response. Huw.

Really? I always thought rabbits' left legs were the same lengths as their right legs. Obviously, I could be mistaken ... .

I'd welcome the chance. Somehow, though, I doubt if I'll ever experience it (not a moan, or a plea for sympathy - merely a statement of fact). Huw.

If the diabetics I know are anything to go by, it's actually a bit more nuanced than that. Apart from there being a number of different forms of diabetes, I understand that a key issue here is the body not always being able to correctly regulate blood sugar levels. As you say, the problem is often too much sugar. Sometimes, however, the problem might actually be too little sugar - which is why a number of diabetics have sometimes been known to have glucose tablets (or Lucozade) with them, for a quick sugar boost. Huw.

I guess that means my, perfectly reasonable, requests - for a piece of carpet, a snooker cue and a cask of Hoegaarden - would be declined if I ever built an exhibitable layout. After all, there are completely legitimate reasons for all of these: * The carpet would be to stop my feet hurting after 8 hours of standing behind a layout (or table). * The snooker cue would be useful when "explaining" technical points about wiring to people who don't like listening. * As for the Hoegaarden, this might come in very useful after dealing with some of these "comedians". Seriously though, I've never been "inside the barriers" at any show - and I'm not expecting this to change any time soon. Even if this were to happen, I'd go out of my way to be reasonable with my requests - and completely honest with any claims, which would be detailed. Saying that, I'm not expecting this to be put to the test any time soon. Huw.

It depends - do those Mars bars have to come from John Lewis Waitrose?* * When the parliamentary expenses scandal hit the headlines, there was a lot of fuss about second homes and the "John Lewis list". A number of MPs, from various parties, were implicated - some were "invited" to pay back some of their expenses - while others were "invited" to check into the "iron bar hotel", for an extended holiday "at Her Majesty's pleasure". Joking aside, I could see Mars bars being legitimate for a number of people - especially if they have certain medical conditions (diabetes?). Huw.

Gentlemen, All this garbage about supposedly being shafted every time a magazine publisher puts out a new "subs" offer is starting to get ever so slightly tedious. The same goes for any spurious comparisons with "Fred the shred". The magazine publishers - and the people who work to create their magazines - are offering us very readable magazines with content that interests a large number of us. Nobody is forcing anybody to buy these magazines - but a lot of us actively choose to. The publishers are also offering us various packages to interest us in the idea of buying these magazines direct - in advance and in bulk. Again, there's no coercion - merely offers, which we are free to choose if we want. I, personally, don't do subscriptions - but this is only because I actively choose to buy my magazines from my local corner newsagent. This is a personal choice - which I'm free to make. Other people choose to subscribe - some have continued to do so over a number of years - their personal choice, which they are also free to make. I suspect that the majority of these people are happy that they are getting a decent deal - and I am not arguing with that. However, at various times, the publishers have even offered existing subscribers the chance to switch to new deals, if (and it is "if") it actually suits them. Let's face it, guys, Warners are not shafting anybody - and they are not even trying to. Perhaps it might be time to do us all a favour - and change the record. Please move on - there's nothing to see. Let's get back to the trains - please. Huw.

I suspect that some commuters in the UK might wish certain TOCs to take note (allegedly). It might make some people wonder if certain marketing consultants might be taking the oui oui. Well, it's either that or a mischievous suggestion that some trains might not always move à grande vitesse … . Still, what do I know? Huw.

Alack, Shakespeare. I knew his works well. Well, some of them. And rather too well for my liking. Be it written in an English language so obscure, and antiquated, that lots of people these days can't understand some of the words without an explanation. I could make similar observations about the works of Dickens - and other "classic" authors - who padded their writing out with pages of meaningless (and sometimes unintelligible) waffle, to keep up the word count (and presumably maximise the amount contemporary magazines paid them to serialize their novels). And yet, those educationalists who've insisted, over the years, on inflicting this stuff onto generations of teenagers, seem incapable of comprehending the fact that lots of people have been turned off reading for life. (I can't possibly think why.) Hmmm - the "Oxford comma" has long been a personal bête noire - which is why I made a point of including one in my previous comments. You needn't worry - there won't be more of the abominations any time soon - well, not from me, anyway. Unfortunately, by the same token, if people try to communicate with me using "txt.spk", then oh dear ... ! Now we're talking - except, in my case, we're not (however much I might wish for the opportunity to do something constructive about this). Anyway, moving swiftly on: Well, there might - but probably best not to go into too much detail there - especially in view of a few thousand people for whom the word "stand" probably means something completely different right now. While they all wish us to see them as upright citizens - "honourable men" (and women) - some of them seem to be in the wrong line. That's right - some of them belong in "stand up" - while others aren't remotely funny. For obvious reasons, I'd prefer not to engage in discussion here about which ones would get my vote - and which ones would merely get "a piece of my mind". Anyway, that's enough about that. Let's get back to the trains. Huw.

Hmmm ... post #10 ... which makes me wonder if this comment might have been even more appropriate if it had come 3 posts earlier. Still, what do I know? After all, it's not as if I've ever visited Portmeirion ... . Huw.

It'll be interesting to see if they also appear, separately, on the BRM stand at various modelmaking exhibitions - and at what price. I suspect they might appeal to a number of people (including some regular readers of various Warner's magazines) who'll never take out subscriptions. I suspect this is one of those cases where it's impossible to please everybody. There's always likely to be a trade-off between ensuring there's enough usable space - with holders for whatever tools, dispensers, paint tinlets and containers various people use - and trying to keep the whole thing small enough to fit in the available space or on somebody's lap. However, as already pointed out, it's perfectly possible to produce a DIY version in any size. I also suspect that a number of companies might sell affordable, basic stands and organisers which could easily be adapted for this sort of use. Huw.

That's certainly the case these days. Saying that, 5 years ago, some high quality content from RMweb found its way into an e-zine - with a title something like Modelling Inspiration - which was available for download on this site, then included as a pullout in certain editions of BRM. It's a while since I last looked at a new issue of MI - and I'll probably never see any more. This is a shame, because they were very good indeed - "top drawer" - "high class" - the sort of stuff which "a discerning clientele" might even describe as "model railway p*rn". Yes. Right. Whatever. All I know is that I liked them - as did a number of other people. If something similar were to be done now - perhaps as e-zines - perhaps as BRM pullouts - perhaps as model railway show handouts (with tickets - or available, with a chat, at the BRM stand at shows) - I reckon they'd be quite a "draw". Whether copies find their way into doctors' / dentists' waiting rooms - alongside copies of Country Life, Condé Nast Traveller, National Geographic or the various caravan, yacht and performance car mags - is not for me to decide. However, I feel that aspirational fare like this is the sort of company that magazines like BRM need to keep (and are perfectly capable of keeping). This is the sort of thing I had in mind, a few months back, when I joked about BRM becoming a "coffee table" magazine. As for "online extras", what sort of fare is feasible? I'd be tempted to look "across the pond": I could look at Model Railroader, whose online content includes extra photos, plans and wallpaper, which wouldn't fit into the printed mag, plus relevant old articles from their many years of previous editions. This stuff is available free to all readers (even non subscribers and people who don't live in the US), but much of it only for a limited time (a few months or a year). I'm rather less keen on their "subscriber extras" idea - mainly because I don't want to cut my local newsagent out of the loop - but also because, with me living in the UK (where any subs are likely to be handled via an intermediary), I don't even know if all of the "subscriber only" stuff would actually be available to me as part of the package! I could also look at a free online magazine Model Railroad Hobbyist, which includes "rate this article" links, plus links to related content and advertisers' sites. There are also layout tours and other footage, available free by clicking on a "subscriber extras" link. At this point, there's nothing for me to worry about - as the e-zine is paid for by advertisers and (optional) subscriptions are free of charge. I also don't recall the publisher asking for much in the way of personal info - something like email address (many of us have separate ones for different purposes) and "board name" for the e-zine's associated forum site. "Pay content" is also available via further links, for any readers who are interested. Two different magazines - with different visions of online content. Both have free online extras and forum sites, which require free registration. Both also send you emails every so often (none of which are likely to cause anyone any problems). The main differences seem to lie in exactly what online extras are offered - for how long - and whether any readers are prevented from accessing any of these, especially based on geographic location. As for me, I find that both have provided a mix of online extras - some very useful - some less so - but I prefer MRH's "open to all readers" access model. Anyway, that's enough from me. Regards, Huw.

I'd wondered about that - but I suspect it might be very difficult (if not impossible) to get an accurate breakdown. As for me, I'd also prefer the paper magazine - even if storing the things can become a bit of a problem over time. I have read some "virtual magazines" (mainly Model Railroad Hobbyist) on my PC or laptop - they can be interesting (and break the monotony of having nothing else to do) - they can also be easy to carry round (a load of them on one decent sized memory stick) - but you need to make back up copies and stuff like that. There's also the physical presence of paper magazines - the tactile sensation of holding a real magazine and turning the pages - the distinctive aroma of the ink, when you get a fresh copy - also the chat with the friendly family running the local corner newsagent, when you hand over some real money to buy your real copy. No amount of going online replaces that - and I don't want it to, either. For me, virtual mags are about something completely different - not having to carry and store an increasingly heavy pile of paper - being able to access an archive of older editions quickly (always assuming, of course, that you've got a reasonably effective index), even if the resolution of drawings isn't always the same with certain magazines. Ultimately, I suspect that printed and "virtual" magazines probably appeal to different people, with different requirements. "You pay your money - and make your choice." Huw.

Why stop at stuff which the BRM team are used to dealing with? Certainly there's a lot which they are used to - but I wonder if there might also be some scope for involving the RMweb community in general, either in an occasional "any ideas?" slot or by inviting people to post about models etc. they are having issues with on RMweb, in the hope that somebody might have dealt with similar stuff in the past. Likewise, I wonder if there might be scope for something similar at shows. Far fetched? Perhaps. Perhaps not. Some show visitors would actually welcome stuff like this - I know I certainly would. An excuse to snap out of "exhausted zombie" mode and actually exercise my mind while at a show - what's not to like? As for the wiring (and electronics soldering), I really enjoy this stuff - have done for many years - the same goes for any excuse to use LEDs. I might not be too keen on "programmable" components but, if I get an excuse to experiment with real components, real wire and a real soldering iron, I tend to enjoy myself. Anyway, that's more than enough of my random thoughts - the random thoughts of some guy who's too tired to stay awake much longer (it probably shows). What probably also shows is the fact that, when I worked in a university, I made a point of looking at things from a different angle to some people (and encouraging students to do the same). They were, after all, training to be engineers … . Huw.

Well, there's always modular baseboard construction - and wiring running in rectangular trunking. Colour coded cable markers (with numbers) might also come in useful. Seriously though, I'm looking forward to seeing whatever you come up with. Huw.

I take it that you mean Narrow Gauge & Shortline Gazette - or was it Railroad Model Craftsman? Perhaps it might even have been the online Model Railroad Hobbyist? Joking aside, I strongly suspect that you're actually referring to Model Railroader - which seems to have been the dominant US publication for a number of years. Some people might see this as a good thing - after all, it usually seems to be a decent read (as do a number of other publications from the same stable). I'm not so sure - as, for a number of years, it seemed to go "off the boil", with a less than ideal mix of content and US forum site complaints of "chequebook modelling". I suspect that the fact that there is some competition in the UK helps keep magazines "honest". Coaches? I'd say "yes please" - especially if I can read some "how to" articles on "cut and shut" conversions, kitbashes and the like - but then, anyone who knows me (or whom I spoke to at "Ally Pally" this year) probably wouldn't be too surprised by my viewpoint. A number of people who contributed to my recent MM&M thread - in which I asked if people had started building models, even if they knew the final product would be flawed - probably also wouldn't be too surprised. Any of these people would have been left in no doubt that I enjoy build projects of this nature - "cut and shut" and other conversions, preferably with starting points that lend themselves to adaptation (it also helps if they're not too expensive in the first place). They might also have sussed that I'm planning to build a model inspired by an early petrol railbus (but using coach kit panels, or a home-brew equivalent) - even if (thanks to an external hard disk crash on my home PC) it might be slightly longer than planned before I get chance to build anything - but then, how many practical projects go ahead and get completed, without a hitch? While on the subject of stuff I'd like to see covered, I could also add multiple units (diesel or electric - I don't really mind) - building them from kits or converting them from cheap coach bodyshells - sorting out the interiors - and then adding and wiring internal lights. (OK - with my background, I might know a thing or two about wiring LEDs - but that's neither here nor there.) Then there's one aspect of railway modelling that everyone* really likes - that's right - layout wiring! (*OK - perhaps not - but it can be enjoyable, if you make a decent job of planning ahead and designing things properly.) Seriously though, I suspect we could all come up with our own personal lists of what we want to see in a model railway magazine - and what we don't want to see. I also suspect that everyone's lists would look rather different - which inevitably makes it a lot harder for the people who edit magazines to set the correct balance. All I know is that I'm not expecting to see any articles with my name on them any time soon - I'm in no rush to write them - and I suspect most people are in no rush to read them - not that this worries me, you understand. I'm quite happy to leave stuff like that to people who know their stuff. Huw.

Tired to the point of exhaustion. I seem to recall a "shrunk" version of Bernard Cribbins - on a Hornby advert - in the 1970s. In a similar vein, some years back, one mainstream magazine's front covers - with "tension lock coupler" equipped RTR locos routinely PhotoShopped into a photo of a real railway location - became rather tedious. Unfortunately, a lot of people (including people working on magazines) have the annoying habit of keeping on regurgitating the same old "joke" - time after time after time ... - and any joke is likely to get rather irritating by the five hundredth time of telling. Just saying. Nothing personal, you understand. Huw.

I very much hope that this "back to the drawing board" malarkey involves a new body and chassis. Your model looks far too good to discard. Huw.

I can think of 2 ways: * Locomotive exchange trials, or other unusual allocations - this happened for some large locos - surely, it must also have happened for shunters. (These days, something similar might be part and parcel of preservation.) * Failing all else, there's always "Rule 1" operation - which probably isn't actually as far fetched as some people imagine. After all, when Class 20, 37 and 58 diesel locos have been used in mainland Europe - and some German Köfs found their way to Eastleigh - a GWR loco "on tour" seems tame by comparison. Saying that, whose railway are we talking about here? Huw.

It sounds like somebody might have had a Whale of a time - is there a Precedent for reviewing LNWR locos? I hope I'm not causing a Problem, but I didn't hear anyone complain: "That's another nice mess you've gotten me into." Seriously though, this sounds like it could be an interesting issue - I might have to check it out, next week, when it appears in my local newsagent. Huw.

Would it be this one, by any chance? http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/95520-what-lima-loco-did-this-pancake-motor-come-from/&do=findComment&comment=1779537 This model - and others very similar to it - is actually US outline - and has been offered by a number of RTR manufacturers. It's based on a Plymouth shunter - I believe the 0-4-0 version to be a MDT and the 0-6-0 version a WDT (please don't hold me to this - I'm not an expert - I'm just repeating stuff other people have posted on a number of other sites). Plymouth actually produced a number of similarly styled Diesel shunters, both of these models are reputed to be somewhat overscale - despite being sold as HO, they're often regarded as actually being much closer to On30 (albeit having cabs with low roofs for the scale). This is reputed to have been one factor behind the appearance of the "On30 Conspiracy" - the "conspiracy" being that it was easy to get started in the scale. One "conversion" being promoted essentially consisted of removing a "HO" Plymouth from its box - repainting / relabelling it - changing the couplings - and chucking it onto an On30 layout. A more frequently encountered conversion also involves adding a larger cab (which often seems to mean a taller cab). There seem to be plenty of these conversions in the On30 sections of a number of US model railway forum sites. For example, I seriously considered building my own variants of some of the critters shown in one thread on FreeRails: http://www.freerails.com/view_topic.php?id=4726&forum_id=4&highlight=Bachmann I could also point to another interesting conversion thread on Railroad Line (I could probably point to others, if I looked a bit harder - the On30 and "critter" build sections of a number of US sites seem to be full of similar fare): http://railroad-line.com/discussion/pop_printer_friendly.asp?TOPIC_ID=36138 Meanwhile, this online presentation elsewhere also made for very interesting reading: http://thoroughbredlimited2015.yolasite.com/resources/Clinic_Presentations/Gliebe-Critters%20Great%20%26%20Small%202015-2.pdf As for me, I've yet to have a go at a similar "bash" - though I must admit they sound like fun. (In case you're wondering why I needed to ask which Lima shunter you were referring to, a few years back I came across another former Lima 0-4-0 Diesel shunter of similar "quality" - more recently sold in a cheap Jouef branded blister pack with a couple of 4 wheel wagons. I also had a few ideas for "bashes" - though whether any of them will see the light of day remains to be seen.) Huw.

That wouldn't, by any chance, be a LNER W1? Seriously though, whatever it is, I'm sure we'll find out in due course.