Huw Griffiths

I always thought it was a Skoda - but then what do I know?

I wondered where this shuttle bus had disappeared to, on the way back. Going there from Wood Green in the morning, this bus and a newer ("66 plate") one with different headlights turned up together and both headed to "Ally Pally". On the way back, after a very long wait, the "66 plater" turned up on its own at about 10 to 5 - and the driver announced that there'd be a long wait before it set off - and, since it might take some time to do the return trip, this journey would now become the final bus, a bit before 5 - so much for the last bus back being quarter past 5 on both days. As for the show itself, I really enjoyed it - and (thanks to the presence of certain specialist suppliers) was able to achieve more than I planned to, within half an hour of entering the halls. I'll also be able to get on with my next build project (time permitting, of course). I'm certainly not complaining. Huw.

It's a while since we heard from that nice, tolerant, guy from Tunbridge Wells. Not that I'm in any rush to do so，you understand … .

This year's challenge is not for me, I'm afraid. However, when I spoke to the researchers at "Ally Pally", I got the impression that they might be looking to do other challenges in future years - some of which might be more workable for me. Time will tell - but I'd be happy to be kept "in the loop". One thing which came across very strongly in conversation was that they are keen to portray the hobby in a positive light - and make it clear that a number of skills are involved in the hobby. As I suggested when I chatted with them on Sunday, the NMRA website offers some potential ideas here: nmra.org/beginner/why-model I could also add that it offers a credible excuse - sorry - reason - to do some electronics stuff. Do you like lights inside your model trains? You could always add a homebrew circuit board inside the roof, complete with a number of small LEDs and resistors - and your soldering iron also gets a workout! Seriously though, this hobby involves a lot of skills - especially if you build things yourself (I know - shocking concept - it'll never catch on). Exactly how many skills are involved - and to what extent - are matters of personal choice. However, there's certainly a lot more to railway modelling than shaking RTR models out of a box - and long may this continue. Huw.

- US outline On30 - especially the trams, domed clerestory coaches / combines and 0-4-0 Diesels. - Returns stand - to visitors familiar with shows up to 2015, no major show seems complete without the Bachmann scrum and associated chance for people's rucksacks and steel toecapped boots to get a serious workout. Seriously though, the lack of "returns" stands has been commented about in the past - as has their quoted reason for this (not as many returns). A number of people will also have things they'd like to see reinstated, or added, to their range (preferably at affordable prices): - "Junior" and "Underground Ernie" ranges (or some other toy range using the same motor chassis). - AGEIR 60 ton boxcab (a number of people in the US have been agitating for this - and it could be built to use the UE multiple unit chassis - fit a double ended motor and all wheel drive would also be available). In practice, of course, it's doubtful if they could ever please everyone. Even if they could, stand space at shows doesn't come cheap (neither does venue hire), so there's always going to be a balancing act. There's also the fact that, at any show, not everyone will be buying RTR. I certainly wasn't at "Ally Pally". I'm one of those show visitors who intend to something really shocking - that's right - BUILD SOMETHING!! I know - some people probably need to lie down in a darkened room after reading that - and they probably expect me to wash my mouth out with soap. We'll, I'm not going to. And, on that bombshell, it's time to end. Thanks for reading. Goodbye. Huw.

I've also been looking at some small German locos - of the Köf2 variety. I wouldn't want to ruin them (for me, the original clsssic design's got a real charm) - but they've given me a few ideas for freelance bashes of cheap starter locos. Whether any of them get built is another matter. Huw.

Fair comment. OK - to be pedantic, transformers actually output AC - the DC output "wall warts" and other power supplies that are widely used have components to convert AC to DC (exactly what depends on whether they are simple, transformer / rectifier / capacitor based designs or the, rather more complex, switch mode types). However, I think you've summed things up pretty well. I can remember a few years back, when one major manufacturer threatened to move to supplying their whole RTR range only as "ready chipped", with their "own" decoder. Although, on the surface, this might have appeared to make sense, there were howls of protest from DCC "converts" as well as DC "luddites". People not interested in model railways (yes - I've been told they exist) would probably have had no difficulty in seeing why some DC modellers would be unhappy about having to pay extra for "chips" they had no use for. However, some DCC types were complaining about exactly the same thing, albeit for different reasons. These people wanted to be able to choose which decoders went into their locos - which features - stuff like that. Then we come to DCC novices - the few modellers who might benefit most from basic "factory DCC". Rather than pushing one specific decoder on them, might it perhaps be better to provide them with information on what a suitable decoder needs to offer? I'm not sure - after all, I'm no expert. Huw.

… do … * * Other alien concepts are also available - but I don't think we need worry about them here. I'm not convinced that everyone else does … .

Only if it features an item only available "chipped" - perhaps a specific make of traverser, or something else reasonably distinctive. Not from everyone. As far as I am concerned, it's a case of "each to their own". Chips fitted inside locos might not suit me personally - even if effectively allowing for them to be fitted at a later date might. The situation will be different for other people - as will the line they take. Fair enough - nothing to see - life moves on. Huw.

Well, I suppose they could start putting reviews on their cover DVDs. I'm not saying they need to - or even that they should - but I'm sure they could, if there were any point in them doing so. Somehow though, I don't see them being in any rush to try this.

As some people here know, I'm an electrical engineer - with some experience of instrumentation. Some people might imagine that I'd be likely to want all the bells, whistles, "57 engines in steam" and all that malarkey. Sorry, guys; I want something I understand - something I can fix, myself, without using exotic (for which read "expensive and difficult to use") equipment and pre-programmed chips that can only be bought from one guy knocking them out in his back room for half an hour, once a fortnight. If I get chance to build a layout, I want simple wiring that's easy to faultfind - just 2 wires, per section of track - that sort of thing. If I build any locos or railcars, you can be certain I'll include an 8 pin socket, with standard wiring - not because I actually want chips onboard, but because bringing all the wiring to a single socket with standard wiring would make it easier to faultfind. In other words, I don't want to be forced to go digital - but, if any part of the DCC "package" makes my analogue life easier, where's the harm in using that part and allowing for future compatibility? At this point, I could imagine some people suggesting that 8 pin sockets would be the wrong way to go - the new standard is 21 pin, 22 pin, or whatever - well, as one guy put it to me at a tradeshow, "the really great thing about standards is that there are so many of them". For me, the really great thing about "8 pin" is that sockets and plugs can be easily converted from ordinary integrated circuit sockets (preferably "turned pin") - and these are easy and cheap to obtain. It's also easy to insert or remove jumper wires - or even use additional sockets to produce custom "patch leads". In other words, for what I want, "8 pin" works just fine - so why change it? Anyway, if I ever were to go digital, all my loco wiring would be to an existing scheme and easy to convert - likewise, any track wiring would be sensibly and clearly laid out, clearly labelled and again easy to convert. That is, if I'd actually need to convert any track wiring - after all, the layout concepts I'm interested in right now are actually microlayouts, suitable for 1 loco at a time, shunting and that's about it. In fact, as long as I ensure that all wiring is conservatively rated - and any switches are closed before I even consider getting any DCC gear - I probably wouldn't need to change much at all. That is, if I ever make the switch - and I'm in no rush to do so - it just doesn't suit my purposes right now. Huw.

I suspect that some people - determined to use nothing but "old fashioned" DC - might have a slightly different "digital" option - a choice between 1 and 2 digits ... . Meanwhile, some of our Stateside friends refer to R/C battery power as "dead rail" - that's right - this option doesn't exist here. As for the "nuclear option", I can't see too many people wanting their model trains to glow in the dark ... . Seriously though, I doubt if it would really be feasible to cater for all potential power / control options - but I'd expect DC and DCC to be the most popular options. The results could be interesting if visitors to "Ally Pally" or "Warley" were to be surveyed - the same goes for visitors to small, local, shows and club open days (especially if they're somewhere well served by public transport - and advertised in local papers, libraries and on posters). Huw.

Depending on exactly where in the Glen this enterprise will actually be, I suspect that some of the challenges involved might be rather "interesting". Wait a second - did you have a different definition of "interesting" in mind? Joking aside, it could also be interesting if someone from the production company were to post directly on here - better still if they were to take on board some of the constructive suggestions about the concept and what's likely to be involved.

An interesting choice of wording. After all isn't "h. sapiens" supposed to be Latin for "wise man"? Unfortunately, a small number of "wise guys" wouldn't understand common sense if it whacked them on the head - and "hi-viz" (plus other PPE) is the result. Saying that, it probably makes some people look slightly more prototypical … . No - that just sticks out like a sore thumb … . When I visit on the Sunday, I'll be wearing my steel toecapped "size 9s" - the same ones I wear most days. As they happen to be a decent fit (and can stand up to a lot of abuse), they'll make me feel very comfortable indeed - and a lot safer, to boot. No - but they'll come in very useful for carrying home any essential supplies purchased at the show. Just like canary jackets, they might also make people slightly more visible if they have to do any walking or cycling late at night. Anyway, I think it's time to get back to the trains. Huw.

Swiftly returning to the real topic of this thread … that's right … Health & Safety … I've been to a number of trade shows in my time - including some with sections devoted to H&S, at which some of the exhibitors have handed out cigarette lighters. I know that some people might point out that I've always been strongly opposed to smoking (and had successfully nagged 2 older relatives to stop smoking, before I left primary school) - well, I'm not nagging anyone here, but I can't work out why exhibitors at H&S themed shows were handing out smoking equipment. Meanwhile, at a motor trade show last summer, one exhibitor was using similar lighters to demonstrate the heat resistance of the insulation on some of their wire - and handing out "home demo packs", so show visitors could have a go for themselves. Needless to say, as with the lighters from the H&S show, at least one of these things found it's way into the hands of a guy who won't be using it to light anything more dangerous than a "nightlight" candle - and even that only to facilitate the "ancient art" of "sprue stretching", when building plastic model kits. Who said companies never give away anything useful at trade shows? I guess they might have a point … . Huw.

... might almost certainly being the operative term. Before we get any exasperated howls of "how dare you say that", I'd probably better stress that nobody's likely to deliberately be inattentive, negligent, or anything remotely like that. When this sort of work's going on, you can pretty much guarantee that there will be "blindspots" - probably less than ideal illumination - people won't always be heard - and there's likely to be nowhere near enough time for anybody to react if people appear without warning. Think of it as much like a building site - except that it's display stands being built. OK - I've never been an exhibitor at any show - I probably never will be - but I'd hope that common sense would tell people to "prepare for the unexpected". As for what's sometimes known as PPE ("personal protective equipment"), hi-viz "canary jackets" or day-glo yellow vests aren't expensive - you can get them at Screwfix, or places like Arco. These places also stock helmets and safety footwear. (Sometimes, you might even be able to get basic PPE from your favourite German discount supermarket - at basic prices.) From when I did my industrial training (a number of years back, at a power station which was being commissioned), I recall that the only PPE I found even remotely uncomfortable were a helmet and ear defenders - this was mainly because, if I had to wear them for extended periods of time, they turned into sweat traps. However, even this would have been immensely preferable to serious injuries. Anyway, that's more than enough of my thoughts on this matter. Like everyone else here, I just hope the show (plus the build-up and breakdown) passes off without serious incident. Huw.

I'm sure lots of people are looking forward to it. As for the NSE unit, I suspect I'm like a number of people here - might not model this region / epoch - but definitely wouldn't say no to something like this, either. I am sure you'll get lots of people filling in these forms … . I hope you don't mind me checking a couple of minor details - just in case they are of interest to any RMweb members visiting the show: * Would I be correct in assuming the boxes won't be sealed / removed until after visitors have left on the Sunday? This might sound like a stupid question - but this might be the only time some visitors get to fill in the forms. (We'll, I say "fill in" - but it's not unknown for me to print "name / address / other details" stickers in advance and use these to save time with any forms I choose to complete … .) * Although I'm not expecting any RMweb "lunchtime meetings" - and I'm not particularly looking for any - I could imagine some people arranging their own unofficial versions. I could also imagine some people popping out of the halls to look for a cash point. Can you confirm that a "pass out / free return" facility will be available, if people ask for their hands to be stamped? Anyway, that's more than enough questions about minor details. Huw.

That spoils the fun! If they were to ask all exhibitors, I could imagine the sort of questions they might have got if they'd asked a controller supplier - or MERG, for that matter: What nominal track supply voltage is used for most DC powered HO layouts ... and what's the real maximum track voltage? How many wires do you really need to get the "juice" to the track with DCC? Seriously though, I'm sure that (just like me) some exhibitors would be rather more interested in the technical side of model railways than they might be in what they look like. However, one of the great things about this hobby is the fact that it's got so many different areas, that interest different people. Long may this continue. Returning to the survey, it sounds to me like the show organisers might be more interested in what draws people to shows in general - this one in particular - and what we might like to see more of in future. The show organisers would only need to look at this site to get a good idea of the sort of answers they'd be likely to get from people like me. However, I suspect that the majority of show visitors are unlikely to be members here - even less active posters. I'd imagine they're particularly keen to get the views of this silent majority. Huw.

Now if they were offering a couple of their On30 streetcars, I might be interested ... . Seriously though, this sounds good. I take it anyone visiting the show will be able to enter. Would I be right in assuming that forms are to be dropped off at the BRM stand (without a requirement to subscribe)?

As they put it in "Hot Fuzz": "Bonum commune communitatis". (Apparently, it's supposed to mean something along the lines of "common good of the community". Yes. Right. Whatever.) Since I never did Latin in school, I'll just point out that all this "bashing" is "for the greater good". Huw.

We'll, I'm not too worried as long as they don't have their heads in the Sky … .* (* Clearly, I'm not suggesting that they do. I should also point out that other programme makers - and commercial TV channels - are available.)

When one of the researchers phoned me last July, she was talking about the Leeds Liverpool Canal - and saying that somebody had been along the route on a pushbike. As for the currently projected location, I personally don't know anything about it - but a number of people's posts here suggest that the exercise could turn out to be "challenging", to say the least. Wherever anyone's coming from, I don't see these comments as "negativity". Rather, I see them as warnings - potential "red flags", which should at least be investigated - so the people making any decisions can satisfy themselves that there aren't underlying problems which might force the whole scheme to be abandoned. Far better to be aware of anything like this now - before loads of money, equipment and, ultimately, people get committed to an impossible undertaking. If the whole endeavour is genuinely workable, then all's well and good - and a number of people might be in for an interesting and rewarding time. However, if this is not the case, it's better to be realistic about it - and change the exercise, location or whatever else as appropriate. A number of us are likely to follow any developments on this with interest. Huw.

Similar fare often features in other scales /gauges as well. The 7mm NGA magazine (and "spin off" beginners' guides) often features similar conversions - typically using various "flavours" of Hornby 0-4-0, "Bill & Ben", Bachmann "Junior", or old (very basic and hopefully cheap) Jouef locos as donor models. At this point I should perhaps mention the late Howard ES Clarke and his "yellow perils". Meanwhile, a number of US websites feature similar "Frankenlok" style conversions of (usually) Diesel switchers - generally referred to as "critters" - a typical donor model being a (supposedly) HO scale Plymouth DDT or MDT switcher, sold by a number of manufacturers over the years. The key to the popularity of this conversion is that this model is very similar in size (and shape) to certain designs of Plymouth in On30. This is reputed to have been a key factor in the appearance of the "On30 Conspiracy". Ultimately, there's lots of scope for conversions like these - in a wide range of scales and gauges - and they can be as easy or as difficult as you want. This is why I reckon they could be an excellent introduction to model making for people new to the hobby - and a rather good "skill builder" for more experienced modellers (and for people like me, who aren't really sure where we stand!). I think they're great. Huw.

I know I might be starting to sound like a broken record here, but I can think of another way of using this concept to spur on people's modelling mojo. Some people here - certainly some BRM readers - will have acquired one of Hornby's basic 0-4-0 offerings, as part of a subscription deal. With BRM's change of Editor - and RMweb's upcoming 12th "birthday" I'd have thought this might present an opportunity to encourage new entrants to the hobby to have a go at building something - and I don't see why more experienced modellers should be left out. A number of people (me included) already have "starter locos" hidden away in a "stash", waiting for the right chance to make constructive use of them. The locos concerned might include - Hornby 0-4-0 locos - "Thomas" themed stuff - Bachmann "Junior" - Bachmann "Underground Ernie" - Roco "Hobby" - Hornby "Railroad" (plus some of their "main range" to a similar or lesser standard, such as their "Pacer" DMU) - most Lima offerings - plus lots of items offered over the years by other manufacturers. A while back, I even copied and scaled some drawings off the internet, for an AGEIR 60 ton boxcab, which I was thinking of building onto a Bachmann "Underground Ernie" EMU chassis. I never built it - but I have "dusted off" the drawings a few times recently. Will it get built? Who knows - but it could certainly be workable. In 2015, Andy York decided to celebrate 10 years of RMweb by running a "build a loco" challenge - pretty much any motive power - any scale. Since this challenge ended at the end of 2015, I haven't been aware of any official RMweb challenges. I'd like the motive power challenge to reappear, preferably on a "rolling" basis (staying open from one year to the next - "the year it's built is the year it's entered") - but with new entry categories for beginners and everyone else, in which "starter locos" and plastic loco, rolling stock or road vehicle kits have a "starring role". Of course, whether this actually happens is not for me to decide. However, in the absence of anything else, perhaps it might be an idea for this unofficial "starter model" bashing "challenge" to be officially "adopted". How about it? Huw.

This sounds like a fair point to me. Whether or not the programme makers wish to involve any / all of the people they've previously been in contact with, I'd regard it as a matter of common courtesy for all of these people to be contacted again, unless they've specifically said they wish to hear nothing further. However, a comment earlier in this thread about the programme makers "putting out calls for people at ModelRail Scotland" makes me wonder how keen they might be to involve too many people from the opposite end of the UK. Ultimately, I can't see many people wishing to be out of pocket if they take part in this endeavour. A number of these people won't have their own cars, so would be reliant on public transport (or hire cars) to get to and from the filming location. Even those with their own cars would probably want to be paid more than some nominal "fuel only" rate for this purpose - and they'd also expect to be housed, fed and watered during the time they'd be there. Using local people might well reduce these costs considerably, if large numbers of people are involved. It'll be interesting to see how many people from outside the area are contacted with a view to them being actively involved - and how many of these people have specialist skills (eg electrical engineering). In practice, I guess it might end up being something of a "numbers game" - the more people the production company needs, the wider they "cast their net". As I've never been any further North than Cumbria (and that a rapidly receding memory of my 22nd birthday), I hadn't given any thought to the midges - I hope the production company have. Getting power to the loco(s) might also be an issue - if they use 12V DC, it wouldn't take too many lengths of track for the (Ohmic) voltage drops across the rails to reduce the supply to a level at which the loco motor would stop working properly - there's also the issue of lack of continuity (or reduced continuity) at track joints. If they're going down this route, they'd need a lot of car batteries to maintain the track supply voltage at a suitable level. Another possibility might be what some of our friends in the US might refer to as "dead rail" - that's right, "onboard" batteries and radio control. I've never done any of this with model trains, but a number of people have - I'm sure that suitable equipment would be available, albeit at a price. As for the O gauge track, I wonder how many people might want a few dozen lengths of the stuff as "souvenirs". After all, it probably wouldn't be too much of a problem for people to clean a number of lengths of this stuff for use on their own (as yet unbuilt) layouts, if they're getting it "gratis" - but the resale value of this stuff after it's been laid on the ground would probably be negligible. I'm not sure that doing this would allow this stunt to qualify as "the longest model railway in the world" - which is a stated aim for the whole exercise. However, after the run has been completed, I could imagine the loco (or locos) involved needing a lot of "TLC" to be usable elsewhere. Whether this worries the production company remains to be seen. Perhaps. I could imagine the availability of stuff they need (especially at an advantageous price) being helpful - but I wonder if any manufacturer / supplier sponsorship would actually be a "deciding issue". Ultimately, I'd imagine that the production company would have done their sums before pitching the series to TV channels - so, when it comes to what they charge the network, they'd have a pretty good idea of the "break even point". Whoever ultimately owns any production company, I can't see them being prepared to make programmes unless they're certain of making a significant profit. Exactly how significant this profit is would be commercially sensitive - but the quoted price for one of this company's series (which used to be on BBC) suggests they're probably reasonably "switched on" in this department. As previously said by a number of people in this thread, developments are likely to be interesting. Huw.