Huw Griffiths

Rolling stock - Eight wagons and a small loco for the yard. One of the locos will be an 03, it's ideal off the shelf motive power. We'll need spares though and so one will be a steam industrial and the o

Brick bonds - I'm a bit of an anorak about this so have an awful lot of English bond plasticard on hand for construction work. However, most of the buildings will owe their originas to kits and if the bond is wrong, I'm not fixing it.

This is one reason I'm not too keen on some of the Wills brick wall slabs - I seem to recall the plain stretcher bond looking vaguely OK - but the "bonding" of some of the bricks on the other slabs didn't look too good to me.

Of course, there might also be another reason for me not liking their brick wall slabs - when I tried using the things a number of years back, I had difficulty cutting them cleanly. OK, it's always possible that this might have been down to inexperience - but I've been wary of them ever since.

As for the couplings, I've seen a number of switching layouts at shows over the years - and I've noticed that some types of couplings seem to lend themselves better than others to visitor operation. The reason for the mention of Kadees was that I'd seen them on one such layout (admittedly an old HO scale US layout) and they seemed to work extremely well. Whether they'd work so well on any layout with "trainset" curves is another matter.

The questions about locos, stock and railbuses etc had more to do with a suspicion that many people would probably already have suitable gear (small shunters and 4 wheel wagons often appearing in train sets). If not - and people are willing to be reasonably flexible - suitable stuff could probably be obtained at reasonable cost (secondhand if necessary).

I was trying to get people thinking about what suitable locos and stock they've already got - and what they could get without needing a second mortgage.

There was also another reason behind the question about locos.

I've been led to believe that it might be possible to convert the Bachmann Junior diesel shunter into a reasonably acceptable freelance industrial shunter - perhaps slightly more to it than pointing a rattle can at it and replacing the black cab "windows" with something you can see through. Slightly more than this - but probably within the capabilities of a number of relatively inexperienced modellers.

I was just wondering if simple RTR conversions of this nature might, at some time, offer the potential for spin off "how to" articles.

As for trying to pre-empt future articles - no chance. That's never been my style - and I don't think it ever will be.

Quite simply, my questions were more to do with thinking aloud - and trying to encourage newcomers to think about what they'd like to achieve.

Regards,

Huw.

I hope nobody minds if I start a thread about the new BRM project layout.

Although many of the issues affecting this layout will already have been covered in connection with "Edgeworth", I'm sure that a number of people will have further questions about "Ruston Quays".

If it's OK by everyone, I'd like to kick off with some questions of my own:

• Has any thought been given to what locos and stock might appear on this layout, during show outings?
  
  Obviously, there'd be scope for small industrial locos - diesel or steam (03, 04, 08, or Sentinel Diesel - L&Y "Pug" - perhaps an ex GWR Pannier) - but might there also be scope for relatively straightforward conversions of (eg) Bachmann Junior locos?
  
   
• In view of the "Inglenook" part of this layout offering the potential for use as a visitor operated switching puzzle, might there be any value in replacing the tension lock couplings with Kadee (or similar) magnetic couplings? If so, would these be operated using magnets between the rails - or a magnet on a stick?
  
   
• As for the "passenger shuttle" part of the layout, would I be correct in assuming that there could potentially be some flexibility when it comes to stock for this (pre-nationalisation petrol / diesel railcar - steam railmotor - loco + autotrailer - BR "Modernisation Plan" DMU or railbus - even a Pacer, if people aren't too fussy about epoch)?
   

OK - I can't see you taking a suitcase full of alternative stock options with you to shows - and I don't think anyone would want you to.

I'm actually trying to prompt some thoughts about what sort of stuff might be regarded as vaguely credible, if somebody seeing this layout at a show felt motivated to build their own version.

At the same time, I'm also trying to think of the sort of "beginner friendly" loco and stock conversions which might be usable - and might encourage new entrants to the hobby to have a go for themselves.

Apologies for the stupid questions.

Regards,

Huw.

I think this is an exceptional announcement.

 

There have been lots of people wanting tube stock for a long time. My impression is that most of these people wanted some kind of historical stock, but in the spirit of a museum commission the idea that people will purchase a model of what they can see every day has lots of currency.

Fair comment.

I hope that, once the initial limited edition sells out, Bachmann are also able to produce renumbered versions - for sale in their regular range, through any model shops that wish to stock them.

I also hope that any licensing fees are kept at sensible levels.

A while back, there were comments in another section of this site about a (Halling) model of a Croydon Tramlink LRV - and the lack of further models, after the initial limited edition had sold out. Reasons for this were given "in thread" - but some people were less than happy, nonetheless.

I haven't read all nine pages yet, so I apologize if the following observation is redundant, but it is interesting that Bachmann took on such a big commission. They are rolling off their Ivatt C1 commission for Locomotion and we had 'heard' that they wanted to focus on their own branded items rather than commissions. Clearly there is an opportunity cost and production slots used for this model do mean that other announced products have to wait.

I could never imagine anyone from Bachmann commenting in public - but I wonder if a commission of this nature might suit Bachmann's purposes.

As well as giving them the chance to build up a relationship with the LT Museum - and TfL - this might also give them the opportunity to gauge potential interest in models of "Underground" trains in general.

I can't help wondering about other potential subjects, if this one works out as well as expected (D78 - 1992 tube stock - DLR trams units - who knows?).

Nevertheless this announcement is very exciting news for people who would like modern tube stock. My only question is whether it will have sound with "Mind the Gap" announcements.

If Bachmann were to follow this, at a later date, with models of D78 trainsets, some people might wonder what accent would be used for "Mind the Gap" announcements ... .

Although I personally have no use for a S Stock trainset model, I'll still be interested to see developments on this one.

Regards,

Huw.

Something over 30 years ago I reviewed this crossing on site with Major Kit Holden of HMRI, with a view to modernising. It's a pity other schemes were more pressing.

I remember Kit Holden well. He and Tom Craig of Transmark and myself spent a lot of time working together with the Northern Ireland Railways level crossing modernisation programme in the 1980s.  Here they are in 1980 with Leslie Young of the DOE(NI) Roads division

Is Kit still around and any contact details?

He was fairly "grown up" then, so would not be young now. I also suspect more recent changes in the HMRI might not have impressed the incumbents from those days.

I don't know whether this is the same gentleman - but a familiar sounding name appears on one website, connected with Parry People Movers:

http://www.intermediatetechnologyworkshops.com/#!meet-the-team/cyse

Huw.

I've never been to the NEWGOG show - well, to be honest, I've never been inside the Lysaght, either.

What's this show normally like - much in the way of layouts - trade support - demonstrators - that sort of stuff?

Congratulations on 10 years. Like so many others have said, it's a wonderful achievement and a fantastic resource.

I discovered RMWeb having been on another forum, where I'd become disillusioned with the constant bickering and egotistical ranting.

Sure there are times on here when it can get a bit lively, but generally people behave themselves!

I've always liked the environment where you can ask the most basic question and find there's someone who's prepared to help. Ive made some good friends along the way and I'm extremely thankful to Andy and the team for all their efforts.

I couldn't agree more. This site has always been an excelllent resource - and 10 years is something of an achievement.

I agree completely about some of the "politics" on certain other forum sites.

I'm still a member (albeit, effectively, in name only) on one of the sites in question - a UK site where, amongst the rubbish, they also have some useful stuff and some decent members. I still look there very occasionally - but have never really felt at home there.

I don't think I'm alone in my experiences of the site in question. Last year, I was on a shuttle bus, returning from a show - and some RMweb members were chatting about forum sites in general. One guy commented about a site - which he branded as "NOT RMweb.co.uk" - a USP which probably only really appeals to individuals who've been shown the door here.

He went on to say that a lot of people had joined the site in question - quickly become disillusioned with the openly hostile atmosphere and all the "pleasantries" there - and returned here, saying that they "had friends on RMweb".

I know the feeling - except that I never left RMweb - and I have no intention of doing so.

Since I have no wish to "rock the boat", I'm not about to name names - but I know such nonsense does go on in a number of places.

While on the subject of "pleasantries" elsewhere on the web, they were actually among the triggers which led to me finding and joining RMweb (and, at the same time, FreeRails {a US site} - I still enjoy the privilege of being on both these sites):

• I was looking to find some model railway related information, for a planned personal project. Web searches for information and pictures threw up interesting links to both of these sites.

   

• I had already been on some Yahoo groups - some of which were (and still are) well run. However, I had become increasingly frustrated by threads on certain groups being overrun with waffle - discussions going off on (sometimes very) odd tangents - ad hominem attacks - and ineffective, biased or non existent moderation.

   

• About the same time, I was visiting a local model railway show - and got chatting to one, thoroughly decent, guy who was exhibiting a layout. I found out that he was (and still is) a member of RMweb - and decided that if he was, in any way, typical of the members here, I really wished to join ASAP.

   

  This was a bit of an issue at the time, because the site was down for a few days. By the time the site went back up, I'd become aware of another trigger - which, for me, was effectively the "tipping point".

   

• The final trigger was one individual who'd just been "invited to leave" this site. I won't go into the reasons for this - or who the individual is - but they were whingeing on a number of other forum sites - and their own personal website - about how "hard done by" they felt.

   

  It quickly became apparent to me that Andy had been more than justified in showing this individual the door. I liked the fact that he was prepared to take effective action against trouble makers.

   

  As far as I'm concerned, a site (such as RMweb) where trouble makers get stopped in their tracks is the sort of site I wish to be a member of.

At this point, I think I should stress that, I'm actually a member of a number of forum sites. A lot of them are well run - run by decent people, whom I've got time for - and a privilege to be involved with - even if I only visit some of them when I'm trying to find out something specific to their subject "areas". They are not the target of my criticism.

Unfortunately, there are also a minority of sites where ad hominem attacks against sites like this (and the people running them) are not only tolerated but actively encouraged.

We all know such nonsense goes on routinely on some rogue sites - it doesn't go on here. If it even starts, Andy and the mods are ready to deal with the individuals responsible - and that's one of the things that make this site a safe, welcoming, environment.

Another thing I really like here is the way in which, if people have questions, they also get answers - useful, helpful, answers - offered in a pleasant, non judgmental, way. People here seem willing to help - and supportive of other people here - which says a lot about most of the members here.

It also says a lot about this site - and all the people who run it - that this sort of mindset has always been actively encouraged here.

RMweb has always been a well run virtual club - and an excellent resource. I'm glad that, 10 years ago, Andy had the vision to set this site up. I'm glad that he's also had the tenacity to keep it going for this time. I hope this site continues - not just to survive - but also to grow and thrive.

Well done, Andy - thanks for everything over the last 10 years - here's to the future.

All the best,

Huw.

A Chelsea v Millwall supporters 'gathering'

Don't tell me - the match is a "friendly".

Huw.

Perhaps they're doing some modelling.

Modelling?

What's that?

Wait a second - I think it involves buiding something - an alien concept for some of us.

No - I don't think it will ever catch on ... .

Huw.

. He's probably drilling them on the importance of not carrying solder to the work on the iron.......

Very important skill this electronics soldering - as I know only too well (but then I would say that - I've been into electronics for most of my life - and it was a key skill in a former job).

Some remain scarred after being told they can't use track rubbers on their Brio.

No - keep those things for preparing stuff to be soldered together - far better than fibreglass scratch brushes - if they rub their faces after using one of those things, they might well be scarred.

Joking aside, it's just as well model railway shows don't include demos on this subject - some of us could send just about anyone off to sleep in next to no time.

Anyway, returning to the original topic of this thread, a number of people seem to have disappeared from this site in recent months - I just hope there's nothing wrong.

Huw.

I agree - the site is well worth a look (as are the US forum sites linked to on his site).

Over the years, Harold Minkwitz has posted a lot of fascinating stuff about modelling in a couple of "narrow gauge" scales - which often seem to involve the use of modified RTR and kits, originally sold for use in other scales, generally running on HO track modified to look "narrow gauge".

His favoured scales seem to be On30 (which probably needs no introduction here) - and what he refers to as 55n3 (1:55 - or about 5.5mm / foot - prototype track gauge of 3 feet).

His site includes links to 2 well known US forum sites, both of which include rather good On30 sections - Railroad Line and FreeRails (there's a lot of good stuff on both sites - which can be viewed without needing to register).

Both of these forum sites include a lot of (usually relatively cheap) HO RTR mechanisms being hacked about and fitted with new bodies - sometimes scratchbuilt - sometimes kits - stuff intended for one scale being adapted to another scale seems a lot more commonplace than it might be on here. (Military vehicle kits often seem to feature as donors for these conversions - a number of which can only be described as amazing.)

At this point, I should probably mention that I've actually been a member of both sites for a number of years (only posted a few times on Railroad Line - much more active on FreeRails, which I joined about the same time as I joined RMweb - but I haven't been very active on either recently, due to other commitments).

Returning to your layout, I like the idea of effectively splitting one layout into 2 sides, based on different countries, eras etc. This trick has actually been tried elsewhere (I can remember a coffee table tram layout in a Model Railroader layouts "special" - OK, rather a large, homebrew, coffee table - split into 4 sections, to represent different seasons).

This approach to layout building allows you to run different stock on the track at different times - giving you 2 completely different layouts in the space of 1 - with either half using the other as a fiddle yard - very clever and (if well executed) very effective.

Needless to say, I'll be following this with interest.

Regards,

Huw.

I did go a little mad back when the bits were available.

 

I was thinking of having lots of these so a made some more.

 

I suspect that some people here might be wishing they'd gone "mad" in that way ... .

Things have moved on now and I don't know what to do with all these.

 

Dave

 

Networker9.jpg

I'm not convinced that's exactly the right thing to do with Networkers - real or model.

They're relatively modern - and structurally sound - probably not ready for a trip to the scrapyard quite yet ... .

Huw.

I'm not saying my approach is the definitive way as it's self-taught rather than books or tutorials but it's just a method that works for me. I just wish there was a quick and easy way of masking around OHLE, trees and lattice-post signals!

Following a break for food, I've had chance to think about this one from a different angle - which may, or may not, be helpful.

You probably know that a lot of stuff in films and TV programmes is shot against a blank backdrop.

Is there any sensible way in which something similar could be done for layout photography - perhaps by having some grey* card placed behind the layout (or section of it) - and adding the sky afterwards from a library shot?

(* Other colours are available - in TV and film, I believe that blue - and green - backdrops have often been used. However, I might be wrong on this - I've never worked in these areas. I'm sure that some RMweb members would know a lot more about this than I do.)

In all honesty, I'm not completely sure what I think about PhotoShop with regard to layout photography.

I like things to look much like they do in real life - I'm certainly no fan of some of the obviously fake stuff I've seen in some places.

However, I also can't claim to be too happy about obvious distractions in the background behind layouts - stuff like shelf fixings, mains sockets and the like.

I'm not sure that it's really possible to please everyone all the time - even pleasing one person all the time isn't too easy.

I guess it's a case of being sensible about it and trying to strike a balance - something which has definitely been achieved here.

Huw.

Ah, so the 'render clouds' is a new creation in the smoke source layer, and not a rendering of the existing clouds in the picture!

 

I'm not too familiar with cloning, but presumably you just take an area of it from the 'smoke source' layer and in effect spray it on the 'smoke layer'?

1. Spot on - I can see where the confusion may have arisen.

 

2. That's it; it sprays a thin duplication onto the 'smoke' layer.

 

I'm not saying my approach is the definitive way as it's self-taught rather than books or tutorials but it's just a method that works for me. I just wish there was a quick and easy way of masking around OHLE, trees and lattice-post signals!

Would the Magic Wand tool be any use for that Andy?

About as much use as a real magic wand would be Steve; it just cannot differentiate with sufficient consistency in areas of similar colour and tone without a lot of additional work after a best stab.

I hope I have not missed this somewhere in the text, but how long would that complete process take, approximately?

I'd agree about the timescale - and a very large percentage of this time is actually taken up with doing the selections / masking.

It isn't exactly the same thing - but I don't know how many people here have tried to "fix" an old, scratched, faded and coffee stained, photo of some well liked, but now dead, relative, who was photographed against a cluttered background many years before you were born. I can guarantee some "fun" at the edges of their hair and clothes - and at the edges of any stains.

It's extremely difficult to accurately select the edges - doesn't matter whether you use "magic wand" (very "hit and miss"), "find edges" (similar), the "extract" tool (can be slightly better - but difficult to get the program to recognise the transitions you want), a mask drawn on some sort of adjustment layer (almost as bad - but also very time consuming), or paths (what I'd probably go for - but it's hard to get used to - and not available on all versions of PhotoShop). Whichever of these "tools" are available in your program - and whichever you use - I don't think any of them are exactly brilliant.

There are also a number of after market "plug in" tools, sold for doing this - and other stuff. I've never tried any of them - so I can't comment on them.

Also, whichever tools you use, I suspect that it won't be too long before you start thinking in terms of "feathering" selections by a couple of pixels - to try and avoid the "cardboard cutout" look.

Selections for stuff like railings, fences and OHLE are just as difficult to do - and often for exactly the same reason - I'm not aware of any "guaranteed effective" way of ensuring that you get clean edges between these features and the background.

Like it or not, you're always likely to be looking at a balancing act between accuracy of selections / masking and time taken to do this work.

However, let's assume you've finally created selections / masks that you are happy with. You now come to the bit where you clone certain bits of the picture - and try to make the transition from "real" to "cloned" look as seamless as possible.

I'm sure you'll be working on a new layer - partly because it makes it easier to modify the cloned area without affecting everything else - partly because, if you really don't like the result, this gives you the option of trying again.

At this point, you'll realise that different areas of the picture - that you think are the same colour / pattern - are actually nothing of the sort. The differences might be obvious - they might not - but you'll probably notice them the moment you start cloning. You might also notice that certain patterns seem to repeat themselves - and that some of this repetition doesn't look quite "right".

To some extent, you might be able to disguise this by cloning in a number of low opacity "washes" of different picture areas - on top of each other - but probably with slightly different edges. You might also be able to alter the hue, saturation or brilliance of the cloned stuff.

Sometimes, it's easier to create a new "texture" from scratch - by rendering it - using some of the "clouds", "noise" and other rendering filters in your image processing program.

It's possible to spend many an enjoyable hour experimenting with this stuff - and, over the years, I've come across some amazing internet tutorials which tell you how to generate (from scratch) all manner of cool stuff like imaginary landscapes, planets and even solar systems. A lot of this stuff can be well worth checking out - but probably not now.

Eventually - after selecting, cloning, rendering, altering colours etc, you'll probably find yourself looking at some picture you're happy with. At this point, you now need to make a copy of your original image layer - and your correction / clone layers - place all these layers into a new layer set - and make a duplicate set.

Now, merge the "duped" set - and check that you're still happy with the result. (Please note that you still haven't destroyed your original - you don't want to! In fact, at his point, it might be worth saving all the new and copied stuff as a separate file.) If you are happy with the result, do a final check for rough transitions between original areas and areas you've worked on - it might be possible to fix these using "tools" like "blur" or "smudge" - or perhaps the "patch" or "texture" tools that can be found in some versions of PhotoShop.

You might even wish to alter all - or part - of the new image - to suggest that it might have been photographed under different light conditions - perhaps even to make it look like certain parts have been "spotlighted" or "floodlit". (Here's one point at which you're likely to find it very useful if you've still got all the separate layers - you might need to work on some, but not others.) A lot of photo manipulation software allows you to do all this - and more - but it's really something which comes with practice (a bit like the CG planets in some of the tutorials I've alluded to). It can all be very enjoyable to do - but I wouldn't recommend it on any pictures that matter, unless you've had plenty of practice.

If you're happy with the result, it's now time to sit back and admire your work (or, if you work in publishing or graphic design, start thinking about the dozens of other pictures that require similar attention, all by yesterday).

If you're not happy - well I'm afraid it's time to start retracing your steps. Now you know why I suggested creating loads of different layers - copying everything into layer sets (which, themselves, get duplicated) - and, above all, always working on a copy and never doing anything to the original.

I don't pretend to be an expert here - but I think it's fair to say that PhotoShopping is one of those things that needs to be subtle to really work. I'm certain that we've all seen bad examples of PhotoShopping - pictures where some elements look like cardboard cutouts (possibly out of perspective or lit from a different direction to everything else) - "out of the box" RTR loco models, complete with tension lock couplings, roughly superimposed onto library photos of Crewe station - stuff like that. I can see the join - I'm sure you can - and I'm sure everyone else can, too.

I'm not saying this to poke fun at people who've produced this sort of stuff - merely to point out that it's probably best not to copy some ideas.

I'm sure we've all got standards - standards that we're constantly aiming to improve on - and that sort of stuff really doesn't cut the mustard.

At this point, I should add that I've got no problem with Andy's PhotoShop work at the start of this thread - it's subtle, effective and well done. Same goes for a number of other people who have also produced good quality PhotoShop work.

There are, however, some people who routinely come up with stuff that nobody with standards would ever wish to be associated with. I'd like to hope that this doesn't apply to anyone here.

Huw.

Don't you mean chocolate and cream?

Phil - you've been dreaming about the biscuits again!

Last time I checked, they were called health foods - they make you feel good.

In my case, this is certainly true for Bourbons - although I don't normally like chocolate flavour anything, I've always liked these things - especially when washed down with a decent port.

Still, rolling moving swiftly on ... .

Phil - that steam railmotor looks interesting - if the wrong scale.

I wonder how much work would be involved in kitbashing a RTR coach or autocoach into that steam railmotor they've got at Didcot. Either that, or one of those ex-Lima AEC railcars in "blood and custard" or other suitable colours.

Whatever the score, I'm sure it'll look good in the end.

Huw.

At the moment - Yes. Just waiting for a suitable railcar to run.

 

Got an etched kit in the store somewhere but that's probably too advanced (read: will take lots of bodging and fiddling best not shown in print) to build. Besides, I fancy finishing it in custard and cream...

Don't you mean chocolate and cream?

Thank Huw, however it is the steam railway I was thinking about not the MER

OK - apologies for the thread hijack.

Huw.

I don't know if you're interested in the Manx Electric Railway.

If you are, I believe there have also been 4mm kits of MER Winter Saloon #22:

• Alphagraphix / Brumtrams - card kit.
   
• Mark Hughes - white metal (probably now pewter), with some etched brass parts.

Although not relevant to you, I suspect that some modellers of early Blackpool & Fleetwood trams might also be interested in the Mark Hughes kit - as some very similar cars were also used there.

I gather the Ordnance Survey always put a mistake into each map to catch out anyone who just copies their work.

Not just the Ordnance Survey, from what I've heard.

I don't know if you remember a number of years back - Nick Crane did a BBC TV series called "Map Man".

One of the programmes in this series homed in on the London A-Z atlas - and mentioned that they were doing something very similar.

Apparently, they also had some means by which members of the public could contact them about errors in their maps / atlases. In the programme, they showed Nick Crane speaking to them about an error he was aware of (I think some cul-de-sac had been given the wrong name, or something like that).

They then showed some guy amending this on a computer, ready for the next edition - at the same time as talking about their policy of deliberately introducing a small number of known minor errors into their maps, so they could tell if anyone tried copying their work and passing it off as their own.

I'd be very surprised if this policy has changed in the intervening years.

Huw.

Alternatively, you could leave the others in the city centre and take a bus (one of the the Penarth or Barry ones) to the 'Pumping station'

Not all the Barry buses pass the Pumping Station.

The ones you want are run by Cardiff Bus - routes 92, 93 or 94 - between them, they run about every 10 minutes (but they often seem to "bunch", returning from Penarth to Cardiff).

Although they pass the bus station, they don't stop there - so you need to get on by the Philharmonic, or the stop by the Library and John Lewis.

Another thing to watch out for with Cardiff Bus is that all their buses have coinboxes - and are "exact fare only". (They do, however, accept Network Rider tickets - which may, or may not, be of use.)

I don't know if scratchbuilding might be an option for you?

The reason I'm asking is that the Model Bus Federation publish a magazine, which often includes plans of various designs of bus (usually about 4mm scale, but not difficult to rescale).

I don't know if this link (a preview of their February 2012 issue) might be of interest: http://www.model-bus-federation.org.uk/journal_preview.htm.

I'm not a regular reader - but I'd guess that copies could be bought direct (or perhaps even from somewhere like Ian Allan).

I hope this is of some help.

Huw.

I've actually wondered about using one of these myself - for running testing old Limas, with pancake motors.

Stephen makes a number of good points about coreless motors and PWM. However, if I were using a Portescap (or something similar), I'd be conscious of the cost of the things - and giving them the kid glove treatment (they'd get the smoothest, most harmonic-free, low voltage DC supply money could buy).

Lima pancakes are a different matter - they seem to thrive on PWM - they didn't cost me much in the first place - and I've got a few spares kicking round.

There are also a number of articles showing how to remotor them, using salvage motors (originally designed for other purposes).

Failing everything, I might just have to learn how to fit a more modern motor / gearbox combo.

In other words, I'm not too worried about the things. They're cheap and they do what I want. If they go up in smoke, I get some cheap fodder for experiments (which I'd probably enjoy, as I'm an electrical engineer). If they keep on working, I get even cheaper models to hammer on hastily-built switching planks. Translation - I can't lose.

As for building the controller into something usable - well, I've got a number of suitable ready made electronic project cases (bought for 10p a pop, when Tandy were selling up). I've also got some suitable wall warts, connectors and large capacitors, just in case I need them.

I might not be sold on cases made from balsa or MDF, but then I don't need to be.

I reckon these controllers would suit some people - but not everyone. They'd suit me - and they'd probably suit a number of people here - but I can think of some people they wouldn't suit.

Huw.

Ixion Models (again from Australia) are introducing a 'Coffee-Pot' railcar as shown here http://www.ixionmode.../coffee_pot.htm

This model seems to be attracting a lot of interest on narrow gauge forum sites - and the shots of the test build look very good.

(For what it's worth, I believe the prototype was actually built in the UK!)

The main problem is the cost - about £250 a pop, according to one post on NGRM.

I know that the current issue of Narrow Gauge Down Under (#38 - July 2010) includes a load of drawings and other stuff for a freelance, shortened, On30 version, which could be adapted to fit in (for O-16.5, blow up by 111.6% on a photocopier).

Otherwise, you're probably looking at adapting US outline On30.

Backwoods Miniatures do a "Mack AC Railbus" conversion kit for the Bachmann railbus.

Other manufacturers offering similar kitbash fodder include Boulder Valley Models. (I quite like the look of their projected "Wandering Woodchuck" kit.)

Perhaps at this point, I should stress that I've never had dealings with these companies, so I don't know what they're like.

A number of American forum sites include threads describing how people have fitted cabs / bonnets from cheap diecast trucks to On30 stock - the Bachmann tramcar seems to be a favourite for this treatment.

I can also remember a variation on this theme, from an American "G scale" magazine about 10 years ago - fitting a cab to a RTR coach body and using a powered chassis. I've often wondered about doing this myself, but have never had the chance. If I were to get round to it, I'd probably use a Bachman On30 coach (or try to build something similar) and a cheap diesel or electric bogie chassis (something like an Underground Ernie unit might be a good candidate).

So much for what's available - and what I (or anyone else) would probably do. There are loads of options - you've really got to decide what you're happy with.

All the best,

Huw.

Just seen this on Ebay

 

http://cgi.ebay.co.u...=item27b0ade336

 

 

Cheeky bleeder, especially asking £125.00

 

I've asked them to remove my copyright images from their listing, seeing as they didn't ask for permission.

 

And listed 15 of my own, at the right price...

Looks like blatant profiteering to me - disgraceful.

I wish there were some way of putting these rip-off merchants out of business permanently.

I know I'm not alone - I believe ModelRail published some correspondence about stuff like this a while back.

I can't remember details, but I think this sort of scum have been known to bulk buy special edition stuff at exhibitions (done so clubs can raise funds) - then wait until genuine collectors and other enthusiasts can't get them - finally drip feeding them onto ebay at rip-off prices. (Unfortunately, some people are prepared to pay their prices.)

In short, they're a bit like the ticket touts that stitch up genuine supporters at football matches.

I wish there were some way of getting ebay to permanently ban these guys - unfortunately, the chances of that happening are probably on the interesting side of zero.