Wright writes.....

[jamie92208]

I've also had bad experience with kits in 7mm. I built an Alan Gibson 990 class 4-4-0 and found it had some terrible design features.

a) As built according to the instructions the footplate was inclined up at 1 in 20 at the front.

b) The tender sat 5mm below the loco and needed packing pieces between the frames and the tank.

c) The tube for the boiler was too small and had to be slit and a 5mm strip soldered in to get the join between the boiler wrapping and the firebox looking right.

d) Worst of all the front bogie made no allowance for the overthrow on 6' radius curves that a big 4-4-0 has. All it had was a centre hole for an 8BA bolt. It need a minimum of 2.5mm movement each side plus some sort of control mechanism.

 

I one had a letter published in the guild gazette suggesting that kits should have information as to what radius of curve they were designed for and also whether they were designed to S7 standards or for 32mm gauge. If that is not allowed for you often get built in shorts on the inside of rear splashers.

 

sadly no one seemed to be interested in doing anything about this.

 

Having been involved in producing etches for a coach I understand the economics of producing such a kit and the amount of effort needed to get things right. Proof reading etches in 2 dimensions is not easy and often unforeseen problems arise when they are assembled in 3 dimensions. Considering the price of kits I feel that they should have had proper test builds done at development stage and that manufacturers should allow for at least two stages of test etch in their pricing. However building a kit and getting it right is a very satisfying experience.

 

Jamie

[glo41f]

There was a reference earlier to the Thame layout which was part of the MRC's portfolio in the 1970's.  I understand that the layout still exists in Yorkshire though it is no longer mobile. The signalman also sat on the public side of the layout which made an immediate contact point with spectators. This sadly seems lacking in current layouts with the operators lurking at the rear or in the middle thus making engagement with spectators difficult. In fact with DCC operations becoming more prevalent, operators seem to have a head down approach  looking at the control box (be it a phone or a control module) just like many folk walking about the streets today immersed in their digital microworld!

 

I have to ask this but why would anyone want a Thompson pacific aberration as a RTR product? ( ) ?

 

Martin Long

[John Isherwood]

Considering the price of kits I feel that they should have had proper test builds done at development stage and that manufacturers should allow for at least two stages of test etch in their pricing.

 

... but there you have the problem!

 

If the kit producer paid a professional modeller to test-build the kit - twice - and write and draw the instructions, no-one would be prepared to pay the necessary asking price.

 

There is a host of things that SHOULD be done in an ideal world, but life's not like that.

 

I regard kits as the starting point, and am more than prepared to amend them to suit my requirements.

 

The Impetus PWM652 kit that I am just finishing SHOULD have had a representation of the mechanical lubricator and linkage - it didn't, but it has now!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[landscapes]

Thanks Andrew,

 

The image is most-helpful.

 

The work on this project is progressing at quite a rate, so my answers to the questions I was asked (answered by all those who've helped on here, so thanks once more to all concerned) should allow it to proceed further. I state again, my input is only minimal, and I'm certainly taking no credit. 

 

One question I was also asked was about the colour of the roofs on these wee trams. Were they, at any time, ever white? I'd be surprised if they were, and even if they were white when brand new or just-shopped, the roofs would surely turn to dark grey after a few trips. 

 

The commissioning of new RTR models by magazines and retailers seems to be a growing trend these days. What will be next, I wonder? 

 

As a demonstrator, I'm frequently asked about whether Thompson's Pacifics might one day appear in RTR form. At Doncaster, I had two on display (one complete, one now complete) in need of painting; an A2/2 and an A2/3, both built from DJH kits (with two more A2/2s just started). My answer is always the same; 'Never say never, but I'd be very surprised'. That said, who'd have predicted a few years ago that we'd now have (or soon will have) things like L&NWR 0-8-0s, Coal Tanks, Lanky 2-4-2Ts, SE&CR 0-6-0s and (among others) LB&SCR Atlantics? All of these (certainly in pre-Grouping form) are before the memory of most alive today, yet they seem to be popular. If nothing else, it shows that many (most?) modellers don't always model what they recall, but for those who do (like me), Thompson's big creations were as much a part of the ECML BR steam era scene as anything built by Gresley or Peppercorn. 

 

When I was helping Bachmann with the research for their Thompson carriages (a modest input), I took along two A2/3 models of mine. One was built from a DJH kit, the other from a King/Bachmann A2 conversion. It was the latter which I thought the firm might be interested in. They borrowed it for some time, after I suggested they examine it and consider a potential RTR example in future. After all, the boiler, dome, bogie, pony, Cartazzi frames, coupled wheelbase, coupling rods, crossheads, slidebars and the whole tender were the same for the A2 as the A2/3, and there were an equal number of real locos. The answer came back eventually, 'No'. And, that was that. 

 

Though I am by no means a pundit on polls, may I ask if anyone is interested in buying an RTR A2/3 (or A2/2 - the A1/1 and the A2/1s would have no chance?), they contact me, please? On here, if you like. I can then ask again, but don't hold your breath!

 

If nothing else, the above request shows my hypocrisy yet again; talk about poachers and gamekeepers! Other than acting as an advisor, I have not a great deal of interest in an RTR A2/3. The five I 'need', which are more than enough, I've built/modified (Graeme King did the one conversion, which I completed), and those who manufacture the kits for them (or any other loco kits) should be supported; an RTR example is usually the death-knell for an equivalent kit. However, for those who can't build one for themselves or and/or can't afford to pay someone else to do it for them, then an RTR A2/3 would be the answer for them, wouldn't it? What might the price be, though? Over (well over) £200.00? That'll start some bleating! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Hi Tony

 

Hope you are well.

 

Yes without any doubt I would willing purchase any of the Thompson Pacific's if they were available in RTR as long as they were seen at Haymarket which should cover three of the four different classes.

 

As you know I do have a PDK A2/1 and two partly completed Bachmann A2/3's conversions using Graeme King's Resin and Etched Parts, but there is always room for more.

 

Regards

 

David

[Tony Wright]

It is one of the big questions that makes me think when I build kits. I have recently wrestled with two kits, one whitemetal and one etched. Both from reputable manufacturers and both containing some fairly obvious faults.

 

So do you just build the kit or do you correct the faults?

 

In the case of the two I have built, if I was to correct the faults, I may as well have scratchbuilt them. I had to alter one of them as if I didn't, the buffers passed over the ones on the next vehicle. It was that much too high. The others I made a decision based on how much time they would take and if the resulting improvement was worth the effort.

 

In the case of Mons Meg, your post made me look up a photo of the real thing as it is not a class I know well, just to see what you mean. Several things jumped out at me. Comparing the real thing to the model just makes me see all the little bits that are not quite right. So the gap between the bottom of the smokebox and the top of the saddle is quite a bit bigger than it should be at the front end. The handrail should be just under the rectangular cover on the smokebox, so either the handrail is too low, or the covers too high (or too small). The cylinders stick out sideways too far beyond the footplate and they are also too high, or the front footplate is too low. The buffers should be at the lower edge of the beam, not in the centre (which would suggest the front footplate is too low) and the vacuum pipe should be nearer the coupling hook rather than half way between the hook and the buffer. The steps on the curved part of the footplate on the front are right at the edge instead of being in the middle. The sandbox fillers don't look right for 60504 either. The AWS guard, fitted under the front bufferbeam, was not fitted centrally. It was offset to the LHS looking forward. If it had been central, it would have been in the way of the vacuum pipe. 

 

Incidentally, there is a colour photo of the loco on the web (just type LNER Mons Meg into the search) which looks for all the world as if the nameplate is all brass, with no black, or any other colour backing. Is it just the light reflecting? Has the paint rubbed off with cleaning?

 

I am sure none of these will be down to Tony W's construction but are more to do with errors in the kit itself. I can't imagine Tony getting parts that were correct and assembling them to look wrong!

 

I hope I have not come across as doing a demolition job but if if it had been a RTR model, these things would have been picked up on. If people don't know about them, they don't have an opportunity to correct them. If anything, I just want to flag up the pitfalls of expecting a kit to be accurate. In many respects RTR models are more accurate than kits. Perhaps that is one reason why so many choose not to build their own locos any more.

Tony,

 

If only more posters were this honest; with one caveat (see later)!

 

The only thing I'd 'argue' with is the comment about the sandbox fillers. The ones on my MONS MEG are right for the period modelled (summer 1958). She had them in different places at other times.

 

The caveat? Using a metaphor, if one pops a head above the parapet, one can be shot at. However, one can also shoot back! For many years I've been popping my head above many model railway parapets, probably sending back more in the way of 'firepower' than I've received. That 'comes with the territory'. If you give it out, you've got to take it, and vice versa. 

 

I heartily seek out constructive criticism, and yours of my model I take constructively. It was built for review and I only altered the cabside proportions later. Should I have also mentioned the 'faults' you've listed (with justification?) on my A2/2 with regard to the model on the video clip? The reason I mentioned the position of the cabside numbers was because it is so noticeable; their being far too low. I don't know the loco's builder (if I do and I haven't put two and two together, then I apologise), but to have produced such a list as you've done in criticism of his work might have been very counter-productive. As far as I can tell (in the main) he's built the kit as supplied (with the faults you mention), just as, in the main, I did. 

 

If everybody's work was subjected to the same 'examination' as you've conducted on mine, it could be very destructive.One thing which delights me about this thread is the number of pictures of models produced by both the finest of model-makers and by some of those just learning the craft. We must be careful of not being too much in awe of the best (as was pointed out recently with regard to that stunning 2mm P2), but at the same time not tearing to bits the efforts of the not-so-experienced. I'm more than happy to have my own work scrutinised, especially by those I respect (such as yourself) but I would be horrified if folk were put off from posting pictures of their work because of 'fear' of a fusillade of 'criticism'. 

 

In the past, I've been 'critical' of some modelling, on this site. The reaction to my 'critical' comments about one layout was tantamount to my 'swearing in church'! How dare I, seemed to be the reaction from the said followers of the 'chosen path'. 

 

We must all be critical, especially of our own work, and I thank you again for your post. 

 

However, just to prove that I can build an 'accurate' A2/2, will this stand closer scrutiny? 

 

 

 

 

This is built from a DJH kit, which, in my view, is better than the alternatives. I need to qualify 'my view' because I built the prototype for this kit, built the first production example and wrote the instructions for it. There are some 'issues'; the crank pins are easy to use, but a screw head isn't that real and the drivers on this example are generic 24mm Romfords, rather than the specific ones. 

 

And, now, in the best traditions of this sort of debate, it's over to you. May we see what's on your workbench, please, Tony? 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[St Enodoc]

There was a reference earlier to the Thame layout which was part of the MRC's portfolio in the 1970's.  I understand that the layout still exists in Yorkshire though it is no longer mobile. The signalman also sat on the public side of the layout which made an immediate contact point with spectators. This sadly seems lacking in current layouts with the operators lurking at the rear or in the middle thus making engagement with spectators difficult. In fact with DCC operations becoming more prevalent, operators seem to have a head down approach  looking at the control box (be it a phone or a control module) just like many folk walking about the streets today immersed in their digital microworld!

 

I have to ask this but why would anyone want a Thompson pacific aberration as a RTR product? ( ) ?

 

Martin Long

Martin, if my memory serves me there were two drivers, one at each fiddle yard, who drove trains towards themselves. I think the signalman sat at the back but there was a control point at the front for a fourth person to shunt the goods yard. This was nearly 35 years ago so I stand to be corrected.

[MJI]

Hi Andy and Tony

 

Ever tried to make a diesel locomotive kit, and I am not on about dear old MTK but all manufacturers seem to have a couple of guesses at things in each kit. Overall dimensions are frequently wrong, I have two class 14 kits one too long and one too short (one for the front of the layout and one for the back, helps with the perspective). But I am no better when I scratch build. The limitations are down the available information before building, be it parts for a scratch build or masters for casting etc.

 

Well lets look at that.

 

I had a look at Q kits, my skills were not good enough.

MTK, such crude castings, I decided not worth the bother. Not when Lima were producing so much and the Hornby models were crude but accurate in dimensions.

Scratch, grills aghhh, then I choose a loco and someone releases a nice RTR. Or a shunter, warped like nobodies business.

 

Then of course SH RTR available for a few quid, found a tatty Hornby 47 which is now Severn and looks really nice. Bought cheap in 1982 with terrible paint job.

 

A1 Not an easy kit, but will eventually produce a nice shunter not at all suitable for my layout (may build a mini one with an underground train)

 

Judith Edge - most success so far, hope to finish this year VERY suitable as allocated to the area I am modelling.

 

I am now having more luck, I can afford old S/H stock to cut and modify. Etched sides are so good.

 

Somewhere in a box there is a warped 05, a warped NBL 16, a part made 73 with not great cabs.

 

Doing better now, but I do like brass sides.

[Denbridge]

Martin, if my memory serves me there were two drivers, one at each fiddle yard, who drove trains towards themselves. I think the signalman sat at the back but there was a control point at the front for a fourth person to shunt the goods yard. This was nearly 35 years ago so I stand to be corrected.

You are correct in that the 'mainline' drivers operated from the ends. However, the Signalbox was at the front. This was a work of art, with a correct interlocked frame. the goods yard could be shunted from the front by the signalman or from the rear. IIRC there were buttons producing electronic 'whistle' sounds so the shunter could give instructions to the 'box. As I said a wonderful layout which certainly left an impression. Think it was around 1984 when i last saw it.

[St Enodoc]

You are correct in that the 'mainline' drivers operated from the ends. However, the Signalbox was at the front. This was a work of art, with a correct interlocked frame. the goods yard could be shunted from the front by the signalman or from the rear. IIRC there were buttons producing electronic 'whistle' sounds so the shunter could give instructions to the 'box. As I said a wonderful layout which certainly left an impression. Think it was around 1984 when i last saw it.

You are probably right. Yes, the interlocking was all electromechanical using relays that physically locked the levers I think.

 

Edit: some nice pictures here:

 

http://www.s-scale.org.uk/gallery13.htm

Edited February 16, 2018 by St Enodoc

[Clive Mortimore]

Hi Andy and Tony

 

Ever tried to make a diesel locomotive kit, and I am not on about dear old MTK but all manufacturers seem to have a couple of guesses at things in each kit. Overall dimensions are frequently wrong, I have two class 14 kits one too long and one too short (one for the front of the layout and one for the back, helps with the perspective). But I am no better when I scratch build. The limitations are down the available information before building, be it parts for a scratch build or masters for casting etc.

I also forgot to add that I am sure many kit manufacturers have the same measuring implement as me, you know the one that loses or gains the odd millimeter when transferring a dimension from the drawing to piece of material being worked on.

 

When building some thing from scratch I try my best to get as much information as I can before starting the project, not always as easy as people think it is. I therefore have great empathy with kit manufacturers. It isn't until a week after I have done my best guess at what that "odd shaped bit under there" looks like when I find 5 photos saying "Take it off matey and make it like this". 

 

We are lucky that so many people have tried to do drawings for modellers, some are great some not so great but remember one of the biggest skills a draftsperson has is interpreting the information he/she has into a 2D drawing. If not 100% right then any model made from it will incur the same error......all my hand built class 15s have the same cab window problem from the drawing I used.

Edited February 16, 2018 by Clive Mortimore

[grahame]

If everybody's work was subjected to the same 'examination' as you've conducted on mine, it could be very destructive.One thing which delights me about this thread is the number of pictures of models produced by both the finest of model-makers and by some of those just learning the craft. We must be careful of not being too much in awe of the best (as was pointed out recently with regard to that stunning 2mm P2), but at the same time not tearing to bits the efforts of the not-so-experienced. I'm more than happy to have my own work scrutinised, especially by those I respect (such as yourself) but I would be horrified if folk were put off from posting pictures of their work because of 'fear' of a fusillade of 'criticism'. 

 

In the past, I've been 'critical' of some modelling, on this site. The reaction to my 'critical' comments about one layout was tantamount to my 'swearing in church'! How dare I, seemed to be the reaction from the said followers of the 'chosen path'. 

 

We must all be critical, especially of our own work, and I thank you again for your post. 

 

 . . . . .

 

And, now, in the best traditions of this sort of debate, it's over to you. May we see what's on your workbench, please, Tony? 

 

 

Okay, I'll grasp the nettle, get us started and post up the latest on my workbench.

 

It's a scratch built low-relief row of buildings in N/2mm scale. They're based on real ones in Tooley Street, SE1 in the 1980s. They were demolished later to make way for the controversial London Bridge City phase II 'More' development. The model is not yet finished, plenty still to do, but here is the progress to date:

 

 

G.

[CF MRC]

Thame was ‘Clunk Click’ every trip.

All this talk of Mons Meg has made me wonder whether it wouldn’t be a good choice for CF, rather than Lord President, as their is hard photographic evidence of it leaving KX. The two engines were, for 2mm scale purposes, identical. Anyone any thoughts?

 

Tim

Edited February 16, 2018 by CF MRC

[Barry Ten]

Those are fantastic, Grahame - really atmospheric and convincing, as is all your 2mm modelling.

 

[t-b-g]

Tony,

 

If only more posters were this honest; with one caveat (see later)!

 

The only thing I'd 'argue' with is the comment about the sandbox fillers. The ones on my MONS MEG are right for the period modelled (summer 1958). She had them in different places at other times.

 

The caveat? Using a metaphor, if one pops a head above the parapet, one can be shot at. However, one can also shoot back! For many years I've been popping my head above many model railway parapets, probably sending back more in the way of 'firepower' than I've received. That 'comes with the territory'. If you give it out, you've got to take it, and vice versa. 

 

I heartily seek out constructive criticism, and yours of my model I take constructively. It was built for review and I only altered the cabside proportions later. Should I have also mentioned the 'faults' you've listed (with justification?) on my A2/2 with regard to the model on the video clip? The reason I mentioned the position of the cabside numbers was because it is so noticeable; their being far too low. I don't know the loco's builder (if I do and I haven't put two and two together, then I apologise), but to have produced such a list as you've done in criticism of his work might have been very counter-productive. As far as I can tell (in the main) he's built the kit as supplied (with the faults you mention), just as, in the main, I did. 

 

If everybody's work was subjected to the same 'examination' as you've conducted on mine, it could be very destructive.One thing which delights me about this thread is the number of pictures of models produced by both the finest of model-makers and by some of those just learning the craft. We must be careful of not being too much in awe of the best (as was pointed out recently with regard to that stunning 2mm P2), but at the same time not tearing to bits the efforts of the not-so-experienced. I'm more than happy to have my own work scrutinised, especially by those I respect (such as yourself) but I would be horrified if folk were put off from posting pictures of their work because of 'fear' of a fusillade of 'criticism'. 

 

In the past, I've been 'critical' of some modelling, on this site. The reaction to my 'critical' comments about one layout was tantamount to my 'swearing in church'! How dare I, seemed to be the reaction from the said followers of the 'chosen path'. 

 

We must all be critical, especially of our own work, and I thank you again for your post. 

 

However, just to prove that I can build an 'accurate' A2/2, will this stand closer scrutiny? 

 

60506 05.jpg

 

RM Little Bytham 18.jpg

 

A2 2 02 DJH 60506.jpg

 

This is built from a DJH kit, which, in my view, is better than the alternatives. I need to qualify 'my view' because I built the prototype for this kit, built the first production example and wrote the instructions for it. There are some 'issues'; the crank pins are easy to use, but a screw head isn't that real and the drivers on this example are generic 24mm Romfords, rather than the specific ones. 

 

And, now, in the best traditions of this sort of debate, it's over to you. May we see what's on your workbench, please, Tony? 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.

 

I certainly can't see any of the things I mentioned previously on that one! It does look so much better. The daft thing is that if Tim hadn't mentioned the cab window I would not have looked at a prototype photo and would have been none the wiser.

 

It doesn't do any harm to stir things up a bit once in a while, as long as it is done in the right spirit. If a relative novice had posted similar photos, or indeed somebody I don't know, I wouldn't have commented in that way.

 

As for my own workbench, it isn't very exciting just yet but a number of projects are under way.

 

The first is a new controller to replace the recently failed ECM Compspeed at Buckingham. To get something to fit the hole in the panel, I took a Gaugemaster apart and mounted it on a new front panel. It works but I need to decide how to decorate it, if at all.

 

 

 

Then there is a Southern bracket signal, rigged up with servos and working lamps from DCC concepts.

 

For myself we have a 9P "Valour", a "Jersey Lily" and an LD&ECR 0-6-0T plus a signal box in 7mm. Other recently completed things have gone to new homes on Narrow Road and for Doncaster but I will photograph them next time I go to the respective places.

 

Plus general repairs, cleaning, servicing etc. on the old layout.

 

So I am keeping quite busy!

 

Cheers

 

Tony

[Tony Wright]

I certainly can't see any of the things I mentioned previously on that one! It does look so much better. The daft thing is that if Tim hadn't mentioned the cab window I would not have looked at a prototype photo and would have been none the wiser.

 

It doesn't do any harm to stir things up a bit once in a while, as long as it is done in the right spirit. If a relative novice had posted similar photos, or indeed somebody I don't know, I wouldn't have commented in that way.

 

As for my own workbench, it isn't very exciting just yet but a number of projects are under way.

 

The first is a new controller to replace the recently failed ECM Compspeed at Buckingham. To get something to fit the hole in the panel, I took a Gaugemaster apart and mounted it on a new front panel. It works but I need to decide how to decorate it, if at all.

 

 

 

Then there is a Southern bracket signal, rigged up with servos and working lamps from DCC concepts.

 

For myself we have a 9P "Valour", a "Jersey Lily" and an LD&ECR 0-6-0T plus a signal box in 7mm. Other recently completed things have gone to new homes on Narrow Road and for Doncaster but I will photograph them next time I go to the respective places.IMG_20180216_131939.jpgIMG_20180216_131958.jpgIMG_20180216_132221.jpgIMG_20180216_132457.jpgIMG_20180216_132314.jpg

 

Plus general repairs, cleaning, servicing etc. on the old layout.

 

So I am keeping quite busy!

 

Cheers

 

Tony

There's some super work there, Tony,

 

Now, if only you knew how to use a camera!!!!!!

 

And, I might have a commission for you. Do you fancy finishing off Mick Nic's MR signals? I've done a bit more on them, but it's a question of time. I've just been asked to write a further book!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

Thame was ‘Clunk Click’ every trip.

All this talk of Mons Meg has made me wonder whether it wouldn’t be a good choice for CF, rather than Lord President, as their is hard photographic evidence of it leaving KX. The two engines were, for 2mm scale purposes, identical. Anyone any thoughts?

 

Tim

I can't tell the two apart as P2s, Tim. 

 

I'd go with MONS MEG, the one female in the class (after all locos are always - like warships - described as 'she'). 

 

I look forward to seeing it painted. 

 

I trust the pictures arrived.

[Clive Mortimore]

Much edited post

 

The first is a new controller to replace the recently failed ECM Compspeed at Buckingham. To get something to fit the hole in the panel, I took a Gaugemaster apart and mounted it on a new front panel. It works but I need to decide how to decorate it, if at all.

 

 

 

Cheers

 

Tony

Hi Tony

 

As a one time employee of Gaugemaster can I lend you some technical advice regarding the decoration of your new controller. Use a bright coloured felt tip pen and letter as shown.

 

Edited February 16, 2018 by Clive Mortimore

[Bucoops]

I'm disappointed you didn't make it go to 11

[t-b-g]

Hi Tony

 

As a one time employee of Gaugemaster can I lend you some technical advice regarding the decoration of your new controller. Use a bright coloured felt tip pen and letter as shown.

 

Tony's turnie thing.jpg

 

Many thanks for that. What do I do if I want it to go slower?

Edited February 16, 2018 by t-b-g

[Tony Wright]

Another request, if I may, please,

 

I've just received six K's cast metal wagon kits, with a request to sell them on behalf of a bereaved family (all proceeds to Cancer Research). 

 

There are four SR 8T wagons, a GWR mineral wagon and an SR gunpowder van. All are in unopened boxes and (according to the labels) contain Jackson wheels. 

 

They would appear to have been sold by Puffers. The address for K's is given as 101 Tubbs Road, Willesden, so they're of some 'antiquity'.

 

The request? I don't have the faintest idea what these are worth. Does anyone have any idea and/or is anyone interested in them? 

 

Thanks in anticipation.

[Clive Mortimore]

Many thanks for that. What do I do if I want it to go slower?

I don't know, I wasn't in the going slower department.

[t-b-g]

I don't know, I wasn't in the going slower department.

Hopefully this has all the options covered.

 

 

I apologise for the quality of the photos. I have one of those new fangled tablet thingies and it is really quick to photograph and post without using the computer and the proper camera. What it gains in time it loses in quality. I can take a decent photo with a half decent camera, honestly. I even got published once or twice!

[Barry Ten]

I ordered this controller from ebay but I think I clicked on the wrong link by mistake.

 

 

Obviously "finished with engines" is when it's time to go to bed.

 

Al

[Bucoops]

Or maybe that's the Beeching handle?

[t-b-g]

There's some super work there, Tony,

 

Now, if only you knew how to use a camera!!!!!!

 

And, I might have a commission for you. Do you fancy finishing off Mick Nic's MR signals? I've done a bit more on them, but it's a question of time. I've just been asked to write a further book!

 

Regards,

 

Tony.

 

Thanks Tony. So far so good with some of them. One day they might even get finished. It takes me many times longer than it takes you to put a kit together, even one where all the bits are the right shape and size and all the bits fit!

 

There are some things I leave to those who know what they are doing! I blame the rubbish camera built into my tablet.

 

What still needs doing on the signals? It would be a great honour to contribute a little something to your layout.

 

Cheers

 

Tony

I ordered this controller from ebay but I think I clicked on the wrong link by mistake.

 

cruise-ship-speed.jpg

 

Obviously "finished with engines" is when it's time to go to bed.

 

Al

I want one!