John Isherwood

Sorry - didn't know we were talking pre-Nationalisation; my Sheet C89 contains many useful GWR departmental lettering elements. Regards, John Isherwood.

There shouldn't be any need to adapt my transfers for Chivers kits - I list dedicated sheets for the BR steam era models. Regards, John Isherwood, https://www.cctrans.org.uk/products.htm

I don't know if you refer to me - perhaps not - but if so, you may have failed to note several 'Likes', attributable to me, against images of your GT3. I don't apologise for being sceptical - you came hard on the heels of a notable failure, and your initial approach did not encourage confidence. You have chalked up a win - continue in the same vein and the sky's the limit. John Isherwood.

I have not quite given up on the present day model railway press - I check out the latest issues on the magazines shelves, but it all seems to be so bland and 'samey'. I note from the response to my posts today that I am not alone in this view. Whatever, it's approaching bedtime; tomorrow is another day; and the boxes of building kits never seemed so full. On that tack - I have recently been putting together Ratio railway building kits - something new for me; I am very impressed. (Take that as a review if you wish)! John Isherwood.

The principal way that I have been affected by the issues in this topic is that I have not, for the past ten years or so, been able to find enjoyment, interest and inspiration in the mainstream model railway press. I used to enjoy my monthly binge of modelling inspiration, but the new generation of writers seem to have little practical knowledge or experience of actually making things. Shame really, John Isherwood.

This seems to have considerable promise - please put me down for one, if and when they become available. John Isherwood.

Nope - I purchaed and built a considerable number of the Cambrian kits several years ago. Failure to purchase a particular model, or the review that failed to identify its principal fault, does not preclude me having an opinion concerning the latter. John Isherwood.

Nope - I now buy no magazines except MRJ; for the sole reason that none of the others cover material that has not been done time and time again. I used to buy them all - and I still have them, going back to 1960; but I can no longer find anything in them that inspires or informs me. My comments have been made as a result of a posting here, to the effect that the review failed to mention the length issue. John Isherwood.

I have nothing but sympathy for Flangeway; at no point have I expressed any view concerning them. My opinions have been solely directed at a review that failed to detect such a basic error. John Isherwood.

All I'll say to that is that anyone who sets out to review a model SALMON without obtaining some form of drawing or basic dimensions is fair game in my book. John Isherwood.

Since your *some people* reference is made in a response to my post, I think that I may be forgiven if my ears burned a little! How do you know whether my life is hectic or not? I am a supplier of niche products which are suddenly in great demand, and I do all in my power to provide a by-return service. In addition - and I make no apology for the fact - I am frantically producing a multitude of buildings for my first and last proper layout. Alongside that, I have builders and other tradesmen busily working to convert our garage into a railway room; supervising those works is also quite demanding. If model railway magazine publishers choose to task writers to produce articles for which they are unqualified, then they deserve the criticism that they receive in consequence. I am fully conversant with the pressures of a busy career, and I was subjected to public criticism in the press and television when *certain people* didn't like how I did my work or what I did. Criticism is a fact of life, whether justified or not. John Isherwood.

Whilst I can accept that life as a model press writer is hectic - for whom is it not? - I still believe that to undertake to review a model without a drawing, or at least a few basic dimensions, is inexcusable. Also, I find it difficult to believe that any writer who purports to write with any authority on model railways can be unaware of the existence of the primary source for BR weight diagrams. During my career, those with whom I came into contact did not refrain from pointing out my errors - and I was the better for them doing so. In this case, the review writer will be much more cautious in future, and may have learned of a valuable data resource. John Isherwood.

In which case, the review should state that the model has not been checked for dimensional accuracy; when the model has been so checked the review invariably indicates the fact. As to the subject wagon of this thread, a quick online visit to http://www.barrowmoremrg.co.uk/Prototype.html would have revealed the inaccuracy. I cannot accept that the reviewer in this case made more than a token effort to do the job he / she was being paid for; and the review is valueless. John Isherwood.

Be aware that the Class A (silver) wagons had a longer tank, plus other detail differences; some cutting / shutting is required. John Isherwood.

16T slope-minded mineral - as produced in kit form by Peco (Parkside). John Isherwood.

Including (mini) hubcaps !! The fastidious may split the horizontal grab rails at the roof panel joints - or perhaps not! John Isherwood.

Could be red - I would have expected yellow. John Isherwood.

Just shows how thorough magazine reviews are !! John Isherwood.

That's better. John Isherwood.

If you don't run DCC - strip out all the DCC wiring and just connect the pick-ups to the motor terminals. John Isherwood.

The first job I had was as a delivery driver for a wholesale greengrocer in Sunderland. Apart from local shops, he had the contract for the local fire stations and the NCB canteens. Fire stations were a nightmare - the canteens were always up several flights of steps, and half-hundredweight sacks of potatoes are no fun after the tenth! The NCB canteens were another matter, given the railway interest! I deliverd to both ends of the Harton / Westoe system as well as Monkwearmouth Colliery, and one had to be on the lookout for locos - especially silent electric ones - when driving around colliery premises. It's no wonder that I'm a little overweight nowadays - you never left a canteen without a mug of tea and a bacon / sausage butty, and after a couple of collieries and two or more fire stations in a morning - well, you weren't in a hurry for lunch! Oh - and then there were the shipyards ...... Doxfords was good for steam locos and bacon butties! John Isherwood.

Chris, Tell me about it! As you may know, I'm Cambridge Custom Transfers; https://www.cctrans.org.uk/products.htm Regards, John Isherwood.

I'm bound to agree - my RTR conventially-motored locos, and my kit-built locos with etched brass chassis, High Level gearboxes and cheap Mitsumi motors, are much smoother runners than my few RTR locos that have coreless motors. John Isherwood.

Your and Bill's input is much appreciated - I am sure that those amongst us who felt the need to know are grateful, and regret that it was necessary to interrupt your weekends; (which I am sure we did not intend should happen). John Isherwood.

Accepted Chris - but some of that qualification could usefully have been added to your response; Rhydgaled was clearly mislead by your post. Surely someone at Model Rail knows whether the 1600 model has a conventional or a coreless motor? I can, to some extent, understand a reluctance to be specific - given that the latter type are mistrusted / disliked in some quarters. John Isherwood.