John Isherwood

Jerry, In a word - pragmatism ! I designed a 9.5 x 3.0 m. loft layout that included all of the features of Evercreech Junction apart from the junction itself, pretty much to scale length. Bearing in mind that I am now 70; that the loft is currently totally unconverted; that the roof timbers would severely inhibit construction and operation; and that EVERYTHING would need to be constructed by me, I have come to the reluctant conclusion that it isn't going to happen. I have, over the past 55 years, built and purchased / modified a vast collection of stock; all intended for the eventual EJ 1961 layout. The thought of it never running before it has to be disposed of was unthinkable, so I was forced to the conclusion that I had to lower my sights somewhat. Now, being a wagon nutter, the sidings at EJ and their shunting ARE, to me, the most interesting part of the track layout; the rest of the layout will be there to allow me to 'watch the trains go by'. The fact that there will be few buildings to construct; (which is a chore that I do not really enjoy); is a bonus. That the scenic part of the layout fades out part of the way along the platforms bothers me not one iota - and no-one else is likely to see the layout. Something akin to prototypical train movements will be possible, and I will get a great deal of pleasure from the layout. The bottom line is that the revised layout is achievable in my lifetime, and will satisfy me - nothing else matters. .......... and that doesn't mean that I should therefore lower my sights as far as stock and locos are concerned; my priorities are my own, and no-one else's! Regards, John Isherwood.

Tony, You seem to be saying that those who can build their own locos should do so; or at least be prepared to replace components that are inaccurate. I don't accept that argument. As I progress through my seventies, I am increasingly aware that the time remaining to me is finite, and that a strategy for speeding-up the achievement of my model railway ambitions is needed. In particular, if Evercreech Junction 1961 is ever to become a reality, I need to make a start on it and spend less time building locos and stock. To that end, when Bachmann announced 58072, an S&DJR stalwart, I immediately put my Craftsman kit on the market, despite having acquired all of the wheels, motor, gearbox, etc. to go with it. The time saved in constructing the kit could be put to better use. As it happens, a recent, more radical review of priorities concluded that 58072 fell outside my chosen timeframe, so the order was cancelled as being an indulgence; (nothing to do with the merits or otherwise of the Bachmann model). Nonetheless; (and whilst I await sight of 58072 with its correct Stanier chimney); I would be having qualms over a model that is fitted with traction tyres. My view is that, unless we accept a return to 'Design Clever'; and having regard for the pricing of current models; it is reasonable to expect models that will satisfy the needs of those who can build their own locos, but would welcome the opportunity to devote their efforts to subjects not available as RTR. In this respect, you are fortunate in having a group of professionals / friends who can contribute to the achievement of your ambitions; something not at the disposal of most of us. We may be in a minority of railway modellers, but I would guess that we have a significant spending power which manufacturers can ill afford to dismiss. I cannot believe that it would be prohibitively expensive to reproduce, for instance, the bolted coverplate on the top of the dome - which has been produced as a separate component to suit this particular version. Moreover, if manufacturers choose to have their models photographed and published via a popular model railway forum, in a form that makes them appear less than accurate, then they are making a calculation that the publicity benefits outweigh any criticism of inaccurate fittings, traction tyres, etc. I know that some potential purchasers clamour for daily updates, but there are dangers in publishing images of hybrid models which can lead to discussions such as we are now having. Just my two p'ennorth. Regards, John Isherwood. PS. Evercreech Junction 1961 will now be a garage (rather than a loft) layout, concentrating on the (for me) most interesting part - the through lines, the bank of sidings and the goods yard. The platform ends and the centre road for banking locos will be modelled, but the station buildings will be, conveniently, off-scene. The multiple fiddle-yard roads will be reduced to two through roads and a pair of train cassette loops, with several cassette storage drawers beneath the fiddle-yard. Some reduction in radii will also have to be accepted.

I, too, am wondering whether the sale of my Craftsman kit was such a good idea. I cancelled (for other reasons) my Bachmann order before I saw these photos, and I don't now regret that. Regards, John Isherwood.

Tony, When you say "line up" - would that be horizontally, or just on an inclined line? It MAY just be a result of the angle of the photo but, IMHO, the chimney of the BR version dominates in an exaggerated manner. Regards, John Isherwood

I don't think that it is in the immediate environs of Bodmin Road (Parkway) - which, as a local and a regular visitor to the signalbox cafe, I know quite well. Regards, John Isherwood.

I have to say that I was surprised to discover the limitations of my Poppy's jig; some very common wheelbases have proved to be problematic - when a slight lengthening of certain axle slots would have accommodated them. I even slightly (and VERY carefully) modified my jig to allow its use for a couple of projects; it seems to me that insufficient thought was put into the design in order to optimise the range of wheelbases that could be built. Regards, John Isherwood.

Regards, John Isherwood.

Not too sure about that chimney - it looks somewhat over-excited to me !! ... and the dome lacks the rather evident bolted cover plate where the Ramsbottom valves were originally located. Regards, John Isherwood.

Perhaps we can make a stand for proper UK spelling on Thursday ?!? OK, ok - no politics. Regards, John Isherwood.

IMHO, anyone who goes wandering round in a smoking volcano crater has to take responsibility for the consequences - my sympathies are entirely with the relatives of those who failed to survive their 'adventure'. I confess to considerable unease during our visit to the Rotorua area in N.Z. a couple of years ago - especially when I touched the lake water outside our hotel and got a mild scald! Natural forces take no prisoners !! Regards, John Isherwood.

Surely, as this is a UK-based group, it's sulphide? ... or is this another unwanted product of internationalism (Americanisation)? ( ... just sayin' ); Regards, John Isherwood.

One of the many variant of BR heavy duty buffers, I'd guess. Dowty? Regards, John Isherwood.

Quite - I think that we have to accept that the old Hornby and early Bachmann / Airfix models were not designed to the standards that we would expect today. The classic case is the Hornby 2721 - an ancient model that was designed to provide for more sales of the antedeluvian 'Jinty' chassis, with which it was originally released. The 'Jinty' and its derivatives were 'updated' repeatedly, but it was never redesigned as such and so it is pointless to bemoan it's many deficiencies. It's a cheap and cheerful caricature - weight distribution and bunker coal levels are irrelevant at this late date. Regards, John Isherwood.

Is this any good? It's a sheet of waterslide transfers intended for Festiniog Railway wagons, but the style is suitably 'rustic'. The numbers on the 4mm. scale sheet are 1.3 mm. tall; on the 7mm. scale sheet they are 2.3 mm. tall; and on the G1 sheet they are 3 mm. tall. Regards, John Isherwood.

So how are manufacturers supposed to balance their models correctly if they cannot put weight in the bunker? You seem to be arguing against yourself - or wanting your cake and eat it ! Regards, John Isherwood.

You're looking at the wrong photos - NEVER trust 'preserved' wagons for authenticity. What you see in that photo are later fittings. There's nothing wrong with the RCH buffers supplied with the kit. Regards, John Isherwood.

Having consulted Harris, I concur with your analysis of the photo and with the caption, and apologise for doubting you. The point that I was trying to make is that, nowadays, far too many photo captions make bold statements that are in no way supported by the information contained in the photo itself. When those statements are based on research elsewhere there should be some indication of the fact, so that the reader can have confidence in the veracity of the caption. Of course, a great many captions, especially in magazines, are just plain wrong - or as we plain-speaking Lancastrians would say - b*ll*cks !! Regards, John Isherwood.

I'm afraid that I'm not convinced. I see the upper surface of the coach beading reflecting the light - as is the edge of the roof and the upper surface of the boiler handrail of the loco. I am equally dubious about whether or not the coaches are lined - at least on the waistline. If they are unlined, they're the first unlined maroon coaches carrying roundels that I've ever come across; .... and as for exposed stainless steel beading on a maroon coach? When it comes to captions, less is often more. If you can't point to irrefutable proof for everything stated, it's best left out. Regards, John Isherwood.

I have all of them, and use them according to the job in hand; clearly, thick solder deposits will require a coarser wheel than a surface film. Be a little circumspect when using the coarser grades - you don't want to create a 'dish' in the underlying etch. If in doubt, scrape the bulk of the solder away with a D-shaped scalpel blade, and then polish away the residue with a relatively fine wheel. What you are aiming for is the merest seam of solder visible along the joint; a single wheel, used alone, will get into the narrowest of gaps. Regards, John Isherwood.

For removing excess solder I strongly recommend https://www.moleroda.com/product/small-3m-radial-discs-19mm-25mm/?attribute_size=19mm&attribute_grit=80g+-+(Yellow)+Coarse&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIsMXnyLuc5gIVV-DtCh0CtwcJEAQYAiABEgIF4PD_BwE . Available from numerous outlets and in a range of degrees of abrasiveness, they transform a thankless tasc into the work of moments ! Regards, John Isherwood.

I would strongly advocate, as does Tony Wright, a rigid chassis. I've never been able to get reliable running with 'floppy' chassis, whereas rigid chassis seem always to run smoothly for me, at least. A Comet 4F chassis should be fine for your 3F. Regards, John Isherwood.

I believe that the 7Fs had special Ferodo brake-blocks. Regards, John Isherwood.

Stewart, You can add the 4mm. anywhere in the parallel part of the bonnet / battery boxes / running board. If I had been unable to obtain a second body moulding, I intended to laminate some U-shaped layers of plastic card, and attach them to one half of the cut body. I would then have trimmed back the outside of the laminations flush with the outside of the body moulding, and then attached the other half of the cut body. Only when the adhesive had thoroughly cured would I have trimmed back the interior of the laminations. This may seem complex, but it is essential that the two parts of the body are exactly aligned, in order to avoid a 'bendy' body. Alternatively, do as I did and ask Golden Arrow if they can sell you a reject body. If so, cut both bodies at different locations 4mm. apart, so that you can join a long 'front' to a long 'back. Regards, John.

VERY slow now. Regards, John Isherwood.

Seems to be grinding a bit at the moment. Regards, John Isherwood.