John Isherwood

When the current rebuild of Bodmin Gaol (by the Russians!) is completed shortly, there will be very little 'languishing' done there. I expect that it will cost an arm and a leg; (not literally I hope); to walk across the threshold !! (Perhaps the Russians know more than we do? Could it be intended by the Corbyn regime as a luxury resort for the Party faithful)? Regards, with tongue in cheek, John Isherwood.

Do as I intend doing - forthcoming open-cabbed Army version with markings removed; sheet the cab cut-out; and add DS1169 numberplates from 247 Developments. Simples !! Regards, John Isherwood.

..... and me - just be careful to ensure that the 'filed' slot does not wander off the vertical. Regards, John Isherwood.

Funnily enough, that may well be of a similar vintage to my Black 5 - when did Brassmasters introduce that kit, I wonder? Regards, John Isherwood.

Look no further https://www.cctrans.org.uk/products.htm !! My Sheets BL27, BL109, BL110, BL121, BL152, BL155 & BL172 are a fairly comprehensive collection of transfers for the BR steam / early diesel PRESFLOs. Regards, John Isherwood.

I use these :- https://miniatronics.com/products/2-pin-micro-mini-connector-with-12-flexible-leads-2-units?_pos=1&_sid=d3434e454&_ss=r exclusively for loco / tender connections. I doubt that you will find anything smaller, and they can be obtained from https://www.coastaldcc.co.uk/search.php?search=miniatronics ; (note that the pack contains two pairs). Regards, John Isherwood.

My recollection, from building most of the pre-Nationalisation CONFLATs, is that the body of the 9' WB version has the same dimensions as the 10' WB one; 17'-6'' in length. After all, the containers that were loaded were not specific to the wheelbase of the CONFLAT. Regards, John Isherwood.

.... which all goes to support my view that Brassmasters kits are chronically over-engineered. By a factor of at least ten, my Brassmasters Black 5 is the undisputed holder of the long-term, part-built loco trophy ! If you didn't know, and could not see that the component existed until Brassmasters expect you to install it, it is surplus to all reasonable requirements, IMHO. I've a feeling that my Black 5 will, sooner or later, be completed with a Comet chassis. Regards, John Isherwood.

If something realistic is wanted, a 9ft. WB wooden mineral wagon chassis with the sides and ends stripped off would be most likely; (10ft. WB seven plank mineral wagons would have been rare, to say the least)! Visibility would be important, and an intact seven plank mineral wagon would block most of the driver's view with a tiny loco such as this. If a runner / pick-up wagon is essential, it should not be difficult to fit a 9' WB wagon chassis with pick-ups, and transfer the plug and socket from the CONFLAT. Regards, John Isherwood.

Clem, I wouldn't disagree that, in some areas, a lighter shade of grey was locally common. The essence of my point, though, is that the widespread use of sandy shades is simply not representative of steam era steam loco 'weathering'. Regards, John Isherwood.

As I am constantly adding to my very large (66,000 +) collection of BR-era loco photos, I have ample opportunity to study colour photos of BR steam locos; and particularly those in a 'weathered' condition. I also have my recollections of the period in question. What strikes me about so many of the photos of 'weathered' steam locos here on RMweb is that the finish is far too light coloured - many look as if they have been driven across a ploughed field or a tank training course !! This applies equally to RTR and hand-finished 'weathered' models. The 'weathering' that adhered to steam era steam locos was largely the products of the combustion of coal - either from the loco itself or from the domestic and industrial fires that surrounded the railway. This residue was dark in colour - shades of dark grey; not the desert-dust shades that are so often used to represent 'weathering' on model locos. There were few sources of light coloured discolouration - one would have been from the track, but only if it was poorly maintained and 'pumping' liquified sub-soil from beneath the ballast. Another would be ash dust - but, again, that would have been grey in colour, and would mostly have blown away outside the immediate shed environment. I wonder if the misapprehension of 'weathering' in the steam era arises from what we see on present-day trains - which is much lighter, and lacks the overwhelming coal combustion by-products of years gone by ? Synthetic brake pads / shoes produce an entirely different residue from the former cast-iron on steel braking systems. What I saw in my trainspotting childhood and youth was that the livery elements gradually disappeared under an overall coating of dark grey 'grot'. If you were lucky, someone had made a token wipe of the loco number, so that the crew could identify their allocated steed, but on all but the top-line locos, that was it. It was still a blackish loco; (even if it was supposed to be dark green); but beyond that it was far too often impossible to detect any lining or crest. Just my personal view, but my eyes tell me that far too many 'weathered' steam loco models in no way match the photographic evidence from the time of their prototypes. It's not as if there aren't sufficient photos on-line to study - I suspect that many modellers and RTR suppliers reproduce their own concept of what weathering looked like, rather than the reality of the time in question. Please - work from colour photos, and replace the light earth shades with greys - mostly dark. Regards, John Isherwood.

Paul, I think that you are confusing Pete with me - I am Cambridge Custom Transfers. Unfortunately, I have nothing suitable for the Bachmann BOGIE BOLSTER C. Regards, John Isherwood.

Yeah - there's the one which Guy Fawkes used for meetings of the House of Commons Homemade Fireworks Club. ..... but we all know how that ended !! Regards, John Isherwod.

With a raincoat like that, and lurking around a corner - it's got to be the Phantom W*lly Waver !!! Regards, John Isherwood.

No doubt - it's a pot-boiler for the undiscerning, and of no interest to the GWR cogniscenti. Regards, John Isherwood.

That really is laughable in 2019 - I remember being underwhelmed by the Dean Single when I was a pre-teen, and I'm now some sixty years older !! I'm only glad that I have no use for such a caricature - even Rule 1 would be stretching credibility to breaking-point. Regards, John Isherwood.

If we're playing with words - I don't do fun; I do enjoyment and satisfaction. Since retirement, I also don't do seriously. Regards, John Isherwood.

I suppose it depends what you understand by 'fun' - as opposed to enjoyment. For me, 'fun' is harmless, but ultimately pointless, amusement; with little or no purpose other than immediate gratification. Railway modelling always has, for me, an ultimate purpose - that of engendering pleasure, and a sense of achievement, in overcoming challenges to produce a model which represents a prototype. So, no - my railway modelling isn't 'fun'; but it is enjoyable and results in a sense of satisfaction. Regards, John Isherwood.

I don't recall reading anything in this thread that would warrant that derogatory comment; please could you point out those 'inane thoughts'? I have read a question, (which I posed), which has received considered responses - other than your own. Some model for fun; some for other, equally valid resons - none deserve your abuse! Regards, John Isherwood.

They have already done so - Midland Railway springs to mind. The trouble is - regardless of livery - the distinctive panelling is merely printed onto a plain-sided body. Regards, John Isherwood.

You called? Not so - I would say that at least 50% of my locos and rolling stock would have no legitimate place on my projected Evercreech Junction 1961; the 'illegitimate' items were built / bought because I like them. Fun, though? I'm not sure that I equate my railway modelling with fun - though it certainly gives me great pleasure and satisfaction. I'm sure that it a defect on my part, but I just can't see the point of the circle of track round the Christmas tree / biscuit tin / plant pot / etc. etc.; they certainly don't amuse me, and that has nothing to do with authenticity, or lack of it. Regards, John Isherwood.

I know that I'll regret asking this - but why ???????????????? Regards, John Isherwood. ....... and, please, something more imaginative than "'Cos we can"!

Very nicely done indeed ! Just one point - we (nearly all of us) model in OO (4mm. / 1ft.) scale in the UK; not HO (3.5mm. / 1ft.). Regards, John Isherwood.

They were oval, not circular. Regards, John Isherwood.

I would be nice if they could be externally restored store vehicles, rather than the decrepit wrecks so often seen on 'heritage' lines. Regards, John Isherwood.