John Isherwood

'Paul' - you know the person in question, perhaps? So it's OK for fraud to take place, and it's the fault of the innocent potential customer who get's ripped off, but who hasn't the means or conviction to take restorative action? A very odd point of view, IMHO ! Do you share his morals? Regards, John.

..... but unfortunately not even prepared to update his website to reflect what he can actually provide. Now that smacks of dishonesty and certainly does no encourage me, (and I suspect many others), to support him in any way whatsoever. There is even an argumant that, if it were possible to organise a total boycott of his products, he might just be forced to sell to someone who could competently take the products forward. ..... or at least throw in the towel and take down his (arguably fraudulent) website; thereby saving any more unwary potential customers from having to wave their money goodbye! Regards, John Isherwood.

You are undoubtedly right - but as it is clear that his moulding equipment is non-functional, and he seems to be so short of funds that he is engaging in dishonest business practices, he really has not been in a position to take advantage of any opportunity that presents itself, if it involves plastic. This continuing debate seems to be going nowhere - unless his circumstances change dramatically, or he has a miraculous change of attitude towards disposing of the moulds, we should accept that the plastic kit side of the operation is gone forever. All the 'if onlys' in the world won't change the situation. Regards, John Isherwood.

Is the website under construction? No sign of the Deltic items or anything else 4mm. scale, except OO9. Regards, John Isherwood.

Regards, John Isherwood.

A hinged plate for the engine cleaner to stand on when clearing ash and char from the smokebox. Two plates are provided, one for the horizontal position and on for the vertical position. When fitting the latter, I needed to unscrew and raise the loco body slightly to get the plate lugs to fit into holes in the chassis. Regards, John Isherwood.

I had, by dint of a lot of photo-peering, identified pretty much all of the features to which you refer; and have / intend to incorporate(d) them into the model. The sole exception, I suspect, will be the curved cab rear - not easy to amend on the resin moulding and none too obvious, I think. I am struggling with cab interior photos - I managed to screen grab a couple from the BTF GT3 movie, and there are a couple of stills from the British Pathe movie. I also found a loco simulation programme that has a cab interior that matches the stills, and fills in some of the gaps - though how much of that is creative thinking, I'm not sure. Anyway, the project now has 'light at the end of the tunnel', so I'll try and stick with it ! Oh - I omitted two 'to do' items from my list in the last post :- etched treadplate to the running board; fit the resin-cast 'hub-caps' to the coupling rod bosses. Regards, John Isherwood.

Third time lucky for me - after a trial run on the Kernow test track, I now have a much quieter, smoother 1367. There has been some comment here concerning the somewhat 'underfed' buffers; I have just finished fitting a set of Slaters sprung Collett parallel loco buffers. Not the easiest of tasks as, once the original buffers had been 'waggled' off, it was necessary to open out the holes in the mazak bufferbeam / running plate casting. In addition, the buffer bases are cast onto the face of the bufferbeam, and need to be removed, so I unscrewed the cab moulding to facilitate better access to the rear bufferbeam. Some VERY careful work with a tapered square needle file ensued, taking care to preserve the adjacent cast rivet detail and the plastic vacuum and steam pipes. I only lost one steam pipe, which was replaced with a suitable casting. The new buffers have been fitted and primed; a topcoat of red will follow tomorrow. The transformation is very marked - the front and rear ends of the loco now have a rugged, purposeful look - in stark contrast to the weedy and ill-formed buffers fitted by Heljan. Photos will follow on completion. Regards, John Isherwood.

Subjective, I know, but in the published photos it looks a tad too 'grassy' to my eye. Regards, John Isherwood.

I use H&M Walkabouts - the control that they give is exemplarary. However, they're getting a bit long in the tooth, and the resistance track on the PCBs can 'misbehave' as they wear. Has anyone ever 'reverse engineered' the Walkabout; (ie. built a copy, or something very similar); as the Walkabout resistance track is an integral part of the circuitry and construction and, to my eyes at least, not capable of being replaced. Regards, John Isherwood.

The gearbox motors for the front fan can be found at http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/DC-12V-200RPM-Micro-Speed-Reduction-Gear-Motor-with-Metal-Gearbox-Wheel-Shaft-/181981925719?hash=item2a5ef7d157:g:19QAAOSw5dNWi40G . However, having had a good few weeks away from modelling, and particularly from GT3, I have come to the conclusion that the electronic bits and bobs must go. The theory worked - the bank of mini-fans produced a believeable turbojet sound; the mini-gearbox motor drove the front fan at a visible speed, (if a trifle noisily); the bridge rectifier kept everything turning in the correct direction; and the ceramic resistor balanced the current draw nicely. However, I became increasingly aware that GT3 stood out like a sore thumb because it sounded loud, and therefore quite realistic - whereas the rest of my loco fleet have been purchased, or designed and built, to be as quiet as possible. Certainly none of them sound like real steam or diesel locos. Moreover, the front fan might have rotated in the correct direction and at a visible speed but, behind the grille, it could not be seen ! So - out it will all come, with some of the vacated space being filled with lead. It was an interesting experiment; (like GT3 itself); and I relearned much of my school physics in the process, but it was a bit of a vanity project, really. I have just completed a checklist of work outstanding before I can start painting; as follows. Cab interior Backs to front step recesses Horns - front & rear Handrails Glazing Windscreen wipers Front guard-irons Lower splashers and fit brackets / pipework above Loco / tender pipes Tender corridor connector suspension & locking handle I intend to work through this list methodically, so that the project can have an end in sight; open-ended schedules often invite prevarication and distractions in my case ! Regards, John Isherwood.

Oh - I can't let that pass unchallenged !! That is the goal for every loco that I buy or build, and it can be achieved by careful selection of RTR models, or by considered design and careful construction of kit-built locos. A good square chassis, with all wheels touching the rails, and pick-ups wherever they can be fitted in, together with a sensible gearbox ratio allowing only a realistic top speed, should achieve the walking pace performance that you refer to. Even my cheap Mitsumi three pole motors can perform in this way when married to a Highlevel gearbox. DCC is fine for those who like playing with electronics, or who want sound, etc.; but it is definitely not a prerequisite of realistic slow running. Regards, John Isherwood.

Paul, Quite right - that'll teach me to rely on (an increasingly flawed) memory !! I can only plead that it must be at least thirty years since I converted a Keyser's kit into a 1/148 - and I don't think that I've had cause to check the history of the 24.5T hoppers since ! Regards, John.

I am confused !! The models in the photo have ".....the vertical section ... the same height on all four sides". The first wagon to 1/148 - as modelled by Keysers - did not have ".....the vertical section ... the same height on all four sides", but I believe that all subsequent wagons, to all diagrams, did have ".....the vertical section ... the same height on all four sides". That may not be reflected in the official BR diagrams - but that means nothing !! Regards, John Isherwood.

I've been in correspondence with an acquaintance on the subject of the merits and demerits of RTR models in general, with a particular reference to the 4-TC. I was taken to task for being an apologist for anything less than what could / should be attainable in an RTR model. The points that I made to him are very relevant to this debate, so I'll take the liberty of posting them below :- With age comes pragmatism ! RTR will always come with a large dose of compromise - what most critics forget is that, above anything else, time is expensive and an overriding financial consideration. I entirely accept that each new model project could be, as nigh on as makes no difference, perfect - given a project development timescale and budget that is open-ended. However, once you've engaged a production contractor you're tied to a strict programme of deadlines which will get you to the production slot allocated at the beginning of the project. No messing - fail to come up with the gen. at the appropriate time and you're back at the end of the queue ! It would be nice to be able to keep submitting each stage of project development to the scrutiny of the modelling public; wait whilst they argue amongst themselves as to the merits or demerits of your cad drawings / test shots / livery proofs, etc., etc.; come to a view as to who is right; (and upset the other 49%); and, eventually (hopefully); arrive at a model that will satisfy the majority, (but by no means the totality), of potential purchasers. That scenario is the recipe for rapid bankruptcy !! Let's face it - the market for, say, a 4TC is hardly mainstream. Try selling what looks like an EMU to the majority of proud Mummies and Daddies at Xmas, and explaining why it hasn't got a motor, but costs way more than a complete Railroad trainset. These niche market RTRs are designed to be produced quickly - by merchandising standards, not railway modellers' 'need it now' expectations. The time that can be allocated to research is extremely limited. The project researcher could no doubt come up with something approaching the true picture, given all the time he needs - but he doesn't have that. There is a lot of 'that'll have to do' involved - but I don't see any alternative in a commercial world. On the other hand, and as I don't make my living from transfers, I can take as long as I like to develop a new sheet of transfers - and if my best efforts fail to produce perfection, I can make corrections if they are brought to my attention. Sorry, ******, but the perfectionists in this hobby need to wake up and smell the coffee - RTR is never going to satisfy them, and they'd be better getting on with scratchbuilding than constantly berating the RTR producers. That, though, does not allow them to make a noise in public about the perceived deficiencies of others, without having to actually produce anything better ! Regards, John Isherwood, Cambridge Custom Transfers.

This model is now at the painted sample stage - well beyond that point where structural changes will be made. Like it or not, what you see in the shape of the model is what you will get; (or not - that's your decision). I can see the point in drawing attention to apparent structural errors at the stage where they could, possibly, be changed; we're now at the stage where apparent livery errors could be amended. There is absolutely no point in repeating criticism of aspects of a model when we're past the point of no return, and it's that continued criticism that makes me suspect some form of attention-seeking. Regards, John Isherwood.

Humour is wasted sometimes, isn't it? Before we all get too worked up about this, remember - it's toy trains we're talking about ! Regards, John Isherwood.

Why this obsession with searching for errors? Are some people determined to find a reason not to buy a new model because, a] they can't afford it anyway, and / or b] they had no intention of buying it anyway? If a modeller needs a particular subject for his chosen area / period, he can either buy the commercial offering, warts and all, or build a perfect model from a kit or by scratchbuilding. I strongly suspect that the majority of the naysayers will do neither of the latter options, because their interest is solely in denigrating commercial products in order to demonstrate their 'superior' knowledge. If you don't like it, fine; don't buy it; the rest of us will form our own judgement and act accordingly. Regards, John Isherwood.

Ah yes - published 1957; a true vintage Awdry !! Being eight at the time, I should have remembered that. Regards, John Isherwood.

Was that a genuine Rev. Wilbert Awdry one - or one of those spin-offs produced, I believe, by his son? Regards, John Isherwood.

The two(?) vertical cylinders are clearly visible behind the pannier(?) tanks. Regards, John Isherwood.

VERY carefully, bend it back upright. Then, apply the TINIEST spot of superglue to the area of weakness using the point of a pin. Regards, John Isherwood.

............ and "I present a short Film of Little Bytham that Tony and myself recorded ......."? Omit Tony, and would you write "I present a short Film of Little Bytham that myself recorded ........"? Sir will be round to check your detention lines very shortly. Regards, John Isherwood.

The Cambridgeshire Records Office have the deposited plans for a narrow gauge 'Oakington & Cottenham Light Railway. A mostly roadside tramway in the style of the Wisbech & Upwell, which would have run from Oakington station, on the Cambridge - St. Ives line, to Cottenham Lode - virtually opposite Cottenham church. The alignment was straight down the main road through Cottenham, with a branch to the local brickworks. I made a start on a model in 1977, but it never got beyond a tiny diaorama and plenty of stock; all based on Tri-ang TT, but in 4mm. scale. Regards, John Isherwood.

Providence ? Ooooh, you're on dangerous ground there !!! Provenance, surely ? Before Sir says it, you're in detention ! Regards, John Isherwood.