John Isherwood

Thank you for your interest in my query; the Atkins, Beard & Tourett 'bible' had several incarnations. I believe the original was a single volume, which I owned but subsequently gave away. Next came the two volume edition - which will be the one that you have. Finally, there was / is the single volume combined version - commonly known as the 'bible'; this is what I now have. If the photo of 12009, (to which you refer as being on page 114 of Volume 2), is the same one as Plate 624 in the 'combined' volume; (the van is allocated to Newport); it was taken in 1900 well before being uprated from 10-10 to 13-5 in May 1918. It was designated AA16 at the time of uprating. The history of these un-diagrammed 10T vans is also reproduced in the 'bible'. http://static.premiersite.co.uk/31418/docs/6594836_1.pdf gives some interesting background, including the original and revised numbers of four vans that were reallocated to the S&T department. Regards, John Isherwood.

I have the honour to be that friend, and a donation to Cancer Research has been made. The AA16 will become the subject of Plate 626 in the A, B & T "GWR Goods Wagons" 'bible'. A scruffy S&T department tool van, with a ladder lashed to the footboard; it has always fascinated me when I flipped through the book. Unfortunately, the caption to the J. H. Russell photo does not quote the running number of the van - can anyone enlighten me, please? I strongly doubt that, in reality, it survived until 1961 on the S&DJR, but I won't let that deter me from running it in due course - stranger things did happen! Regards, John Isherwood.

Nice model - I'm just a little surprised at the CATTLE marking. Can you point me at a photo of the prototype carrying that marking? Regards, John Isherwood.

I hope not - but the area around the coupling recess looks worryingly like the early stages of mazak rot - either that or a poor casting. Regards, John Isherwood.

"Let auld acquaintance be forgot, and never brought to mind ...........". An excellent sentiment, which I am happy to endorse. All the best to all our readers! John Isherwood.

.... and that's what so many of the (pointless) posts here are all about! No basis in fact - just time on one's hands, so let's stir things up a bit. Merry Christmas, John Isherwood.

.... and on what basis do you make that comment? Has there been any suggestion whatsoever that the Hatton's King is NOT progressing as planned? I do wish that there could be some acceptance in certain quarters that projects of this nature do not come to fruition at the wave of a magic wand! I was party to the knowledge that certain of Hornby's releases of recent years were being researched and developed more than ten years before they came to fruition. The difference now is that potential customers know of future releases; then they were blissfully ignorant. I sometimes think that we were better off then - but if that was the case, what would certain members have to froth about and criticise? Regards, John Isherwood.

It's long time since the last update, but progress has been steady. GT3 is now operational - running nice and smoothly, with a functioning front air intake fan, and an operational bank of three mini-fans to replicate the sound of the prototype's turbojet engine. https://youtu.be/fgSnR_f0hoQ https://youtu.be/UHkL-lZL2RI I'm pretty happy with the results; some trial and error with resistors might produce higher fan revs / higher pitched sound, but it'll certainly do for now. I'll do a follow-up posting, with description and photos of the recent work, ASAP. Regards, John Isherwood. PS. I'm disappointed with the sound volume of the Youtube clips - the files play much better on my PC. Is there any way of increasing the volume when uploading to Youtube?

.... as used by the prototype on the Weymouth harbour tramway. Heljan don't do buffers too well, do they? Regards, John Isherwood.

That's fine, thanks. Regards, John Isherwood.

The link doesn't work for me. Regards, John Isherwood.

Really ? In the photo above, I'm sure that I can see bare metal in those recesses behind the solebar. Regards, John Isherwood.

When I get time, I intend removing the moulded ballast load on mine; covering the mechanism with clingfilm; and then applying a thin layer of ballast mixed with PVA glue. That way, I hope to achieve a more realistic ballast load, on which I can strew some tools - shovels, picks, etc. I will post the results in due course. Regards, John Isherwood.

You are entirely correct - how remiss of me to fail to make that distinction ! Those who 'do' do so quietly; those who 'don't' make a great song and dance about how someone else should have done it for them. Regards, John Isherwood.

I have, this afternoon, received a private e-mail from an old friend, who takes me to task for suggesting that the addition of an ash-pan to the forthcoming Hattons 14XX / 48XX is something that those who perceive it to be essential should be capable of adding themselves. In setting down my response I was conscious that I was spelling out, at some length, why I object to the activities here of certain specialist modellers, who repeatedly insist that the RTR manufacturers are ignoring their needs / failing in their duty. Since I have evidently offended that group, both as members and non-members of this forum, I am herewith going to post my response to my friend's missive - if only for the avoidance of misunderstanding of my own motives; (I have made a couple of very minor omissons in order to protect the identity of my friend) :- "I'm afraid that we look upon RTR models, and RMweb, from different perspectives. I see RTR models from the likes of Hornby, Bachmann, etc. in the same way that I have always done - mass market models / toys intended for the less discerning market. That their models are now much more accurate; (though by no means perfect); is to be welcomed, and therefore they appeal to a much wider market than hitherto. What they have never purported to represent is an off-the-shelf equivalent of the skilled kit-built or scratchbuilt model. However, just because great strides have been made in the fidelity of these new generation RTR models, this does not justify the expectation that the models should be detailed to the last 'widget', nor that they should be available in every possible variant in which the prototype might have existed ..... and all this regardles of cost, or the financial viability of the model in question. It is my belief that anyone who is knowledgeable enough / cares enough to demand all of the 'widgets' and variations, should be prepared to make the usually minor amendments to the RTR model in order to produce their particular specification / variant. It has always been thus, and I see no reason why the general improvement in RTR should, at a stroke, eliminate the need to undertake any real modelling. It was through the use of your invaluable range of 'bits and kits' that so many of us of the older generation were enabled to improve the RTR offerings of the day, and move on to the more skilled arena of kits and scratchbuilding. No, I don't have works drawings of the ashpan of a 14XX / 48XX, but if I was in the market for such a model, and it lacked that feature, and I judged it essential to provide some representation of it, I would have no qualms about seeking the necessary information, and setting to with plastic card and scalpel. Indeed, in days gone by I rather suspect that you would have done the same, and offered an after-market ashpan for the discerning to fit themselves - and thereby add some additional mass. As to RMweb, there seems to be a belief that it should be something that it is not; it's a mainstream forum for the mass market of railway 'modellers' - a great many of whom are strictly box-openers. I'm afraid that those members who continually bemoan the absence of what they perceive as indispensible detail, or every possible variant, regardless of the financial viability of their requirements, are bound to 'get up the noses' of the bulk of the membership. Let me state unequivocally that I am right behind Andy York in his aversion to the repeated protests of the niche modellers who feel that they are 'hard done by'. There are plenty of fora (?) dedicated to those with specialist knowledge, and I subscribe to the odd one. Significantly, the posting traffic in these groups is markedly low, compared to that of RMweb. In conclusion, mainstream RTR is essentially mass-market and will always lack, for financial reasons, elements and variety that the specialist modeller will consider essential. That sector has always previously been prepared to adapt RTR to their own purposes, or build better alternatives from kits or scratch - why no longer"? Regards, John Isherwood.

... or the opportunity to do a little modelling ? How hard can a box with knobs on be? Regards, John Isherwood.

You can bet your last penny that Hornby / Bachmann, etc., planned to have the models in question available well in time for Christmas - they'd have to be mad / suicidal not to have done so. That said, if the product is made in China, then it is delivered to a timetable dictated by the Chinese - and there's little that Hornby / Bachmann, etc. can do about it. We now learn that delivery programmes are not even within the control of the Chinese factory managers - if most of your workforce decides to depart early on the annual mass migration that is the Chinese New Year, there's little that can be done. In an ecomomy where demand for skilled labour exceeds supply, the factories cannot even be certain that their workforce will return in its entirity after the holiday. We surely all know this by now, so why does the late delivery of products exercise us so? Rather, let's chill out, enjoy Christmas / New Year, and look forward to the arrival of our belated goodies to brighten the anti-claimax that is the early months of the New Year. Regards, John Isherwood.

Here we go again - just can't leave it alone ! But I for one am not rising to the bait this time. At the end of the day, you'll get what Hatton's provide or do without - simples! Regards, John Isherwood.

For the likely reasons, see the DJM Class 71 thread. Regards, John Isherwood.

I can certainly see black behind the HCP - undoubtedly put there as a base on which to add the TOPS code amid all the rust, and probably the first tin of paint that came to hand ! Regards, John Isherwood.

Found it above - if that's bauxite with a black patch, I'm a Dutchman !! (David is not unknown for his sometimes 'creative' captions). I'd interpret that monochrome photo as an overall rust wagon that has had its number etc., repainted on a patch of unidentifiable coloured new(ish) paint - perhaps black, but just as likely bauxite. If you'd ever seen the conditions when hot coke was doused and dumped at a coking plant, as I did - (Birchenwood, Kidsgrove, Staffs.) - you'd understand why the vast majority of coke hoppers had a livery of unrelieved rust! Regards, John Isherwood.

Chris, Can you point me at these photos; I do have an extensive wagon library? Many thanks, John.

Huh ??? Regards, John Isherwood.

That doesn't explain how the condition of the unit shown in the header photo of your link has been allowed to deteriorate to the point that a total rebuild of the cab areas is now necessary - or am I missing something? Regards, John Isherwood.

Ahhhhh - now that's odd !! I'm assuming that http://www.Hornby.co...-wagon-3-3.html represents, (not too convincingly), an all-over rusted, non-fitted wagon, with renewed lettering and raves. The alternative is that they mean it to be a piped or fitted wagon - in which case it shouldn't have a black background to the lettering. I suppose that some research into the number might enlighten us - but it's late !! Regards, John Isherwood.