John Isherwood

Thank you so much - a renumbering is planned, and some detail changes. CJI.

It would be interesting to learn what you discovered to be the source of the 'stiffness'. CJI.

Hornby's use of a premium brand (and pricing) for metal bodied locos is somewhat disingenuous. The reason for metal bodies being necessary is DCC and, in particular, DCC sound. So much of the interior space within models is now being dedicated to (very light) electronic components that the only way to achieve acceptable weight / adhesion is to make the bodies from metal. Don't believe for one moment that this is a nostalgic move back to the 'good old days' of cast metal models - it's all about compensating for the bulk of all that electronic 'gubbins'. CJI.

I have a slice of Cambridge Tramways rail, recovered from the St. Mary's Street terminus 'Y', on the windowsill of my 'railway salon'. One of the very few perks of working for Cambridge City Council's Highways Department for forty years. Close examination of the rail profile reveals the reason for the tramway's demise. The rail head had been worn away so badly that the trams had been running on their flanges for years - the secondary groove in the flangeway is very marked! It was a choice of relay the rail or close and, as the University would not countenance the unsightly excresences and noise associated with electrification - close they did! CJI.

Does anyone know of a UK supplier of Precision Scale Company Inc. products? CJI.

Not quite, unfortunately - only a single diameter on the rivet shaft. Markits ones are only single diameter, too. CJI.

I have found these https://www.ebay.com/itm/Precision-Scale-HO-139-Rivets-Valve-Gear-Shouldered-Brass-/233117809291?_ul=IN HO scale, and from the USA - but there must surely still be a UK supplier? CJI

With counterbored, shouldered rivets - see diagram below - the joint can only jam if the thickness of the outer rod boss is greater than the depth of the larger diameter of the rivet. If necessary, the boss thickness is reduced by filing to be less than the depth of the larger rivet diameter. A couple of trials will soon establish the optimum setting of the centre-punch for opening the counterbore without squashing the rivet. In case anyone is asking where to get such rivets - I don't know! I have them in several lengths in unmarked polybags, but I'm sure that they came from a UK supplier - just some considerable time ago. If anyone knows of a current supplier, please post a link, as I may need further supplies. CJI.

Even quicker, I use an adjustable, automatic (sprung) centre-punch - one press, CLUNK, and the joint is made. CJI.

Replacing overhead flashes has to be the easiest modelling job going! CJI.

Tortuga, Not sure that is quite correct. A bridge over the route that you are on is an overbridge - regardless of whether your route is road, rail or canal. Similarly, a bridge under the route that you are on is an underbridge. Thus - perhaps confusingly - a railway bridge over a road is an overbridge if you are on the road, but an underbridge if you are on the railway. CJI.

Don't solder - use shouldered valvegear rivets instead. CJI.

Quite! The certificate originally supplied with the loco is lost - end of. If another certificate is purchased / forged, it is NOT the original certificate. The value of the certificate - if you care about such things - is that it is the ORIGINAL certificate supplied by the maker with the model in question. If the replacement certificate is genuine, but from another model, it is still not the ORIGINAL certificate, and I would judge it morally, if not legally, wrong to sell the model as being complete with original certificate. If a replacement certificate is forged, any sale would be fraudulent unless the origin of the certificate was declared - and so what would be the point? ...... and why was the OP able to purchase the model, sans certificate, at an exceptionally low price?!? CJI.

Indeed I do - but no idea when! Wasn't there also a mention of a station under the Catholic Church crossroads, which a reader recalled! What they remembered were the old underground toilets that still exist, though now buried and sealed. CJI.

I avoid the Dapol made kits - the moulds are worn out; the detail is far less defined; the plastic is 'rubbery', and has a tendency to warp. Airfix originals every time for me! CJI.

I always felt that, by comparison with other model tank wagons, the Peco product didn't quite convince - for the sole reason of the end radius. CJI.

High Level Models designed / (produced?) the chassis for CSP - have you tried building one? Could they be adapted to your body? CJI.

As 'The Objector', may I reassure Andy, and members who use this existing thread, that I have no intention whatsoever of continuing my much-misrepresented postings from the locked thread. I was previously unaware of this thread, and will be pressing the IGNORE THIS THREAD tab momentarily. I suspect that future postings will be rather more temperate now that a certain A4 has been excluded! CJI.

Can anyone pass informed comment as to the authenticity of the generously radiused tank end/ side transition? To my eyes, the prototype rarely, if ever, had such a large radius - though I can see why Peco produced it that way; for ease of tool ejection. CJI.

This SUPERB!! I have an etched brass kit - CSP? - which I doubt will ever get built, as it looks too fiddly for my declining eyesight / dexterity. To save me wading back through the thread - is / will this (be) available in any form of kit? John Isherwood.

Have you got a hidden camera in my bathroom ?!? CJI.

..... and I thought that they were a breakfast cereal !!! CJI.

There is a greater issue here - if the group is to fracture into cells where only those of a particular sensitivity are welcome, what is to prevent even further factionalisation on the basis of race, creed, colour, etc., etc. We have hitherto been a cohesive group of railway modellers - despite our diverse interests of scale, period, geographical location, methods of construction, etc., etc. Firm views have been expressed, and there have been strong disagreements at times, but we have always managed to maintain an inclusive attitude to all shades of opinion. However, the subject of this thread - which has nothing whatsoever to do with railway modelling per se - has already lead us into a situation where I am being told to 'go away' - effectively 'you're not one of us, so your views are not welcome'. I do not feel that the presence of such a sensitive sub-group can in any way enhance this forum, and could well damage it. Again, my honest opinion - to which I am entitled. CJI.

Because I happen to have an opinion concerning the subject of the thread. Inevitably, cries of bigotry are making themselves heard - I defy any and all to point to anything that I have posted here that could remotely be so construed. I made, and repeat, one point - that I fail to see the need for any member to know the orientation of any other member - straight or otherwise. It will add nothing to our appreciation of the posts made, or of the results of that person's modelling activities As such, I can see no justification for a sub-group of members of a particular persuasion. That is my opinion - as valid as any other. CJI.

Why do we need to be AWARE? It has precisely nothing to do with our ability, or otherwise, to enjoy railway modelling. Personally, I couldn't give a monkey's what the inclinations are of any member of this group - why do we NEED to know? CJI.