John Isherwood

Contrary to 'common knowledge', most (all?) MTK MU kits could be built into very nice models - given the necessary input of time and skill. They were NOT Airfix-type kits, as many purchasers seemed to expect! CJI.

It has been widely reported that more recent supplies of HMRS transfers suffer from poor registration of the differently colours. CJI.

Whenever this opinion is posted, we are told that the cost is negligible. One starts to wonder where the significant costs arise, when so many elements apparently cost virtually nothing. Let's face it - all this 'added value' is really play value, which appeals to a certain (minority?) sector of the market. Most serious modellers, I suspect, could well do without the 'added', and get better 'value' from a lower price! CJI.

That surprises me greatly - I've used more than a few BBs in all sorts of applications - including cast kits - and performance has been universally excellent. Perhaps you got a rogue example? John Isherwood.

Nothing suitable from Black Beetle? Contrary to common belief, you CAN still get them directly from the manufacturer in Australia. John Isherwood.

Talk to Highlevel Models - they should have something suitable. CJI.

Improvised double bolster - you can see the bolsters through the missing side doors, and the end doors have been removed. CJI.

My bad - it was my order for Markits' standard crankpins that couldn't be fulfilled - sorry for the confusion. John Isherwood.

.... not from Wizard models at present - I had the last few and, on advice, won't expect the balance of the order any time soon. CJI.

I am not trying to be elitist, or to 'dis' modern models, but it is a fact that the current obsession with interior lighting in models is the main thing that 'grates' excruciatingly with those of us who were around at the time in question; (don't get me started on 'sound'). If you can see it's there in daylight, it's too bright; sorry - but that's a fact. I understand that manufacturers provide what most customers demand - but that doesn't make it authentic. CJI.

Oh yeah - those were the days! That is my point - if you didn't experience it, it is virtually impossible to accurately visualise it. Remember - BR provided individual reading lights, focussed on the book, to enable one to read at night - (or even on overcast days) - even when the main compartment light was on. A generation of Sherlock Holmes etc. films, with scenes set in brilliantly lit compartments, have produced a totally false impression amongst the younger / middle-aged groups of modellers. Authentic coach lighting should produce a just-discernable dull glow when viewed from a couple of metres away. On a clear night, back in the day, you could JUST tell if the lights were on in a passing train from, say, the top of a cutting edge or an over / underbridge. CJI.

May I enquire whether you travelled by rail at night during the BR steam era? CJI.

EXACTLY!!! Unfortunately, such a suggestion is insulting / unacceptable to many otherwise skilled modellers! CJI.

If there's a John Turner caption - I'm with you. I just wondered if the WD had been identified solely from the photo. CJI.

If that proves to be the case - the lights will be too bright. Even if you were on the platform, it would have been nigh-on impossible to recognise a friend in a stationary lit coach after dark. It is becoming abundantly clear that many younger modellers have no concept of the inefficiency of coach lighting during the steam era. CJI.

Are you sure that it's not 90473? The cabside rivets make it difficult to be sure. CJI.

Quite - viz my comment re interior detail up-thread. CJI.

Mick, I know all the arguments pro LNER transfers - and for that matter, any pre-Nat. railway. Put succinctly, at my mid-70s, providing transfers is not critical to our finances, and it competes with my own modelling; (age also affects my modelling mojo). If I were younger, and had to hand a knowledgeable colleague versed in all things pre-nationalisation, I might consider it - but even so, it would be a herculean task; (as Railtec has discovered). In my experience, the market for transfers for the current prime modelling era - BR steam era - has a value which funds holidays / railway modelling purchases, rather than a full-time income. I have reason to believe that demand for transfers for earlier periods would be smaller, so I cannot see a comprehensive range of transfers becoming available any time soon. Sorry to be pessimistic - but that's how I see it. John Isherwood.

To do the job properly, one would need to have an encyclopaedic knowledge of LNER liveries - and that I don't have, unfortunately. Sorry, John.

How many times have you heard that? Photos copyright Pete Hill - thanks Pete. As most members will know, I don't 'DO' bespoke transfers - well, except on the very few occasions that I do! I must have been in a receptive mood when Pete Hill asked me to do some lettering for the S160 he was building - and I do have a soft spot for the prototype. Anyway, the above photos show what a superb job Pete made of his model and, incidently, show that "I won't use waterslide transfers because of the visible carrier-film!" is a load of rubbish! As Pete says, "I must admit, I thought the carrier film may be slightly visible, but it is not, and neither are the edges where they were cut from the sheet, following your advice on how to cut them!! So - those members who have spoken the title of this thread - you could not ask for better proof of the fallacy of that opinion than the above photos! White lettering on a satin / matt black finish is THE hardest test of the visibility or otherwise of transfer carrier film. John Isherwood, Cambridge Custom Transfers.

Definitely requires a central pier. CJI.

Why would you want to thread mouse droppings onto a piece of wire? What scale were the mice?😉 CJI.

There's one sitting, mouldering and forgotten, at the end of a remote siding in my marshalling yard. I gather that it is the 'secret' haunt of shunters on wet / cold / quiet shifts - a wisp of smoke from the stove chimney is occasionally to be seen on such occasions! Rule 1 rules! CJI.

Indeed it was - the provided mounting pin is fractionally tight on a Peco / HD R2 coupling, and the inner two pins on the Airfix bufferbeams are intended to limit the sideways swing of the coupler. The outer two bufferbeam pins were intended as attachments for Tri-ang tensionlock couplers - though this resulted in an excessive projection of the coupling. CJI.

Our loss, their gain !?! ☹️ CJI.