The price of our pleasures!

Since I was given my first proper OO Duchess of Atholl in 1949 there have been two things which foster the discontent in me! These are valve gear and chimneys (or funnels as I prefer).

The over thick wheels and the ridiculous bends could be excused away but my bugbears no. As nippers we could identify any class at over

I was happening to be looking at ads of the Black 5 with sound and the new Railroad cheap model. The later has the same motion as those aweful 60s & 70s versions (even back to the 40s come to think of it). This spoils the ship for a ha'pth etc but I am afraid that the sound fitted jobs are too rich for me but I am sure that I will get round to fitting one up myself eventually.

"simon" wrote

Our hobby is a very catholic one, with individuals having a wide range of interests and skills. I know one locomotive enthusiast with minimal skill levels, whose interest in the hobby is limited to having superb models of locos and to a lesser extent rolling stock. He has a wonderful eye for the subtleties of indivisual locomotives, but wouldn't consider himself to be a rivet counter.

He regularly part-exchanges old models for newer more accurate versions, but even so regularly points out the deficiences in the newer models accepting them only as a stop-gap until the next re-tooled version becomes available.

Has he yet found the 'perfect model'? Absolutely not, but thinks one or two of the recent releases have come close, bearing in mind the limitations & inadequacies of British OO-scale.

John.

"Sailor" wrote

I assume your preference for 'funnel' is as a result of a sea-faring life? The reality is I've never heard of a railway man refer to a steam loco chimney in that way. Each unto their own though I guess Peter.

John.

: These are valve gear and chimneys (or funnels as : I prefer).

Don't let us stop you showing up your utter ignorance then, I'm sure you would never dream of suggesting a ship has a left and right side, or worse still and nearside and offside, and would soon tell someone their fortune if they did...

: : He has a wonderful eye for the : subtleties of indivisual locomotives, but wouldn't consider himself to be a : rivet counter.

Wonderful typo there John, assuming you didn't do it on purpose, it looks so 'right'! :~)

Sorry Jerry but I have to tell you that as a submariner of some years we always talked of left and right rudder as well as up and down. Before that I spent a lot of my youth in and on locos both with family and my fathers driver friends. Perhaps we Bristolians see things differently!

To illustrate the submarine approach ( thanks be to the Courageous museum support group): I was ship control officer of the watch when my no 2 who was a sprog submarine officer asked the foreplanesman the time. He replies "Quarter to four sir." He got the terse reply " could we have it in more nautical terms please?" This brought forth "Yo Ho Ho and a bottle of rum -- and it's still quarter to four sir."

It's more fun to see you showing yours. Hint: try a dictionary.

MBQ

Since I was given my first proper OO Duchess of Atholl in 1949 there have been two things which foster the discontent in me! These are valve gear and chimneys (or funnels as I prefer).

The over thick wheels and the ridiculous bends could be excused away but my bugbears no. As nippers we could identify any class at over

I have news for you all. When I was a pupil of the CM&EE at St Rollox in the 50's we always called what you English guys call a chimney, a 'funnel' This is a perfectly respectable locomotive engineering term. Don't let's start some new myths, we have enough of the existing ones. I even designed a funnel once when I was in the DO at the NBL later on in my training (SAR Class 25, if you must know). The thing the smoke comes out of is a funnel. The Scot's have a saying 'Lang may yer lum reek, wi' ither people's coal'. 'Lum' is another common term for a funnel also in common use on the footplate.

I'm glad to hear that someone else has a valve gear fetish. I'm a fellow sufferer and have regular bouts of revulsion at the efforts of modern RTR producers (both Bachmann and Hornby) who will persist in putting the Walschaerts gear return crank on backwards on one side of the loco. Modern RTR is just so good that this idiotic fault should not recur time and time again on new models, but it does. I guess the LCL's (little chinese ladies) don't know any better but it makes you aware of the poor QC being done these days. Back in Margate times Hornby always got it right.

Alistair W

F*ck all left to reply to.

: : I have news for you all. When I was a pupil of the CM&EE at St Rollox in : the 50's we always called what you English guys call a chimney, a 'funnel'

There is no accounting for Scottish engineering slang, probably 'imported' from the Clyde-side ship yards, probably also why the term was also used in the sea port of Bristol - to pick up on another comment by "Sailor".

However doesnt everyone know exactly what you mean when say chimney but has a moment of confusion when called a funnel ? If so then the fact that it was correct usage in olden times or limited circumstances would make some of us wonder if this is an affectation. :-)

cheers, Simon

Thats fine for him, in fact as you say very important to him. Same for others who comment on chimneys and valve gear. But there are some of us who just cant appreciate these differences. Still couldnt see what was wrong with the Scots after it had been pointed out. So we can all choses what matters to us and all be happy without ccritisising other peoples priorities and choices. Plus some of us may get more locos for our cash.

Its amazing how many people choose just on facet of modelling that irritates them. Sometimes seems its just cos theyve taken the trouble to get that right so everyone else should. Now I can spot a dodgy set of rocks/cliffs at a million miles. If see well executed ones then may complement the modeller, if theyre not so good then just keep quiet. However, havent tried doing any yet.

cheers, Simon

"simon" wrote

The 'Royal Scots' were one of my favourite locos in real life, and I'm still offended by every attempt so far at producing a quality 4mm scale ready-to-run model of the rebuilt locos.

Absolutely, no argument with that. Each unto their own, and long may it continue.

The pre-occupation with locomotives, sometimes to the exclusion of all other aspects of our hobby, doesn't surprise me. Many (but not all) model railway enthusiasts I know have an interest which developed from their boyhood (and sometimes on-going) interest of trainspotting.

John.

Can understand that pre-occupation, am 'guilty' of it myself - one of the reasons for building a coach. This may sound stupid but it clicked that you can recognise a non corridor coach by the missing corridor connections ! However when someone claims they dont understand why people with their own layout dont run locos with the correct headlamps this foxes me. Personally I cant remember more than 3 codes despite several attempts at learning them. Another is complaints about working signals, it is good to see them but each to his or her own in terms of priorities.

Cheers, Simon

: Another is complaints about working signals, it is good to see them but each : to his or her own in terms of priorities. :

What gets me more than 'non-working' signals is the over population of signals on some layouts, just about every conceivable movement seems to have been signalled for when many movements would have been achieved by word of mouth between driver/shunter, signalman and a couple of hand flags - less is so often more...

"simon" wrote

I'm going off at a tangent here, but talking about corridor connections, can anyone explain the logic of off-set corridor connections on the end of mail coaches?

I understand that you may want to excluded 'Joe Public' from walking from a passenger coach into a mail coach (although I'd have thought a simple lock would serve that purpose), but the off-setting of corridor connections must make marshalling of mail coaches difficult.

Some also appear to be off-set diagonally, which would mean they wouldn't connect with any other coach.

John.

AIUI, internal GPO/Post Office (standard) sorting equipment layout, do remember that only the dedicated 'sorting vans' had these off-set connections and the coaches were semi permanently coupled - they worked in fixed formations - the outer ends of the formations has standard centred connections.

was reading about marsalling of coaches in terms of corrodor side the other day, certainly for a long while there was an attempt to keep them with the corrodor on the same side - will try and find the article though. As for PO coaches from LMS Coaches - 'sorting racks were on non-corridor side' so perhaps offset was to give more space when passing through - depends on how far things extended into the coach, but more importantly 'the corridor side of the coach carried the pickup net' so the coach would need to be marshalled with pickup on correct side anyway.

Cheers, Simon

Over here it's a smoke stack, or stack for short.

Christmas cheer all round, woklf k.