CeeJay60's WorkBench

What individual members are up to.
CeeJay60
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:00 am

CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby CeeJay60 » Wed May 27, 2020 6:07 pm

Hopefully I'm doing this right and one of those nice moderator chappies can set this up as a sub-forum, since I'll have layout, loco, wagon and signal threads at least!

Socially Distanced Challenge Entry No. 1 – Loco
The loco entry is a London Road Models kit for the North Eastern Railway Class M or Class Q, probably better known as the LNER D17/1 and D17/2 4-4-0 tender locomotives.

This is intended to become a representation of D17/1 No. 1621 of Alnmouth shed in 1938 lined black condition. My primary reference photo is in Yeadon Volume 34 page 10, dated August 1939, which I’m happy to take as showing how it looked after the preceding general repair in August 1937.

IMG_1671.JPG
LRM Kit & Bits

This entry photo shows more than just the contents of the kit – the London Road Models gearbox and gearbox extender are shown (I’ve chosen a 50:1 gear set), and Gibson wheels (the closest available matches - codes G4S42C leading, G4S84 driving and G4S44C or the tender if you want the detail).

I do not intend to give a blow by blow account of the build here. I spent an instructive few evenings reading Alan Goodwillie’s thread on loco building in the Getting Started in P4 area, and even though I’ve built a few successful loco kits, I learn something from Alan every time I talk to him or read anything he’s written. So here, I will only note anything I do a bit differently or learn as I go.

Since these days I prefer a sprung suspension, I had thought in the first instance that I would spring the chassis, drive on the front driving axle with the motor in the boiler, and have space in the firebox for plenty of weight. However, the chassis design is for either rigid, or the classic 4-4-0 flexichas arrangement, with the rear axle fixed and driven, and the front driving axle beam compensated with the leading bogie.
The placement of the frame spacers includes motor supports for a couple of specific motor and gearbox solutions, and would make other suspension or motor and gearbox solutions a bit of a chore. So after a few hours of head scratching, I gave a mental shrug and decided to build the chassis pretty much as designed. The instructions include an actual size drawing of how a portescap motor and gearbox would sit in the chassis, over which my Mashima 1420 and London Road extended gearbox happily sits, so that’s the way I’ll go.

On the other hand, it struck me as superfluous to have both a bogie pivot arm and the compensation beam bearing on the bogie bolt via a plate, so I fabricated a slot in a spare frame spacer for the bogie pivot to slide in, and used this plate on the compensation beam as the bogie mounting. I’ve since filed the tabs off the spare EM frame spacer I used so as to allow better rotation. Whether some form of centring spring will be required remains to be seen.
IMG_1686.JPG
Compensation detail


I’ve also beefed up the beam to pivot tube join with some brass wire, since it is under-slung and all the front weight would otherwise have been on the soldered join.

The 18.83 frame spacers are at the maximum width I would want – I had to file off about half the thickness of the bearing bosses outside the frames to get a free rolling chassis with the bosses on the back of the Gibson wheels. Note to self – use the EM frame spacers when you build the other kit for the D17/2!

So current status is a rolling chassis: -
IMG_1685.JPG
Rolling Chassis


Actually, it’s been stripped down and cleaned ready for the next steps ;)
Cheers,
Colin

I promise I'll get some of it right some of the time!

DougN
Posts: 999
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 9:57 am

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby DougN » Thu May 28, 2020 3:17 am

Looks like you are going to enjoy this, Colin.

Looking good so far. Mine is lurking on the kit table at the moment... pick ups need to be modified and increase its efficiency.
Doug
Still not doing enough modelling

timlewis
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 6:13 pm

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby timlewis » Thu May 28, 2020 9:45 am

Looking forward to seeing this D17 develop - I may do one some day though it''s a bit early for me really.

I know you haven't started your wagon thread yet, but for your Daigram 92 6-plank opens, get yourself some of Dave Bradwell's etched LNER AVB underframes which can be built either with steel or wooden sole bars. I've got a couple of Dia. 92s on the go myself.

Incidentally, Alnmouth will make a great model - I'm doing Coldstream myself, set in about 1947-51. There''s a thread on RMWeb, but I'm going to start one on here soon as well.

Cheers.

Tim

Daddyman
Posts: 111
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2017 1:09 pm

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby Daddyman » Thu May 28, 2020 9:47 am

Good luck with this. Nice to see something North Eastern. Do you model the Alnmouth area?

I notice that the kit seems to have a reasonable dome for once. But there's an error in the tender sides in that the flare and the sides are etched as one part, whereas the flares should be separate and sit proud of the sides.

CeeJay60
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:00 am

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby CeeJay60 » Wed Jun 03, 2020 4:15 pm

Sorry for the longer than intended silence from me, I've needed to change my computer :(

And like most other people, the garden chores and the household chores have been detracting from the modelling time.

Ho hum, that's real life ...
Cheers,
Colin

I promise I'll get some of it right some of the time!

CeeJay60
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:00 am

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby CeeJay60 » Wed Jun 03, 2020 4:21 pm

timlewis » Thu May 28, 2020 10:45 am
... get yourself some of Dave Bradwell's etched LNER AVB underframes which can be built either with steel or wooden sole bars. I've got a couple of Dia. 92s on the go myself.


I'll be honest Tim, I'd forgotten about Dave's under frames and reached into that big box of bits!

I'd be interested to see your interpretation o the D92s
Cheers,
Colin

I promise I'll get some of it right some of the time!

CeeJay60
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:00 am

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby CeeJay60 » Wed Jun 03, 2020 4:24 pm

Post by Daddyman » Thu May 28, 2020 10:47 am

Good luck with this. Nice to see something North Eastern. Do you model the Alnmouth area?

I notice that the kit seems to have a reasonable dome for once. But there's an error in the tender sides in that the flare and the sides are etched as one part, whereas the flares should be separate and sit proud of the sides.


"Alnmouth 1938" is slowly coming together! The model covers from Wooden Gate through the Aln Viaduct, with some compression (!), focusing on Alnmouth Station and shed.

I see what you mean about the tender sides, I'll need to have a think about that.
Cheers,
Colin

I promise I'll get some of it right some of the time!

CeeJay60
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:00 am

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby CeeJay60 » Wed Jun 03, 2020 4:54 pm

On My Workbench - the Layout

Here's the single slip I was working on when I allowed myself to be distracted by the Socially Distanced Challenge.
IMG_1713 Rotated.jpg
SS7 and B8R


Still a fair bit to do on it - really need to add tie bars and the operating links to the servos and thoroughly test before final detailing - don't hold your breath!

The baseboard markings are for the road over-bridge at the South end of Alnmouth station, where the single slip allowed crossover between the up main and down main, or, to or from the up main only, access from or to the branch platform and down goods yard.

The prototype was almost straight North-South, but on this model the curve round the end of the room starts immediately to the left of this photo, and for that reason the geometry is a compromise. The North Eastern Railway plot plan of 1908 (Northumberland Records Office, now Northumberland Archiveshttps://www.northumberlandarchives.com/ reference NRO 4789-1B-2) shows that nearly all of the station point work was 1 in 9, and mostly C switches. I did try OS Maps before getting this plot plan, but they just weren't good enough for the track work.

In the foreground is the trailing point to the Horse Dock and Carriage Dock on the up main.
Cheers,
Colin

I promise I'll get some of it right some of the time!

CeeJay60
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:00 am

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby CeeJay60 » Wed Jun 03, 2020 5:09 pm

Socially Distanced Challenge Entry No.2 - Wagons

I am aware that there are full wagon underframe kits out there, but for this set of wagons, I decided to go back to basics with MJT rocking w-irons and Bill Bedford sprung w-irons.

This is simply because I find them so easy - I can quickly get MJT w-irons to give me a very free rolling wagon, although for some reason I can’t get sprung wagons to roll quite so freely. I do prefer the riding qualities of springing, but free rolling might be important in the long trains I plan to have on the layout.

So in this batch of wagons: -
Wagon 1 is the 9ft wheelbase D3 unfitted wagon on MJT 2299 RCH/GWR rocking w-irons and Wizard split spoke wheels;
Wagon 2 is the 9ft wheelbase D4 fitted wagon on Bedford BWF002 1923 RCH sprung w-irons and Gibson split spoke wheels;
Wagon 3 is the first 10ft wheelbase D92 fitted wagon on MJT 2299 RCH/GWR rocking w-irons and Gibson split spoke wheels;
Wagon 4 is the second 10ft wheelbase D92 fitted wagon on Bedford BWF001 1907 RCH sprung w-irons and Gibson 3-hole disc wheels;

IMG_1696.JPG
W-irons to floors with superglue

The Cambrian floors have useful guide lines moulded on the floor underside – except when you’re trying to install w-irons for 10ft wheelbase not 9ft, and glue them in the wrong place! Thankfully I spotted it before the superglue had completely hardened, but a bit of clean-up was still needed before gluing the w-irons in the right place.

So in line with my philosophy of making it work first, and then making it look pretty, here’s the rolling floors being tested: -
IMG_1697 Cropped.jpg

IMG_1698 Cropped.jpg

It’s much easier to make sure they are running freely, straight and true at this stage.

Meanwhile, the bodies are coming together – just a few minutes a day results in visible progress.
IMG_1712.JPG
Cheers,
Colin

I promise I'll get some of it right some of the time!

CeeJay60
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:00 am

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby CeeJay60 » Wed Jun 03, 2020 5:15 pm

Socially Distanced Challenge Entry No. 1 – Loco

Made a start on the superstructure of the D17. The footplate, footplate reinforcements and valances went together with less difficulty than I thought they might.

However, there are more overlays and laminations than I like – I have had problems in the past with things coming apart years later because of trapped flux residues, despite thorough cleaning - and I’m not yet sure about half etched overlapping joints on visible body work.

I would have liked to leave the cab front removable to make lining of the spectacles easier, but I can’t see a way to do that, since the rear splasher tops are bent out from the cab front.

But it’s coming along nicely enough.

I assembled and tested the London Road Models 50:1 gearbox, although I have not yet fixed the angle of the extender. The motor and gear train initially felt a bit on the tight side to turn by hand, but the Mashima didn’t even notice! A bit of a run-in through the speed steps quickly gave a crawl speed at ~18% on the analogue Gaugemaster before stalling, in both directions. I’m calling that a successful test.
IMG_1710.JPG
Motor and gearbox test
Cheers,
Colin

I promise I'll get some of it right some of the time!

Daddyman
Posts: 111
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2017 1:09 pm

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby Daddyman » Wed Jun 03, 2020 7:30 pm

CeeJay60 wrote: I see what you mean about the tender sides, I'll need to have a think about that.


I'd sacrifice the sides in order to keep the flare. Cut the flare off with a craft knife: on a 3038 tender the flare is exactly 3mm when in the flat, and will probably be the same on the tender fitted to D17s.

Then replace the tender side with a piece of 10 thou which is 0.5mm higher than the visible part of the side - the spare 0.5mm is to give you land to attach the flare to, as on a Bradwell tender. The beading on the leading edge of the side can be replaced with wire of the same diameter as the flare beading (0.5mm?) flattened on the underside. Handrail holes can be marked off the original side using dividers measuring from the bottom edge.

CeeJay60
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:00 am

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby CeeJay60 » Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:16 pm

Socially Distanced Challenge Entry No. 3 – Signals
Over the last few days, I have split my modelling time between preparing sleepers for the next lot of track to be laid on the layout, making a start on the signal assembly, and keeping the wagon build going.

For the signal, I have completed the lattice posts, an exercise in patience perhaps more than soldering skills.

By a happy coincidence, the print of the photo on A4 paper is very close to actual 4mm scale, going by counting of the lattice squares in the available photographs, so the layout of the components here begins to give some idea of what the dimensions of the completed signal might be: -
IMG_1722.JPG
Lattice Signal Posts


I have also knocked together a base on which to construct and test the developing signal, using my standard baseboard socket for a signal. This allows removal of the signal when required, and provides orientation, operation and the electrical connections for the LED signal lamps through the baseboard.
IMG_1727.JPG
Signal Base Plate
IMG_1728.JPG
Plug and Socket


The socket simply comprises a square tube and a round tube super glued into holes through the baseboard to receive the one size smaller square tube and round tube which form a plug on the bottom of the copperclad base plate. When completed, the square tube will provide the negative 0V connection for the LED signal lamps, and the round tube the positive supply (via a resistor from the layout auxiliary 12V supply).
The operating rods pass through the hole in the base plate and the square tube to extend below the socket, allowing servo or memory wire motors to lift the operating rod to clear the signal. Perhaps a photo of a previously completed signal will help to make this clearer: -
IMG_1729.JPG
Previously Completed Signal


And although it’s meaningless really, for some reason I find just standing the bottom post on the copperclad makes a picture that pleases me: -
IMG_1725.JPG
Cheers,
Colin

I promise I'll get some of it right some of the time!

DougN
Posts: 999
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 9:57 am

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby DougN » Tue Jun 09, 2020 12:55 am

Looking great Colin, I was thinking last night about how much solder I actually go through then clean off. It was a bit of thinking about lead exposure. I generally use very little on the loco builds but looking at your signals and remembering how little I actually used on them your doing very well.

However I still think I need to get a mask for the cleaning up of the solder just in case!
Doug
Still not doing enough modelling

CeeJay60
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:00 am

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby CeeJay60 » Mon Jun 15, 2020 2:27 pm

Looking great Colin, I was thinking last night about how much solder I actually go through then clean off. It was a bit of thinking about lead exposure. I generally use very little on the loco builds but looking at your signals and remembering how little I actually used on them your doing very well.

However I still think I need to get a mask for the cleaning up of the solder just in case!


I'll be honest Doug, I generally don't worry about lead or heavy metal exposure. My understanding is that you really have to ingest it for it to do you harm - it's too heavy to worry about air borne particles, so as long as you're not licking your fingers all the time you'll probably be OK. Wash your hands thoroughly when you finish a session.

Of course I'm not a medical professional, so you might want to seek specialist advice.
Cheers,
Colin

I promise I'll get some of it right some of the time!

CeeJay60
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:00 am

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby CeeJay60 » Mon Jun 15, 2020 2:33 pm

The Socially Distanced Challenge Entry No. 3 – Signals

A comprehensive review of all the photographs I have which depict parts of this signal has led me to the following dimensional guidelines: -
From the bottom (ground level) of the base post: -
• What appear to be the balance weights are at the level of what would be the 3rd lattice, although there is some plating;
• The pivot for the starter to the Down Independent is in the 11th lattice;
• The first side platform is at the 13th lattice;
From the level of the first platform: -
• The lamp platform supports for the Up Branch to Up Main distant are at the 2nd lattice;
• The pivot point for the distant signal arm is at the 5th lattice;
• The lamp platform supports for the Down Main to Up Main Backover are at the 6th lattice;
• The pivot point for the backover signal arm is at the 9th lattice;
• The second, cantilevered, side platform is at the 13th lattice;
From the level of the second platform: -
• The top tee bracket is at the 16th lattice;
From the level of the top tee bracket: -
• The pivot point for the Down Main home sky repeat signal arm is at the 7th lattice on the main doll;
• The main doll is 9 lattices to the finial;
• The pivot point for the starter to the Down Independent sky repeat signal arm is at the 5th lattice on the subsidiary doll;
• The subsidiary doll is 7 lattices to the finial;

It is clear from the photographs that originally the Up Branch to Up Main distant and the Down Main to Up Main Backover were at a slightly higher level, and that they were moved down the post at some unknown time. I will model them in their later lower position.

It should also be obvious that the lattices are not all the same size – they get smaller towards the top of the signal assembly. And despite my initial impression that “the print of the photo on A4 paper is very close to actual 4mm scale”, there is clearly significant foreshortening towards the top of the photo!

So the main post is made up from three sections: -
• The base is a 20ft heavy lattice base post which conveniently has 13 lattices;
• The middle section is a 23ft lattice post with a 14” base, which has 16 lattices, the bottom three of which I cut off;
• The top section is a 23ft lattice post with a 12” base, which conveniently has 16 lattices;

Since the main 15ft doll is also the correct size, it does make me wonder whether the real thing was similarly put together from standard size components!

Having removed the bottom of the middle section, it became very delicate, so for a location aid during construction, I added some brass angle inside the top of the base section to help with butt joining the sections together. This went better than I expected, but gave me a very tall post which felt very fragile, so I didn’t even stop to take a photograph. Instead I carried on to add the side platform supports over the butt joins, which helped to make the whole structure more robust.

The second platform cantilever has been cut back to give the approximate dimension arrived at by counting the foot boards – it has still to be trimmed for the single foot board on the other side of the post. The first platform supports are some 1/16” angle cut to the length of the cantilever above.
IMG_1738.JPG


Coming along nicely!
Cheers,
Colin

I promise I'll get some of it right some of the time!

davebradwell
Posts: 272
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2019 3:48 pm

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby davebradwell » Mon Jun 15, 2020 3:38 pm

A very fine thing but it's a pity the bracket isn't the correct pattern - surely not. Can't you do a Megginson and build one up from strip if the correct size isn't available from the D&S range? It'll bother you!

DaveB

CeeJay60
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:00 am

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby CeeJay60 » Tue Jun 16, 2020 11:56 pm

A very fine thing but it's a pity the bracket isn't the correct pattern - surely not. Can't you do a Megginson and build one up from strip if the correct size isn't available from the D&S range? It'll bother you!

DaveB


You're probably right Dave, but I don't know how to bend flat strip that way - I think the curves would have to be etched. So I'll carry on with this technical exercise in what is possible from available components, and come back to it later if I feel the need.
Cheers,
Colin

I promise I'll get some of it right some of the time!

garethashenden
Posts: 292
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2015 9:41 pm

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby garethashenden » Wed Jun 17, 2020 4:33 am

CeeJay60 wrote:Socially Distanced Challenge Entry No.2 - Wagons

I am aware that there are full wagon underframe kits out there, but for this set of wagons, I decided to go back to basics with MJT rocking w-irons and Bill Bedford sprung w-irons.

This is simply because I find them so easy - I can quickly get MJT w-irons to give me a very free rolling wagon, although for some reason I can’t get sprung wagons to roll quite so freely. I do prefer the riding qualities of springing, but free rolling might be important in the long trains I plan to have on the layout.


I’ve had the same issue, I find that more attention is needed to how the bearings fit is needed. The bearing gets mounted in the spring tab, but I often have to file the sides of the bearing a bit to get it to move smoothly in the w-iron. Maybe it’s etched cups in the slot, maybe it’s the bearings I’m using, most likely a bit of both. Rocking w-irons are easier to set up in this regard, but harder when it comes to axle boxes and springs.

CeeJay60
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:00 am

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby CeeJay60 » Mon Jul 06, 2020 9:27 am

I know I've not posted for a couple of weeks - I allowed myself to be distracted by wiring up another baseboard, then solving an electronics problem and writing that up for another society. ;)
Cheers,
Colin

I promise I'll get some of it right some of the time!

CeeJay60
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:00 am

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby CeeJay60 » Mon Jul 06, 2020 9:55 am

Progress has not halted completely, though: -

The Socially Distanced Challenge Entry No. 3 – Signals

The signal structure is substantially complete
IMG_1901.JPG


I have been doing a bit more research on the arms, however.

My initial impression from the photos is that the arms were Stevens & Co. lower quadrant arms. But re-reading selected parts of the excellent "A History of North Eastern Railway Signalling", edited by Neil Mackay and published by NERA (ISBN 978-1-873513-99-6), reminded me of the prevalence of MacKenzie & Holland products on the Northern Division, and their use of "inside arms" on their "iron signals" - that is to say, the lattice equivalent of the slotted post, where the X of the lattice below the signal arm was omitted to allow the arm, mounted inside the post as the name implies, to drop to indicate clear.

Back for another look through the photographs available to me, and I have to conclude that the signals would indeed have been "inside arm" at the time I want to model them (with the obvious exception of the upper quadrant replacement arm). So NER slotted post signal arms it will have to be.

Part of this exercise also looked at the standard NER signal lamps, which are quite distinctive. I'm not aware of a commercial product, so that might need a bit of thought too!
Cheers,
Colin

I promise I'll get some of it right some of the time!

davebradwell
Posts: 272
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2019 3:48 pm

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby davebradwell » Mon Jul 06, 2020 10:08 am

You'll see, too, that the LQ arms are longer and narrower than was "standard" elsewhere. Classic NER.

Mr Tatlow will do you some nice brass finials, I'm sure.

DaveB

User avatar
Mark Tatlow
Posts: 757
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby Mark Tatlow » Mon Jul 06, 2020 9:10 pm

Mr Tatlow can indeed do you some lost wax finials.

I am not sure which lamps you are after. The NER M&H had a really chunky one for their timber slotted signals and then a more delicate one for much of the rest/ MSE do the former and i can do the later (but am out of stock at the moment).

Details here https://miscellanymodels.com/
Last edited by Mark Tatlow on Mon Jul 06, 2020 11:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mark Tatlow

davebradwell
Posts: 272
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2019 3:48 pm

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby davebradwell » Mon Jul 06, 2020 9:55 pm

There seemed to be some real whoppers around the NER ND but I've never seen any specific information on these lamps. You've probably seen the signalling catalogues with pages of lamps so it's difficult to know if it's something new or it's in the system already. I haven't seen your lamps, Mark, but these are significantly bigger than the MSE castings I've been using.

DaveB

CeeJay60
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:00 am

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby CeeJay60 » Sat Jul 11, 2020 9:23 am

The Socially Distanced Challenge Entry No. 3 – Signals

Thanks to DaveB and Mark Tatlow for their offers of help.

I'm going to go with the MSE white metal McK&H finials, since they they look to be the same shape as in the photos.

The Northern Division standard lamp case, however, seems to have been rather camera shy - even "A History of North Eastern Railway Signalling", edited by Neil Mackay and published by NERA (ISBN 978-1-873513-99-6) has no decent photo of them, but a line drawing from the McKenzie & Holland catalogue: -
History of NER Signalling Illustration 174.jpg
History of NER Signalling Illustration 174.jpg (124.73 KiB) Viewed 307 times


The photos I'm referring to show tall lamp cases with a square lower section and tall round chimney, so I'm convinced they are the cases in the illustration. At 22" tall (yes, 7.3mm in 4mm scale!) they are likely to be quite noticeable!
Cheers,
Colin

I promise I'll get some of it right some of the time!

CeeJay60
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:00 am

Re: CeeJay60's WorkBench

Postby CeeJay60 » Sun Jul 12, 2020 10:13 am

The Socially Distanced Challenge Entry No. 3 – Signals

Oh dear - the more I look at the photos, the less sure I am of what I'm seeing. The lamp cases are definitely square (or rectangular), but the chimneys might not be as tall as I thought ...

I think I'm losing the plot, looking at too many fuzzy out-of-focus outlines in the background of photos of other things!
Cheers,
Colin

I promise I'll get some of it right some of the time!


Return to “On My Workbench”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests