009 Society Members Forum

(Not prototype information, but not sure where else to put this! - we ordinary mortals don't seem able to access the Society 'General' section)

Many members of the Society will be aware that the Society holds a Heritage Collection of models dating back to the early days

Running articles in the News on the Heritage Collection is currently under (sporadic) consideration. I am delighted someone else has any interest in these models, sadly, when they are displayed on the Society stand at exhibitions and member's days they seem to attract little attention. I suppose that is a direct consequence of the age of the models, they only appeal to members over 'a certain age'. Some consideration was given to making Mick's photographs available on disc to interested parties but for the life of me I cannot recall what if any decision was made. There may be a copyright question with Mick about this.

Quote from: clayliner on October 26, 2017, 16:21

Comments from interested parties, and others, welcomed.

David.

I would also like to see photos and articles about the 009 Society Heritage Collection.

I would also be happy to take the photos and write the articles, but I would need help from others with some of the information.
But there may be practical issues with this.

Brian Meldon

Why not a 'special' publication. Having photos taken specially for it would a) solve a copyright problem, b) show the models in the best way, and from all sides. Sales would help fund more items? Of course, there could be many reasons why this isn't practical.

Totally inadequate notice, I am sure, but a Society display stand will be at EXPONG tomorrow - this would be a suitable place to display some of the collection. I am not sure that I have ever seen these in the flesh? Perhaps I am one of those who have overlooked them at the exhibitions I have attended. Whenever they are displayed, I suggest a full description, with an explanation of their significance should be included.

Tim

It's a 500+ mile round trip for me to Expong which I am not prepared to undertake at my own expense now! Providing 'full details' of the models when displayed does present some logistical problems. But I do think we will get them into the News sometime soon, one at a time seems a good idea, perhaps a photograph with an extended caption per issue would be the way to do it.

Hi Rod,

Comments as relevant to each section of your response.

Quote from: rod335 on October 27, 2017, 13:31
It's a 500+ mile round trip for me to Expong which I am not prepared to undertake at my own expense now!

That is understandable and will be one of the perpetual obstacles in executing this idea.

Quote from: rod335 on October 27, 2017, 13:31
Providing 'full details' of the models when displayed does present some logistical problems.

How about creating a full details/fact sheet for each on the items and having them available as pdf's to download? That would allow anyone interested to get the full back story and also enable the documents to be printed out whenever the items are displayed.

Quote from: rod335 on October 27, 2017, 13:31
But I do think we will get them into the News sometime soon, one at a time seems a good idea, perhaps a photograph with an extended caption per issue would be the way to do it.

I like this idea! It would still require someone to write up the captions and provide publishable photos to the editor.

Is there an existing list of the items in the collection?

Thanks
Phil H

Quote from: rod335 on October 27, 2017, 13:31
It's a 500+ mile round trip for me to Expong which I am not prepared to undertake at my own expense now!

I infer from this, Rod, that the Collection is currently in your care. I would entirely sympathise with your comment about it not being worth the trip up to ExpoNG - that's entirely reasonable. But is the implication of this that the Collection is unlikely to be seen 'in the flesh' anywhere, say, east of Wimborne or north of Bristol?

If so, then if a home could be found for it more centrally it might be able to be exhibited more often?

David.

We do manage to move bits of the collection around when required, Derek Naylor's Aire Valley locos went to York this year. Yes, I do have the collection and have restored nearly all of the locos to working condition since they have been in my custody. It was suggested last year that the collection be passed to someone else to take them to various exhibitions around the country. It was also suggested that I would still be expected to repair them if they were damaged in any way. I was not happy with this idea and would relinquish my position as Heritage Officer if this situation came about. It is, perhaps, worth reflecting on the fact that no one else had actually done any restoration work on the collection until I was appointed to the post.

However, the collection has to be viewed realistically. Whilst some members would be very interested in seeing them, they would be in a very small minority of the total membership and therefore moving the items around the country at the drop of a hat would be costly and inconvenient for the benefit of a few.

Personally I think putting details in the News regularly is the way forward.

As my name has been mentioned a couple of times in this topic with regard to assumptions that there may be copyright issues about the use of photos that I took of the Society's Heritage Collection, please allow me to put this one at least to bed.

I took photos for catalogue/insurance purposes of the entire contents of the collection as it then was - 272 items, way back in April 2009, ie 8

Thanks to Mick and others for helpful comments.

Hopefully we can look forward to seeing some of the more interesting items from the Collection soon in the News. But it would still be good, I think, to be able to view them on the Society website as well.

Apart from Rod, I note that none of the other Committee members have made any comment on the subject. Maybe they don't look at the Society forum very often (surely not?)

David.

Some of the collection will be at Warley. I know David Gander has an interest in the collection but I am not sure the other directors are all that interested. It is probably an age thing. Should be some articles in the News in the new year. Meanwhile, look out for some other Heritage-related news in due course.

Quote from: rod335 on November 05, 2017, 17:03
It is probably an age thing.

I'm a student and I find the heritage collection interesting, it shows how the hobby has developed and some of the key points in the history of 009 (similar to real heritage railways in some ways), so age is not necessarily related to it. However, I can appreciate that some people will not be aware of the significance of the heritage items and some younger members may not have heard of the layouts/modellers they represent; others may be unaware that the items still exist. I would agree on the idea of a series of articles in the News, and would add that these might spark an interest in the collection for those who are unaware of it at present.

Danny, well said, i too would be interested in finding out the history of narrow gauge modelling, as i have heard of some of the famous pioneers in the hobby and would be very interested in learning more. As a man once famously said, every days a school day, Paul.

Quote from: rod335 on November 05, 2017, 17:03
Some of the collection will be at Warley. I know David Gander has an interest in the collection but I am not sure the other directors are all that interested. It is probably an age thing. Should be some articles in the News in the new year. Meanwhile, look out for some other Heritage-related news in due course.

A "Heritage Collection" sounds important  and if so it's a shame if there is lack of interest at a high level.  I support regular features about it's contents in the 009 News.  Clearly it is an asset of the Society that many know little or nothing about., but probably would like to.
In anticipation,
George Surridge

My feeling (having looked after the collection during my stint as Seceratry - I'm the one mentioned in Mick's post) is that one problem with the heritage collection is a lack of documentation.  Whilst there are some in the Society who know the history behind individual items and why they are in the collection there are IIRC no notes of any of this with the items in the collection. I found this myself when I started cataloging it all, especially trying to work out what really was 'Heritage' and what was just 'nice stuff found on the sales table' and asked a lot of question. Equally I'm probably guilty of not making notes at the time (beyond who built it and possibly when) so I suspect the same questions will be asked to the same people (or those still with us) over again, and again(!) at some point.

Equally, unless things have changed since my time wearing the Secretarial Hat (ask Mick & Charlie what it looks like!), there is no policy about what the Society should be collecting for the future, let alone what the Society does with the collection it currently owns other than making sure that it does not deteriorate.

The suggestion that there is a lack of interest in the collection at Committee level is a little disingenuous I feel. With the Committee meeting only a few times in any year, and with the limited amount of time they can commit to their voluntary work done to keep the Society running from day to day, let alone all the 'special projects' we would like them to do for us, sorting out the Heritage collection comes well down the list compared to (say) updating the website, or getting the News assembled, printed and distributed on time, sorting out the next batch of Society kits, etc. etc... (essentially whatever the last thing was that the membership groused about).

As others have said ideally a series of short articles for the News would be the best way to promote the collection and allow 100% of the membership to see it (albeit a few items at a time), but the bottom line is that this needs someone with the time and skills available to take the photos and someone to write the words needed to go with the photos - note that they do not have to be the same person or persons!

Any volunteers therefore should make their offers to Charlie Insley in the first instance - and his contact details are in 009 News each month.

It is very true that there are a few people in the 009 Society that would be ideal to ask about there models, however I think that by far the best way to find out the history and details of an item in the collection would be to post a photo on this forum, NGRM on-line and the 009 Railway Modellers face book page!

I have found out so much in this way when members of these groups post photos of individual models they have with a simple 'what is this?' question.

Brian Meldon

I'm below 'a certain age' (and if I'm not, I'm young in the area of NG modelling) and am always fascinated when there are articles in the News mentioning how early NG modellers went about scratch building. More of this illustrated with examples from the heritage collection would be very welcome. It sounds like a collection of considerable historic value, not just a memento for those who remember, yet I don't recall seeing any mention of it in Society literature before now.

Being a founder member I do feel that the heritage collection (or photos thereof ) should be more easily available ,as in effect , it reflects the history of the society showing how 009 modelling has evolved throughout the past 40 plus years.
I appreciate totally what Rod and Julien say but it does seem a pity that it does not appear to see the light of day.
Certainly it would seem to me that firstly a photographic record be made of all the items.
Secondly these be identified where possible
and thirdly any unknown items have photos published (as suggested ) to see if other persons recognise these
A decision could then be made as to what items should be in the collection and if the remainder should be disposed of.
The remainder could then have photos published regularly in the news with a description of them.
Lets face it every editor asks for articles so these could not only be space fillers but of interest (hopefully ) to the membership.

For what it is worth it has always been a mystery to me what is held in the heritage collection.  I could list about 20 items in the collection but the remainder.......!  Like Alan I do feel that the heritage collection should be more easily available and I also totally appreciate what Rod and Julien say but it does seem a pity that it does not appear to see the light of day very often.  [And, to pre-empt the retaliation ;) yes, I am conscious of the fact the E&LMRC P D Hancock layout and stock seldom surfaces in public - it is located even further off the beaten track than the Heritage Collection.]

Moving quickly on with my head below the parapet, it would appear from what Julian and Mick tell us there is an inventory and there are photographs of all items in the collection. The inventory and the photos were passed to the Committee in April 2009 along with recommendations regarding disposal of some of the items.  It is not known whether or not the Committee actioned this matter but if they did then something like 50% of what was in the inventory as at 2009 will have been disposed of.   So the first task, as Mick suggested, is to raise the matter directly with the Directors in the accepted procedural manner, by raising their concerns in writing via the Secretary.   I agree with Mick that discussions here on the forum, based on assumptions, will not provide any solutions so I have this evening e-mail the Hon Sec and will report back in due course.

Glad to hear that there should be some articles in the News in the new year however at one item a month it will take many, many years to work through the Collection.  Could I suggest that once it is ascertained what remains in the collection the inventory is published in the 009 News, just a list, no photographs required at this stage.  Should there be any unknown items then photographs could be published (as suggested ) to see if other persons recognise these and then a decision made as to whether they remain in the collection or should be disposed of.  At least then we will all at least know what is in the collection.  Thereafter, as suggested, a regular 'Heritage Collection' item in the 009 News

Just to clarify if I may Malcolm:

1. My comments about Society / Committee policies with respect to the heritage collection relate to the situation back in 2008/9 when the collection was relocated from my house.

2. It therefore follows that I have no knowledge of what the current situation is in this respect, and it may have changed in the intervening years.

I am delighted that this matter has aroused such attention of late. Rest assured, items WILL be appearing in the News fairly soon. As regards details of 'unknown' items, some of you appear to be misinformed. There are NO items of note in the collection that we do not have a reasonable amount of information about. As regards what is in the collection and what has been disposed of, the collection can mainly be regarded as comprising all the Aire Valley locos and what rolling sock (vey little) which survived the fire in Tasmania together with all but one of the Stronachlacher (yes, that is the correct spelling) locos and some rolling stock together with two Craig and Mertonford locos (plus I own another two personally). much of what else was in the collection has been disposed of as it was not felt to be of historic significance.

As regards acquisition policy, this is something I have been trying to get defined for a long time now. The best I have managed so far is that we should wish to acquire models of historical significance, a rather loose definition I know but this is not meant to include models just because they are well made. Personally, I would like to see Maurice Deane's models and the Milwehr and Llenli stock in the collection. I believe I know the whereabouts of the former, the latter are in the ether somewhere.

It should be born in mind that the society never set out to possess a collection of this sort. We have, almost by accident, ended up with it and for many years no one has really either known what to do with it or indeed given it much thought. I cannot help but think that although a FEW people now have expressed interest in the matter, the vast majority of the membership actually have little or no interest in the subject so we may just be proposing pandering to a minority here.

As far as I am aware Pete Wilson has loaned some of his 8mm gauge locos to the society collection.
I guess these are held separately to the bulk of the collection?

Brian Meldon

Quote from: rod335 on November 07, 2017, 09:16
..... Personally, I would like to see Maurice Deane's models and the Milwehr and Llenli stock in the collection. .....

*

I think one needs to be of a certain age to appreciate this idea. I am and do. An excellent suggestion.


CP

Julian
No clarification required.  I was in no doubt you were commenting on the 2008/9 position.  Sorry if I confused you!

With regard to any Society policy, my information, now confirmed by Rod in his latest post, is that there is no clear policy however I have contacted Charles and we await the official position.

It would appear from Rod's post that the collection has been shrunk but it will be interesting to hear from Charles as to what action the Committee did take.

Malcolm

As soon as I had pressed 'post' on my last post I remembered Pete Wilson's locos. Just knew some smart***e would have to correct me. But the locos, like others, are not on loan to the Society. Some years ago all those who had loaned stock for the collection were written to and advised that the Society could no longer accept responsibility for other people's items and unless they requested return of their property ownership would pass to the Society.

Regarding the idea of 'what the society should be collecting for the future' and comments to that effect, does this imply that the collection in future would expand and also feature more recent historically important 009 items?

At present, at least, the Directors are proposing restricting the collection to items from the pre Eggar/Minitrains/Lilliput era. This pretty much means hand-built.

Quote from: rod335 on November 07, 2017, 09:16
much of what else was in the collection has been disposed of as it was not felt to be of historic significance.


It should be born in mind that the society never set out to possess a collection of this sort. We have, almost by accident, ended up with it and for many years no one has really either known what to do with it or indeed given it much thought. I cannot help but think that although a FEW people now have expressed interest in the matter, the vast majority of the membership actually have little or no interest in the subject so we may just be proposing pandering to a minority here.

A bit concerned about the first extract above Rod as you haven't mentioned the Wunce Onli collection built by Mike Sharman and donated by Paul Towers or the HB Whall early 1950's 9.5mm gauge locos. Oversight in your statement regarding the 3 people's scratchbuilt models that have been retained or have these really been disposed of?

Have to comment on a couple of aspects you mentioned in the second para that I have included as a "quote" above:

The Society did set out to possess the collection - David Burleigh started it when he was publicity officer under the chairmanship of Peter Kirkby and followed it on when David himself became chairman. He liaised with owners and coordinated the nucleus of the true heritage items and also sourced a small nucleus of what could well have grown into an interesting historical collection representing early 009/HOe development, for example one of the first Egger diesel locos was acquired, but was then "lost amongst the chaff" when 4 or 5 other Egger diesels were added, but no Fiery Elias or indeed any other Egger locos!

Problem was that when the policy of putting "Nice" items that turned up on sales for display along with some of the Heritage collection items in the Society display case, various following publicity officers, who used to have the "guardianship" of the heritage collection, did not separate these "nice" items and there was no direction or policy regarding rotating these models back into sales stock and replacing them with new "nice" ones as they came up. Result, after a few years of absence of supervision and direction - chaos, and furthermore there were items belonging to the Society scattered all over the country with no real audit trail. It is to Julien's credit that when one of our publicity officers sadly passed away, Julien, who was Society Secretary, inherited the "guardianship" of what was present at the time, and did a lot of work to track down the stray items and get the collection as it stood at the time, at least safeguarded and accounted for and he built the first proper inventory.

By the time I got involved, and temporarily had the collection to take the "catalogue photos" and maybe because of my own interest in some items such as the Aire Valley and Stronachlacher stock, I quickly realised that there were some items that belonged to these sets that were in danger of being disposed of as "no historical interest" simply because they hadn't been identified as being connected. Nobody's fault after the lack of accountability that had prevailed for some years, as not everybody could have been expected to immediately see a particular model and identify it by markings on it, or memories of how it had been described in a mag article 30 or 40 years previously. Anyway that is how it was. I refer as a particular example from memory to what looked like a Minitrains Plymouth diesel that was actually quite a comprehensive conversion and had been built by David Mander for Sronachlacher. Some of the Aire Valley goods vehicles, for example the hoppers, were also in danger of ending up in a skip for the same reason, nobody recognised them for what they were.

So, I took it upon myself to do a new inventory, to flag up known models from the true heritage stock collections and to try to simplify it. Along with Brian G, who was holding the collection until a new Heritage Officer could be appointed, we also created a suggested disposal list which was presented to the committee for decision. By this time I had replaced Julien as Secretary and although my own tenure in the seat was very brief, a policy on the remit for the still to be appointed Heritage Officer, such as what his bounds were to be on not only caring for and making the collection visible to the membership, but also how the collection should be developed, plus what budget would he be working with etc was indeed raised as an agenda item, in the January 2009 committee meeting to be precise, and the actions to be taken to create and then implement a clear policy that was agreed Unanimously by the committee at that time was recorded in the minutes. After i had left the committee I tried to find out what progress was being made on this for 2 years, and clearly became something of a pain about it as I was accused of several things inferring undermining morale, stirring up trouble and etc before I grew weary of it all and developed a need to point my energies and "Angry of Tunbridge Wells (Retd)" head in the direction of those who are supposed to be in charge of the dangerously inept and useless NHS mental health service, or lack of, in the area where I live.

Finally, I am in full agreement with you, it is good that some interest is at last being shown, however I don't fully agree that it is a subject that is not of interest to the majority of the membership, I believe that apparent situation is simply because the majority of the membership either know nothing at all about it, or some may treat the stories about the collection as just one of the "fables" akin to the elusive fate of Lynton & Barnstaple loco Lew that some believe is still lurking somewhere in the Brazilian rain forest, in pristine condition, awaiting the day when it will be re-discovered and will steam triumphantly again into Blackmoor Vale. I agree fully with those who think a regular feature in the News to cover the collection would be a good thing and also fully empathise with your own desire for the Society in its infinite magnificence to come up with a reasonable and positive policy on managing the collection!

At the risk of once again igniting defensive outrage amongst certain luminaries amongst us, I will now close my rant nodes for the night and summon the nurse as it is past bedtime.

Mick

Sorry Mick, my post was not intended to be a comprehensive list of all items, I merely attempted to mention the ones I thought most people would be able to identify. But, as I have stated before, in my experience, when I have taken items for display there has been very little interest in them. Sad but true.

Fair comment Rod, perhaps if the write-ups that were intended to accompany the historical models had ever been done and some publicity about them ie features in the News, also agreed as committee actions, had ever appeared, then there may have been more awareness and interest generated within the membership.

Mick

I think Mick you have probably hit the proverbial nail on the head namely lack of information.  We are all in ignorance to a greater or lesser extent.  How can we expect members to take an interest in the heritage collection if they do not know it exists or, if they know of its existence, know little of its contents or relevance.  This is not something that afflicts only the 009 Society, pitch up at any exhibition and you will be confronted with layouts and displays with little or no explanation of what a particular layout purports to represent and displays of models with no note of information visible.  >:(  [OK, I'll come down of my hobby horse now and take deep breaths to calm down]

Our collective ignorance is all the more reason for an inventory of the collection to be published in the News followed by articles on each item which should include, taking the Aire Valley as an example, a potted history of the layout and the modeller, the relevance of the models and details of where more information can be found which in most cases will be a list of RM or MRN publication dates.  All this should also be brought together in a gallery on this website.

Let's see what Charles Insley comes back with and we can move forward from there.

Malcolm

Just two additional comments, if I may:

(1)  I don't know exactly how Heritage items have previously been displayed at shows etc. - so there's no intended criticism - but I suspect they will not be easily noticed unless they are displayed prominently. A cabinet with  few items on the corner of a table may well be overlooked, but a separate table for a display, with its own entry in the show programme, might raise the visibility and interest.

(2)  Given that many items from deceased members in due course arrive at 009 Sales, the Sales Officer/Team probably have a potentially significant 'gatekeeper' function in looking out for new (i.e. old) items worthy of consideration for the Collection. If so, the Team would possibly benefit from guidance from the Committee as to what criteria to apply in selecting items for possible inclusion.

David.

Quote from: clayliner on November 09, 2017, 17:15
(1)  I don't know exactly how Heritage items have previously been displayed at shows etc. - so there's no intended criticism - but I suspect they will not be easily noticed unless they are displayed prominently. A cabinet with  few items on the corner of a table may well be overlooked, but a separate table for a display, with its own entry in the show programme, might raise the visibility and interest.

Would they perhaps be better off displayed on some sort of diorama, perhaps made in the style of the layout they originate from? (I realise this is more work, it is only a vague suggestion). Are there scenic items/buildings preserved as well or only locos?

Again, I don't know the implications or possibilities of this, but as I remember reading the original Railway modeller articles pertaining to some of the models that I presume we are talking about here, would it be possible, with the permission of PECO, to reprint extracts from these articles in the 009 News?

Just a thought.

Regards, BrianT.

Since the models were not individually featured and really only appeared in general articles about the railways concerned, times were different then, I can't see there would be many articles that would be worth repeating for that purpose.

A (very) few thoughts on the Heritage collection as being discussed. First may I state that in my opinion I think Rod does a superb job of getting items in the collection working and keeping them so.

Getting the collection "seen", needs people to "do" it and take responsibility for organizing transport and safe care of the items involved, I know there is such a thing as insurance but most of these items are unique and are "one offs", and as such are irreplaceable.

What is the collection about and what's in it? (lets assume not everyone knows) Well I believe there is a photographic archive/record and I'm sure articles in the news would be most welcome but here's my suggestion (sorry Chris).

How about (in News format) an extra/special issue purely concerned with the collection, with a photographic record of the collection and a brief history of the items or the modeller or railway they came from. Perhaps with some over run on the print so all new members can have a copy when the join to bring them "up to speed" with the history of 4mm scale narrow gauge. With if possible cross references to published articles in the model press.
So even if the Heritage items are in a small display case on the corner of a demo table any society member old or new would be able to identify what they are looking at, "oh look that's one of David Manders engines" and so on.

Well there you go that's my thoughts on the collection.

John Bruce No7.

Hello John. I was trying to work out 'Turin 60' until I saw your name. Thank you for your kind comments. I think the idea of a 'Special' for the News may have some legs, I will ensure this is raised at the next Committee Meting, scheduled at present for January (NOT that far away!) I believe we have 20 minutes scheduled on the Agenda to discuss the collection.

An apocryphal tale for those who are interested. When the Convention at Kegworth was announced I worked long and hard to get all the locos in the collection operable. I arranged with Garry Whiting that I would have a table beside my layout and constructed a simple 9 and 12mm gauge demonstration track so the locos could be run. I took this and a spare controller to the convention but because space in my car was severely limited arranged with Geoff Bowyer that he would take the Heritage stock.

On arrival at the convention, I was dumfounded to discover that a former committee member had unilaterally taken the decision that, notwithstanding my efforts, all the Heritage stock would be displayed, static only, locked in glass display cabinets. Really does make you wonder why you bother sometimes. At least I intended that members could see the stock running.

Just dumbfounded?  You must have calmed down a bit since then Rod  ;)   

Yes I can confirm Rod was 'dumbfounded' and I myself was more than a 'little annoyed' as we were next door to Rod with P D Hancock's Dundreich as part of what was to have been a concentration of all the heritage items together.  In addition to the heritage collection running on Rod's display tracks I had hoped to have had the work of Hancock's peers appear on the Craig and Mertonford.  Once in a lifetime photo opportunites went a begging.  As it was I think we were only able to spirit one of David Mander's locos onto Dundreich where it was posed with 'Alistair' although I think Mick T may have spirited one or two others out of the showcase when backs were turned.

Malcolm

On top of that, at the end of the convention, another erstwhile Committee member sought to take away my own personal Heritage items in the belief that they belonged to the Society. Neither of these Committee members thought to ask me, the Heritage Officer, about ownership or what my wishes were for the display. Sorry but I found and still find such arrogance to be unacceptable.

Interesting to see Eggar/Minitrains/Lilliput mentioned. If one were trying to define criteria for selection for the Heritage Collection one would need to decide at some stage whether it would be limited to items made by members, or whether it might include other items which were of significance to the development of 009, in which case some ready-to-run items might warrant inclusion (in theory, at least). Some examples of Eggar might qualify on this basis, perhaps. If that was true, then maybe some modern (e.g.) Minitrains specimens might also qualify? - given the significant boost they have given to the hobby in recent years. Which then leads me to ask the question: do we need to wait thirty or forty years before we select a battered Minitrains loco for the collection, or just take a nice shiny new Brigadelok out of its box and add it now? There's a slightly serious question lurking in all this somewhere, which is whether something has to be OLD to be worthy of inclusion? (and whether something new can't be).

Considering criteria more generally, maybe the only serious criterion is that an item needs to be notable in some way? Notable for having been made at all, for the way it was made, for why it was made, for how it was made, or for how well it was made.

I wonder what criteria professional curators work to? (Any suggestions, Mrs W?)

David.

Maybe

Not sure I would go along with this suggestion. It has been mooted before, when it was proposed that the Society should acquire one of every commercially produced HOe/009 item. Where would you stop?

My feeling is that acquisitions should be limited to SIGNIFICANT models which, to me, pretty much defines items as early/handmade/scratch-built. Not kit-bashed, which is viewed by some nowadays as scratch-built. But of course, this definition will to a degree be a moveable feast dictated by the age of the beholder. I am not at all sure that personally I would see the Minitrains range as being as significant as the original Eggar range although I am sure many others will disagree.

I think what we should be looking for, if indeed we wish to pursue an ACTIVE acquisition policy, should be pioneering models, trail-blazers if you wish. This fits far better with my concept of 'significant'. If we are not careful, we are going to end up with a membership-wide vote on what should be placed in the collection, which in effect would be nothing more than a glorified wish-list.

All food for thought to be discussed at the next Committee Meeting in January.

I think the significance of models is as much to do with there original presentation to the public, ie the printed articles they are associated with, as any merit in the model itself.

There are some superb modellers and models out there, a lot of them unknown to we the general readership of this forum, 009 News, and other magazines and publications available, but what a lot of us do remember, are the articles we read, which included some models that are memorable, in the context we remember them in.

Unfortunately, my poor memory inhibits my recounting of examples to reinforce my statement.

I do know, that several of PD Hancock's models for instance, would not be considered particularly worthy of saving or heritage status, were it not for the fact that they played a role in the stories of their exploits on the Craig and Mertonford railway in the Railway modeller, all those years ago.

Without the story background, a lot of the models, in the cold light of day, are of little merit, despite the undoubted work I understand Rod has put into them to make them work.

Having been at Kegworth on part of that memorable weekend, and not knowing of the back story recounted above on these pages, I think it a very poor show that Rod's work was so poorly presented by some unthinking member of the committee on that weekend.

Well that's my two pennorth for what it's worth.

I expect I will receive some flack for my outspoken words, but at seventy nine years old, with fond memories of articles read and books purchased recounting those articles, I aint much bothered.

Regards,

BrianT.

Brian, I think you have raised a very salient point there. I do think that many of the younger members do not realise the historical significance of many of these models because they, firstly, do not understand their historical context, that is they do not appreciate what the rest of the railway modelling world was (mainly) like at the time and, secondly, as a consequence of this, they see only some relatively crude models by today's standards so are viewing them out of context. Not sure what we can do about this. A few years ago the April 61 RM article on the Aire Valley was (more or less) reproduced in the News and caused little comment (interest?) except from 'the usual suspects'. So I am not sure that reproducing the articles is the answer. As an alternative, I wonder if a reprint of the narrow gauge loco section of 'Narrow Gauge Adventure' (Hancock's book, not Kayzer's!) would be a positive starter for the suggested News Special? Peco would permit this provided the source is acknowledged. This would, perhaps, give a readable and accessible introduction to the subject of Heritage items. I understand that you can dismiss any idea of a reprint of the book by Peco whatever we may feel the demand might be.

Quote from: rod335 on November 11, 2017, 20:05
Not sure I would go along with this suggestion. It has been mooted before, when it was proposed that the Society should acquire one of every commercially produced HOe/009 item. Where would you stop?

My feeling is that acquisitions should be limited to SIGNIFICANT models which, to me, pretty much defines items as early/handmade/scratch-built. Not kit-bashed, which is viewed by some nowadays as scratch-built. But of course, this definition will to a degree be a moveable feast dictated by the age of the beholder. I am not at all sure that personally I would see the Minitrains range as being as significant as the original Eggar range although I am sure many others will disagree.

I think what we should be looking for, if indeed we wish to pursue an ACTIVE acquisition policy, should be pioneering models, trail-blazers if you wish. This fits far better with my concept of 'significant'. If we are not careful, we are going to end up with a membership-wide vote on what should be placed in the collection, which in effect would be nothing more than a glorified wish-list.

All food for thought to be discussed at the next Committee Meeting in January.

I agree that significant models in the development of 009 should be added, since they become part of the heritage.  I can see no reason why certain RTR  models cannot be included as they are certainly influencing the hobby now.  Limiting to scratch built etc seems rather elitist as different people enjoy and contribute to the 009 experience in different ways.
George S

Cannot see the 'elitism' tag as having any relevance to a Heritage Collection in any way. I am not decrying for any reason the popularity of the  Minitrains range but their very popularity is a reason for not including them at present. This is not elitism. The collection is intended to show the roots of our branch of the hobby. By all means, if the Society still exists in, say, 20 years time, put the r-t-r items in then, there will still be plenty around for inclusion. But I don't think they are particularly relevant at present. In any event, where would you draw the line? If you include one, surely you would have to include the whole range.

Posting deleted intentionally in its entirety.

Oh dear Mick, be careful what you set in motion here! I had used the word 'significant' deliberately so as not to tie things down with too tight a definition. I think it will prove impossible to come up with a definition acceptable to everyone, Surely common sense and an element of trust should prevail? I am sure you are as well aware as anyone of the sort of items that had accumulated in the collection simply 'because they were nice models' before the cull.

As for the Committee members and Directors discussing this before the January Committee meeting, I am sure that MOST of those concerned have more pressing things to do with their time before then. As for the proposed time limit on the discussion, whether this is serious or not, I am sure you are aware of the adage that if all the committee members in the world were laid end-to-end, they would still never reach a conclusion. Every discussion of this subject that I have been party to has so far failed to reach any meaningful conclusion. I haven't even been able to get a decision on whether or not we should actively try to expand the collection or just sit back and let stuff fall into our collective laps. Although the subject is very dear to me, I cannot help but feel there are more pressing matters to be addressed at present.

Sorry Rod, I didn't set anything in motion here, I only made my first comment about it as the 10th posting of this thread; it just happens that I have a fair bit of knowledge about the provenance of the collection and had done a lot of work to try to bring things under control and set a policy for it when I was involved with it in 2008/early 2009 and have been concerned to learn that apparently nothing has been done in the succeeding 9 years since this was tabled and UNANIMOUSLY agreed by the Committee at that time as to what was going to happen.

I have no truck with the fact that you say there are more pressing matters to be addressed at present (presumably this is pressing matters in the Society rather than pressing matters in general), I just get a bit concerned when assumptions that are not always correct are aired by various people who may not know the history of the matter, and with the greatest of respect, this may also include yourself through no fault aimed at you but probably because those who are still on the committee from the time it was raised, simply haven't provided continuity.

In the interests of peace and harmony I acknowledge that I may have had a bit of an "offload" myself in my last post, so I will delete it in its entirety in case things get mis-interpreted or are seen as incendiary. I will butt out but will however continue to maintain a concerned interest in the continued hope that something constructive can be maintained, now that it has been raised by a member.

Mick

Oh dear, I do fear that the "definition" of the collection will cause much wailing and gnashing of teeth, It seems us modellers don't take kindly to things that restrict us for instance "standards"!
My own rather loose thoughts on the collection are that they should be based on their place and apparent significance in the history of small scale narrow gauge rather than age, method of construction or builder.

So again there is this need for information  on items in the collection be it one of David Manders models or a pioneering RTR model from say Egger Bahn as both have their place in the collection albeit with very different merits. This is what people need to know to understand and appreciate the collection.

John Bruce No7.

Why on earth shouldn't RTR be included in the collection??? "Significant" was mentioned earlier - well the fact that the Egger stuff gave the impetus for many early OO9 layouts surely shows that they were "significant"!! The example doesn't have to be a pristine, first one to be sold in the UK, example, just an early example to show what they are like... And at the same time, as the Society says it covers 12mm gauge as well, so a Zeuke Saxon V1K should be there as well, whilst not many made it over here they are examples of early "Small Scale" (to quote the Society!) RTR NG Models...

Regards "showing" them I'm going to annoy some people with this comment as well. Why shouldn't they be displayed in a display case? OK they can run, fair enough if there's somewhere for them to run on then do that but that should not be a stipulation of the loan of them to a group. Many local groups who use display cases don't necessarily have space for a layout as well and surely the whole point is to show them to us all (and the public), whether they are running or not is irrelevant. I'd suggest that for many exhibitions such a display would be unique, I can't think of many other societies that could put on such a display. "You can't have them unless you can run them" seems a bit "off" to me... I know it wasn't said that way, but that's the way it came across, so if my interpretation was wrong please correct me and let's get them out there!

Sorry Mick if you felt I was attacking you in any way, that was not my intention and as far as I am concerned there is absolutely no need for you to delete any of your postings.

John, I agree with you completely and my use of the word 'significant' was very deliberate. I feel the subject in general is one which cannot have a hard definition and must be left very much to common sense and individual judgment. However, I would not be happy to see the collection to become just a group of current r-t-r stock. I feel that is not what the collection was ever intended to be although I readily appreciate that, because of its history, nothing was ever actually planned.

All I have really ever wanted were guidance on whether we actively pursued an acquisition policy or not and what, if anything, was to be done with models after acquisition.

Blair, at no time have stated, I think, that the models must be run when shown. I merely mentioned the most unreasonable actions by one person at the Convention. And, yes, we are in agreement that early, at least, r-t-r should be included, the criterion to my mind is that anything which was a fundamental game-changer merits inclusion. In this context, excellent though it all is, I do not regard the Minitrains range as fitting that criterion.

Quote from: rod335 on November 13, 2017, 09:03However, I would not be happy to see the collection to become just a group of current r-t-r stock.

I don't see anyone suggesting that, but the early RTR had probably more influence on the start of OO9 modelling than the early layouts in my view. Many Society members would not have got into NG modelling if it wasn't for the availability of Egger and those early white metal kits so to just ignore them in favour of stock from early layouts is to ignore their influence, which (again in my view) was equal to, if not greater, than the influence of those early layouts.

Ha! Good old edit function, eh! Agreed Rod, let's be honest, this is a "heritage" collection therefore current Minitrains should not (yet) be included. I would agree with the "game-changer" view, hence why I suggested what I did and, subsequently, the early kits that were made for N chassis...

Quote from: rod335 on November 12, 2017, 12:25
Cannot see the 'elitism' tag as having any relevance to a Heritage Collection in any way. I am not decrying for any reason the popularity of the  Minitrains range but their very popularity is a reason for not including them at present. This is not elitism. The collection is intended to show the roots of our branch of the hobby. By all means, if the Society still exists in, say, 20 years time, put the r-t-r items in then, there will still be plenty around for inclusion. But I don't think they are particularly relevant at present. In any event, where would you draw the line? If you include one, surely you would have to include the whole range.

With the criteria suggested as "significant" then clearly the whole Minitrains range is not included, in fact maybe none at all. One might argue the work of Fourdees for example  is more "significant"than that of Minitrains. (Usual disclaimer...)

Anyway let's get the present Heritage Collection better known and understood, starting with 009 News and the Society website.
Geo S

Quote from: George Surridge on November 13, 2017, 10:36With the criteria suggested as "significant" then clearly the whole Minitrains range is not included, in fact maybe none at all. One might argue the work of Fourdees for example  is more "significant"than that of Minitrains. (Usual disclaimer...)

I'm not even sure Fordees are either, I'd have thought, in theory, the Heljan L&B loco would be, as the first mass produced RTR OO9 loco...

Quote from: George Surridge on November 13, 2017, 10:36Anyway let's get the present Heritage Collection better known and understood, starting with 009 News and the Society website.

And at local Society Group Shows... Perhaps there's a good argument for the stock to go out "on loan" to the various Groups who have display cases, perhaps rotating the stock round the various Groups?



BTW to start things off I'm prepared to give a Zeuke V1K and matching coaches on long term loan to the Society... Julien, I will bring them along to the Warley Show so keep some space for them in the display cases(!)... However that loan will be on the basis that they get out and about to shows and are not hidden away... If one of the Directors want to get in touch we can sort out the details...

Quote from: clayliner on November 11, 2017, 19:33

<snipped>
I wonder what criteria professional curators work to? (Any suggestions, Mrs W?)

David.

Maybe

I think MrsW - a preventative conservator - might be quite insulted being lumped in with the curators! :D

Right, I'm going to throw in a few thoughts (and probably end up running for cover as a result) as to the collection and what should (and shouldn't?) be in it but here goes:

Whilst it might be 'nice' to have examples of all the rtr and kits produced over the years that will be an awful lot of 'stuff' to look after, especially if we went for a built and unbuilt example of each kit (and duplicated for each version of the kit...).  Equally, if we had wanted to do that then we probably should have started back in 1973 when the Society started and these things were easy to get hold of... As to where we go now - a Heljan Manning Wardle (probably significant, but not for the right reasons), Bachmann Skarloey (with the face), Minitrains F&C Forney, or Schnider?...

Certainly 'significant' items from the past, but that would need definition - is an Iain Kirk or one of the first Dundas kits for a wagon more or less significant than an early Egger or Joueff rtr wagon - or is rolling stock insignificant compared to locos...?

What makes things 'significant' now?  Is it who built it? If / where it published? The layout it ran on? Some technically challenging scratch build from MRJ or a nice example of a kit built body on rtr chassis featured in BRM...? Some of those 'value' judgements I'm not to comfortable with, and I certainly will not want to be the one explaining to a fellow Society member (or their loved ones) why their prized models are not going into the heritage collection...

Assuming that there is an up to date list of what we have in the collection then at least we might avoid any duplication, but equally this should guide as to what we do and do not want for the future. Whilst some may want the Society to have all of the output of the greats - like David Mander and Derek Naylor - do we really want to squander Society resources doing so when there may be area's in the collection not represented?  As an example of this I do not think there are any Paul Windle locos currently in the collection, and perhaps Paul's work (using plastic) may be more relevant to a generation of Society members who cut their teeth on Airfix kits. But given Paul's output what would best represent it - one of his 'specials' or a 'standard cataloge loco... and is just one enough?

Finally, I must admit to being a little unsure about the need to have things in the collection 'restored' to running condition and for them to be used.  In my view the aim of the collection should be the conservation of the Society's heritage, i.e. maintaining it's condition as custodians of the past for future generations.  Whilst Dereck Naylor and the rest would have used their locos and needed to repair breakdowns or felt the need to upgrade motors, chassis, etc. over time how can subsequent custodians presume to the same level of originality, dare one say authenticity, if whole sections of models are being replaced just to make things (continue to) run especially if such work is being done with modern parts and no records are kept as to what has been done?(*) Surely what we want are examples and a display of the work of 'so-and-so' as a model maker way back in the 1960s, not necessarily the skills of subsequent Society officers - who maybe should be represented in the collection as significant in their own right - in the creation of a collection of 'grandfathers axes' or Trigger's brooms'...

To continue the 'use over preserve' argument if we want to see things more capable of running surely all of the working Derek Naylor 12 mm gauge locos (for example) should be converted to 9 mm gauge (and DCC fitted?), as this would allow the locos more opportunity to be run on more layouts at 009 Society events...

Equally, as any conservator will tell you, the process of decay will always continue, and some things just don't cope well with age.  Most of these are made from 'modern' materials - the plastics that make the modern age and form so many of our models, be that styrene mouldings or shees, resin castings or 3D prints - something so new that the professionals don't know how they might degrade over time.  Perhaps there isn't much point in collecting these as in 20 years time all that might be left is a pile of goo (there were a couple of unbuilt resin kits from the early days of the Society in the collection when I looked after it that were heading that way...) or dust in the box that once held that early Chris Ward 3d print...

The ultimate problem is that the collection has to 'please all of the (members) all of the time' - a fairly impossible task...

(* my apologies if this is not the case)

Regarding RTR in the collection, I see no need for "all" of it to be included, just specific examples... Zeuke as the first small scale RTR and Egger as the first HOe/OO9 examples... After that the next is the Heljan loco as I mentioned in my previous post for the reason specified (the Egger, remember, was not OO9 but was mass produced)... Again with the kits, ones which were significant in bringing in people to model OO9 in "large"(!) numbers, so again not all of them, though perhaps one of the GEM and one of the PECO range? (As I'm not an OO9 modeller I'll leave that choice to someone better in the know!)



Perhaps we need to go back to the purpose of the collection is? For me it is a chance to get to see those early models that kick started the scale and nudged so many of us into small scale NG modelling in the flesh, as such the early RTR is just as valid as the hand built stuff by the early modellers... When presenting those models if may be handy to have with them laminated copies of articles in the magazines that we read back then and adverts for the RTR stock so we can show the newcomers what it was like back then?

I do not think that Egger-bahn items should be in the Society collection.
Perhaps the only production loco in the Egger range of historical importance would be the short two wheel drive 1963 green diesel. However these sold in large numbers and as a result there are lots still about today many in as new condition.
They are in fact far more common than some of the other later Egger locos.
Perhaps the handmade brass Egger-bahn pre-production prototypes would be worthy for the society collection, but it is highly unlikely that the owners of these would ever wish to part with them. (Both of the 1963 brass diesel locos used on the Egger-bahn stand at the 1963 Nuremburg toy fair survive as do the brass prototypes for the No2 and No3 locos, but they are not all in the same ownership.)
However these were never marketed as 00 scale they were H0 scale.

The first 9mm gauge loco to be marketed as 00 scale was the Jouef Decauville loco included in the Playcraaft P1600 pre-formed layout in 1967. So it is apt that it is the silhouette of this model loco that is used by the society.
But as we all know these are very over scale for 00 and there are lots about, not only that the version in the P1600 layouts was not the first version of the model, these had red wheels, so what one would be suitable for the collection?

All the above just adds to the confusion, are models marketed as H0 scale models important to the history of the 009 society or only those that are marketed as 00? Should only proper 4mm scale production models be included or items built to any scale?
 
My personal feeling is that the collection should not include mass produced items, but others may think differently.

Brian Meldon

Thank you for your offer Blair but this is not going to work. Some time ago, before I was involved, the Society took a decision that no items could be accepted for the Collection  unless they became the property of the Society. There are cogent reasons for this decision, it is not pure greed! Therefore items cannot be accepted on loan.

Discussing this matter in general with a friend, we came to the conclusion that perhaps the Collection name is wrong and it would be more accurately described as the Historic Collection.

With regard to Julien's point about work I have done to the items, this has been done as I have always thought the attraction for members would be in seeing the items actually moving. No structural alterations have been carried out to the models with the exception of a replacement motor to one of the locos. With regard to Derek Naylor's Forney, I did straighten the chassis which previously should have had Ffyfes written on it and constructed a new trailing truck. If the loco were mine I would sort out the gears and axle bearings as both are severely worn. But it is not so I won't. Work on other locos was in the nature of repairing physical damage, putting valve gear back together and the like. It does seem to me as if the locos were fairly substantially mistreated after they initially left Derek's possession. Forgive me if I am wrong. I am not really sorry if anyone thinks this work should not have been done, I think it was reasonable in the circumstances. It is perhaps worth reflecting on the fact that, as far as I am aware, no one had done anything with the collection since acquisition other than photograph it and wrap the items in tissue paper.

I keep seeing the suggestion that the collection should be split round the area groups for display purposes. I am not at all sure that this is the right course of action. Any group that wants specific models for display purposes only has to ask for them on loan for the duration of their exhibition, it makes more sense that the collection should be kept in one place than scattered about the country.

OK, fair enough, I'll have a think, I may be able to do something, but I'm not if, as it seems, people don't think that RTR should be included....


I'd also refer back to what i said earlier...

What is the purpose of the collection?

Just to "have" them? To show to people?

I feel that it is to show how our hobby has developed over the years? Including early RTR is a must in my view... I don't understand the logic of having a collection (historic or heritage) if it doesn't give the full story, and RTR is a key part in getting OO9 off the ground and running, rather than just a few modellers who had occasional articles in the Mags. The same argument can be used for the early kits...



Going back to the loaning out to Groups, the reason i suggested it was that at the moment they do seem to be stuck in one place, Rod, you mentioned earlier that getting some stuff down to Expong was a non starter (due to the very valid reasons mentioned), however if they were loaned out to the various Groups there wouldn't be the issue and they could be seen in the flesh...

I am beginning to lose the will to live!  ???

However, as a member of Sussex Downs 009 Group (but not commenting in any capacity) I note that, at one time, we had some of the collection "on loan" in our posession, in order to display them in the "official" Society display case that we take to local shows (including EXPONG [TM]). I presume that, around the time of the inventory mentioned above, these were taken back by the Committee for review, but no decision was made then as to whether these, or others, would be returned for display. Therefore, when acting as publicity stand for the Society, we are left to displaying our own models, which may or may not have any merit, as discussed above. I confess, therefore, that at EXPONG for example, we had a rather small display (of exquisite modelling - not my own!  ;D ) although I did persuade some members (on NGRMO forum) to add their models to the case. We also tend to take our demonstration layout - basically a "round and round" with two scenes, one complete, and an alternative showing the process of building up scenery. On this, models may be shown running, and again, we tend to provide a set of loco and wagons/coaches from SDG stock, but welcome anyone to offer a model, whether for the duration of the show, or for short term test or whatever. The hand-held controller is left temptingly near the front, to entice children (or big kids!) to drive the trains, and thus provoke interest and conversation.

Clearly, there is a risk of damage or pilfering of historic stock if run on a display layout, but this may be more controllable if the models are used on a "working" layout. Therefore, considering all the previous comments, it would be good to see some of the collection available to local Groups to show, and help explain what Narrow Gauge (especially 009) modelling is about, and how we have developed. Other Groups may have a different approach to publicising our Society, however.

I think you have to consider the 'purpose' of the collection in the round. We are a Society composed of (mainly)small-scale railway modellers who happen to have found themselves in possession of various historic models. They were not acquired for any specific purpose other than to save them from being metaphorically thrown away. As such we have never either considered or known what to do with them. Indeed, whilst there seems to be a certain amount of fervour at present for letting the membership see them, until recently they never, or hardly ever, saw the light of day. They could have gone to Expong with more notice, with respect, a request on the net the day before the event is not practical in any terms!

I cannot say I am happy with the collection being permanently dispersed amongst the groups if I am still required to maintain the items. This was suggested to me about eighteen months ago and I said I would resign the post of Heritage Officer if this were to be forced on me. I do not want to sound too dictatorial on this but I would not be at all happy if my only contact with the items were to be having to repair them after someone had broken them.  That doesn't read quite as I intended it to but I can't think of a better way of putting it!

There is no suggestion that area groups should not display the items.

So what DO you want to do with them, Rod, as that last paragraph contradicts the previous one in my view unless you intend to allow them only where you can bring them and take them home again afterwards? Again it goes back to the purpose of the collection, whilst I appreciate that they were "saved from destruction" I am sure that those who donated them didn't intend that they be locked away for no-one to see so we should sort something out...


On the point about how they will be looked after, several of my models have been with the West Midlands Group for many years now and are taken for display at the various shows the WM Publicity Stand attends and I haven't had any issues. In fact, as they are locked away in the case, they are "safer" than they would be if they were "in use" on a layout.




The Society really needs to decide what the purpose of the collection is, as it stands we are just going round and round in circles which is just as frustrating for Rod as it is for the rest of us!

I am more than happy for the items to go on request to various exhibitions. Being of limited means I cannot afford to take them myself to every show but there are ways round this as has been proved. Some will be at Warley in a couple of weeks, some were at York earlier this year. I didn't accompany them either time. If I had had more notice I could have got at least some of them to Expong.

O K My twopenneth
A decision has to be made as to whether the heritage collection remains as purely for hand built stock or is intended to show new members what we all started with i.e Egger and w/m kits.
I would suggest that all of the older members now hand building stock started with egger &/or w/m kits .and them moved on to scratch building.
The point that i am making is that if say hand built items made after say 1973 are to be  considered ,then I would venture to suggest that those same modellers started off with egger/mintrains or w/m kits and therefore would be relevant, to show how things developed.
the alternative is to keep it purely pre egger when the small band of modellers had literally to make everything themselves.
member no 009

First, Julien, my sincere apologies to MrsW - certainly no insult was intended (I simply thought that she had some professional expertise in the general area we were discussing and might have some helpful comment to offer).

Quote from: rod335 on November 12, 2017, 12:25
In any event, where would you draw the line? If you include one, surely you would have to include the whole range.

Well, one could decide to have everything, or nothing, or anything in between - if one went for the sensible option of just a selection, then some set of criteria becomes essential, which is what I think we are discussing here.

Incidentally, I don't see why it follows that one would have to include the whole range? - if that's not true for scratchbuilt items, why would it be any different for r-t-r?

If 'significance' is the guiding principle then it seems to me that it's hard not to include any r-t-r, or kits, as these have been the starting point (and beyond!) for many members (and still are today), and have therefore played a significant role in getting them into the hobby and/or maintaining their interest. But in principle if it was decided that, maybe for practical reasons, the Collection should be limited to scratchbuilt items, so be it. But the decisions will have to be taken.

I fully accept that the Committee may indeed have more pressing items to discuss when they meet, so maybe a Heritage sub-committee - less weighed down with the 'affairs of state' - could be appointed to tackle the questions which have been raised here and come up with a set of proposals? If its membership was dispersed around the country maybe each member (or some members) could eventually look after a part of the Collection, be responsible for it and also take steps to display at least some items in their care at local events and shows? If these sub-collections were, over time, rotated around then eventually many more members might get to see more items.

I'm sure Rod is correct in saying that the original aim of the Collection was mainly the very commendable one to save items from being scrapped, and that beyond that little thought had been given to where the Collection should go in the future. Maybe now is a good time to move toward deciding that!

David.

Quote from: clayliner on November 13, 2017, 18:36
I'm sure Rod is correct in saying that the original aim of the Collection was mainly the very commendable one to save items from being scrapped, and that beyond that little thought had been given to where the Collection should go in the future. Maybe now is a good time to move toward deciding that!

In my view that is spot on, David...

Oh no! Not another committee! Endless hours of talking and nothing ever resolved.

Quote from: Hobby on November 13, 2017, 08:59
Why on earth shouldn't RTR be included in the collection??? "Significant" was mentioned earlier - well the fact that the Egger stuff gave the impetus for many early OO9 layouts surely shows that they were "significant"!! The example doesn't have to be a pristine, first one to be sold in the UK, example, just an early example to show what they are like... And at the same time, as the Society says it covers 12mm gauge as well, so a Zeuke Saxon V1K should be there as well, whilst not many made it over here they are examples of early "Small Scale" (to quote the Society!) RTR NG Models...

Regards "showing" them I'm going to annoy some people with this comment as well. Why shouldn't they be displayed in a display case? OK they can run, fair enough if there's somewhere for them to run on then do that but that should not be a stipulation of the loan of them to a group. Many local groups who use display cases don't necessarily have space for a layout as well and surely the whole point is to show them to us all (and the public), whether they are running or not is irrelevant. I'd suggest that for many exhibitions such a display would be unique, I can't think of many other societies that could put on such a display. "You can't have them unless you can run them" seems a bit "off" to me... I know it wasn't said that way, but that's the way it came across, so if my interpretation was wrong please correct me and let's get them out there!

Personally I can't see why inclusion of Egger (earlier, rarer examples rather than the later Jouef variants) equipment is a bad idea in principal but I think it comes down to the fact that the society cannot preserve everything, so must prioritise models which may be unique or one of only a few built over rtr stock which was made in large enough numbers that somebody, somewhere will have preserved an example, as others have sensibly suggested already. Recently I believe a couple of layouts have been built using only early products and equipment, to show what a typical early 009 layout would have looked like, so this may be one route to go down (building replica or representative items to complement the originals) but this is probably beyond the remit of a heritage collection. It probably is too early to include current Minitrains items but, on the other hand, when the time comes to preserve them I wonder how many will be unmodified (assuming this is what we want from rtr models), as is also the case with previous rtr stock. More immediately, is it worth for instance asking Heljan for a pre-production L&B loco as this would certainly be rare and significant in 009?

Quote from: Hobby on November 13, 2017, 19:31

Quote from: clayliner on November 13, 2017, 18:36
I'm sure Rod is correct in saying that the original aim of the Collection was mainly the very commendable one to save items from being scrapped, and that beyond that little thought had been given to where the Collection should go in the future. Maybe now is a good time to move toward deciding that!

In my view that is spot on, David...

Gets my vote too.

John.

I always thought the purpose of the heritage collection was to preserve the few examples of early 009 models that had come into the society's possession, such as David Mander's Locos. Egger's early products are already well preserved in many modellers collections are they not?  If we want to show the development of 009 over the years perhaps that should be some kind of separate display (which could take a lot of work.) The 009 News seems the best place for discussing the hobby's early years. Brian Meldon's series on Eggerbahn are an excellent example of this.
Just me tuppence worth,
Mal.

Regardless of what we include I see no point in preserving them unless we get to see them... Looking at photos is all well and good but nothing beats seeing the thing in the raw... Unless we want to end up with a collection that no-one will see like a certain well known real life narrow gauge collection!

Quote from: rod335 on November 13, 2017, 20:40
Oh no! Not another committee! Endless hours of talking and nothing ever resolved.

That rather depends on who is involved and whether the people on it can compromise, Rod! I don't think there'll be a problem in this case.

It seems to me that museums in general have a very similar problem.   I'm no expert, but as I understand it museums typically have a great deal more material in store than on display.  The material in store is kept for possible future display and also for possible future research.   

The essence of a good, interesting museum display is as much in the selection of the items to display and the information provided as in the artefacts themselves.

A similar approach might work for the Heritage collection - set up a display of a few selected models with information on what they are and how they fit in to the development of 009.   Use them to tell a story.   Have this on display at AGMs and similar events, and change it from time to time (not too often - give people a chance to see it).

Frank

Quote from: rod335 on November 13, 2017, 20:40
Oh no! Not another committee! Endless hours of talking and nothing ever resolved.

Definition of Brexit.

Quote from: rod335 on November 13, 2017, 13:23
I think you have to consider the 'purpose' of the collection in the round. We are a Society composed of (mainly)small-scale railway modellers who happen to have found themselves in possession of various historic models. They were not acquired for any specific purpose other than to save them from being metaphorically thrown away. As such we have never either considered or known what to do with them. Indeed, whilst there seems to be a certain amount of fervour at present for letting the membership see them, until recently they never, or hardly ever, saw the light of day. They could have gone to Expong with more notice, with respect, a request on the net the day before the event is not practical in any terms!

I cannot say I am happy with the collection being permanently dispersed amongst the groups if I am still required to maintain the items. This was suggested to me about eighteen months ago and I said I would resign the post of Heritage Officer if this were to be forced on me. I do not want to sound too dictatorial on this but I would not be at all happy if my only contact with the items were to be having to repair them after someone had broken them.  That doesn't read quite as I intended it to but I can't think of a better way of putting it!

There is no suggestion that area groups should not display the items.

I think that much of that first paragraph hits one of the problem nails firmly on the head.  Much of the collection was donated to and accepted by the Society to avoid it going in the bin! At the time the overriding need was to save it - the problem now is that we don't really know what to do with it.

Now on to the second paragraph. Please don't take this the wrong way Rod but your (repeated) comments in this respect come across a little as though you view the Society's collection as your own personal property.  I am sure that this is not the case Rod but it might give some people the wrong idea (I think you realise that too), but I can understand that you do not want the work you have put in to be undone and  009 Society assets damaged through others carelessness.

My own view is that other than producing articles for 009 News (which still hasn't happened in the last 8 or 9 years) the only ways for members to see items in the collection is to either travel to Rod's home for a private viewing (if Rod is up for that!) or for the models themselves to travel about the country (not ideal but possibly more convenient for all).

The problem is that if models travel from Devon to a show then back again, then do the same trip to another exhibition the next month, and so on, then they are more likely to suffer problems. The solution, in my view, is to apply some Museum Practice to the collection - something that I had offered to do when I first made the offer to manage the collection as a co-opted "Heritage Officer" back in 2008/9 when Simon Coward was Chairman.  The first thing to be done once the collection had been sorted into "we'll keep these" and "dispose of these" groupings would be to have the collection properly packed in custom made inert foam and Sampsonite flight cases (both of which I had already acquired prior to my offer being declined by the Committee!) rather than scrappy tissue paper and an assortment of card boxes. Once packed into a number of cases each flight case would contain a selection of items, and those groups within the Society who have got display cases and undertake publicity displays on behalf of the Society (Swoons, Sussex Downs, West Mids and Bill Luty - there may be others I've forgotten) would get a selection of stock in a flight case (or cases) with guidelines as to what to do / not do with them (with respect to running, general care & handling, etc.) to minimise any damage.  Every so often - annually at the AGM seems the best suggestion I can come up with - the 'traveling' collection would be brought together and the cases rotated between the groups and the 'stored' collection (also packed up in flight cases),with records kept as to who has what and how long it has been 'out'.

The downside is that the groups doing the displays would not be able to have specific models if these were in different flight cases as each case would be made up of a reprisentative mix of the collection rather than there being, for example, a case of David Mander models, and a case of Aire Valley locosk, and so on.  Having proper packing and handling instructions should minimise damage, and by rotating the flight cases between the 'display' groups items in the collection would be more widely seen by both the membership and the public, and by rotating flight cases between 'display' and 'store' the time on display would be spread across the whole collection rather than being concentrated on a small number of 'star' items.

As to maintaining items then the amount of work is dependent on what level the maintainance is being maintained at (!). Perhaps we should be concentrating on the visual appearance - so that something that is a loco actually looks like a loco as it did when David Mander (for example) handed it over to the Society - but not get hung up on keeping the things running so that, for example, if a motor burns out then that's it - no more running sessions for that loco, but if the chimney falls off then it should be stuck back on (and done in accordance with collection guidelines too!) with a record of the work done on each item being logged for future reference (as this should highlight repeated problems).  The issue (for me) is that if things are in working order then they can (and will?) be used, and if used then they will wear out.  If they are not working, they can't work and therefore will not wear out (or will do so much more slowly in line with entropy).  Again, maintanance (its level or even if it is done), 'restoration' or 'conservation' is something that a "Heritage Policy" would include, along with what kind of items we may want to add to, or dare I say have removed from, the current collection to develop the collection for the future.

Quote from: George Surridge on November 14, 2017, 10:51

Quote from: rod335 on November 13, 2017, 20:40
Oh no! Not another committee! Endless hours of talking and nothing ever resolved.

Definition of Brexit.

Surely a definition of politics in general! ::)

I read this thread with a certain amount of deja-vu as the Society is now confronting many of the questions that raised themselves when the P D Hancock Collection started of its own volition. 

Like the Heritage Collection the PDH Collection came about to avoid it going in the bin and we, i.e. the Edinburgh and Lothians MRC, had to decide pretty quickly what to do with it.  In agreeing what to do with it I was probably quite lucky in that the club and myself, as custodian of the collection, were very much on the same wavelength and we were able agree on a way forward.  My remit has a fair bit of slack and there is an element of trust involved on both sides but here I been helped by the fact that I have known some of the club members for over thirty years but basically, if an item has a PDH connection we are interested in acquiring it and conservation is my watchword with the work undertaken to an artefact the minimum required and above all leaving as much of Philip's original handiwork untouched. 

To digress a little here.  The Society Heritage Collection appears to contain locomotives and a few items of rolling stock and not much else.  Should we not also be giving consideration to what we would do if say an Aire Valley building was to arise from the ashes or a layout of 'significance' were to offered?  What if a comprehensive paper archive relating to not only the 009 Society but narrow gauge modelling in general was offered to the Society.  Would it accept it? Should it accept it?  There is more to heritage than locomotives!

As I said in an earlier post we should have details of the heritage collection published in the 009 News and on this website however these things can take time.  I had to wait a year to get the 'Whatever Happened to Craigshire' published in the Railway Modeller and as I was under a gagging order the expanded article could not be published in the 009 News until after publication in the RM so not everything can proceed as quickly as you like.   In the case of the heritage collection the difficulty I had should not cause any delays in details appearing in the 009 News however the detailed research can take considerable time and delay matters.

Now we come to the problem of moving sometimes delicate old things around the country.  Ask the owners of Peter Denny's Buckingham,  Frank Dyer's Borchester or even P D Hancock's C&MR you will find a certain reluctance to move these valuable old layouts and their stock around the country except for special exhibitions.  Slowly but surely the movement, vibration and general handling [white gloves anyone?] leads to damage.  Even a fixed layout such as John Ahern's Madder Valley has its problems especially when it comes to keeping the locos and rolling stock moving albeit on a few select dates only.     When 'Dundreich' and some of the original locos appeared at the 009 Society Conmvention yours truly was nearly wetting himself in case anything went wrong with the borrowed locomotives and stock.  As it was 'Alistair's' motor did not burn out and I was mightly relieved to return the models to their then owner with only a few broken steps and a non working Christine who's Lima chassis gave up the ghost, but of course as it was a r-t-r chassis was easily replaced.   With regard to the locos with unique mechanisms the one way round the problem is to build a replacement mechanism and retain the original mechanism as a museum model, indeed this also has the advantage of letting the interested view the inside of the loco something that under normal viewing conditions is not possible.  I am actively building a look a like [replica would be too strong a word to use] fleet of models for the C&MR including, a Heljan replacement for 'Alistair', but whilst that allows the layout to be operated without fear of damaging the original stock it still does not solve the problem of the delicate nature of the track and scenery.  Maybe I should just build an all new C&MR?

With regard to any work undertaken on any of the C&MR stock or the layout itself all the work has been photographed both before and after and a full written description logged.

As someone who has direct involvement in maintaining an ancient piece of 009 history I hope some of my ramblings will provide some assistance to you all in your deliberations.

Malcolm 




   

Nice one Malcolm! Will your "lookalike" Heljan Alistair be finished in Hancock's Improved Engine Green (lined of course)?

Although I have removed myself from taking part in active/contentious discussion about the Society's Heritage Collection on here, I'm still monitoring the topic closely and with great interest. Whatever people's views on the matter are, and there are clearly a variety of differing views, it is encouraging to observe the amount of interest that has been shown by members - 6 pages in less than a month, which I think is unprecedented for the Society members forum, more in the league of what we see on NGRM!

Mick

Quote from: JulienW on November 14, 2017, 11:02At the time the overriding need was to save it - the problem now is that we don't really know what to do with it.

Doesn't this invite yet another comparison with full-size heritage railways, for instance the locos that were saved 40 years ago and still await restoration?

Perhaps Heljan could do a C&M livery Manning Wardle as a limited edition  ;) - though from reading the Heljan thread it may turn out to be less reliable than the original...

Julien, I am sorry but I cannot let your last post go without comment. I shall try to be brief but that may not be possible. Firstly, I do NOT regard, in any way, the collection as being my own. When I was appointed to the post as Heritage Officer I sought and received clarification from the Board as to my remit, indeed at the last Board Meeting I received an unsolicited endorsement of my work. I have operated within that remit. Perhaps you should reflect on the fact that since my appointment, not only have the items been restored but have also been displayed more times than in the twenty years before. I appreciate your attitude to the collection and why you hold that attitude but we are, with respect, diametrically opposed on this and will probably remain so. I feel we need to view the matter in perspective. We are NOT dealing with priceless relics of a centuries old previous civilisation, we are talking about a few models made 60+ years ago about which probably less than a couple of dozen of our members have more than a passing academic interest in. We are at present, at least, thankfully, not bound, unlike Pendon with the Madder Valley, by the regulations of the Charity Commissioners, admirable though they may be in other circumstances.

To read your posts it would appear that I have savagely set about the collection without any regard for its importance. In the main, all I have done is carry out minor bodywork repairs such as resoldering broken handrails, as well as adjusting pickups and motor brushes and adjusting gear meshing. Hardly the sort of work that requires documenting.

There are three locos I have carried out somewhat more extensive work on. They are:-

1. AVR Anne. The original Triang X04 motor had one armature pole down. Since I did not have a replacement X04 and did not know where to source one I modified an unused and superior MW 005 replacement (supplied FOC by me) to fit. No other alteration was made to the loco, the work is completely reversible if necessary. It is exactly the sort of thing Derek would have done if he had still had the loco.

2. AVR Monarch. I made and fitted two replacement crankpins and reassembled the valve gear on one side of each bogie which was hanging loose. The loco now works.

3. AVR Forney. This had a severely bent chassis and both the trailing truck and headlight were missing. I made a bracket for the headlight and fitted the new headlight supplied for the purpose by Garry Whiting. I straightened the chassis and constructed and fitted a new trailing truck. I also made and fitted replacement cab steps which were missing and straightened and strengthened (internally with brass strip) the cardboard cab sides which had bowed inward badly. Although references in the RM at the time repeatedly state that the loco had a Romford Terrier motor, when received by me the motor was a Mabuchi Mighty Atom. Whether this was replaced by Derek or a subsequent owner of the loco is not known and to a degree underlines why we should not be TOO precious about these things. Incidentally, when I discussed these locos with Derek he was completely at ease with me working on them and gave me his blessing. What I would never do is alter the external appearance of the models.

This has become a much longer post than I intended it to be. However, I do feel that in the period I have had custody of the collection, I have done much more for its well-being than any one elsetodate. Thanks are due to Mick Thornton for photographing  and cataloguing the collection, the only other person to my knowledge who has had any positive input. No one else has either seemed or wanted to do anything with it.

Again, apologies for the length of this post.

Quote from: rod335 on November 13, 2017, 13:23
They could have gone to Expong with more notice, with respect, a request on the net the day before the event is not practical in any terms!

Rod, My suggestion was not intended to be practical, more a comment that the opportunity had been missed since the topic arose only around that time! The prospect of displaying anything from the Society has not been offered to our, or any other Group, so far as I am aware, as my recent message stated; once again, perhaps my comments did not come accross as intended. All I tried to say is that, if Members want items to be displayed, and subject to Committee agreement, the means to display them are availlable.

I will now retire from this discussion, as we seem unable to play fairly, without taking offence!

I neither took nor wished to give offence! If I had known even one day earlier items could have been got to Expong.

Quote from: rod335 on November 15, 2017, 11:12
Julien, I am sorry but I cannot let your last post go without comment. I shall try to be brief but that may not be possible. Firstly, I do NOT regard, in any way, the collection as being my own. When I was appointed to the post as Heritage Officer I sought and received clarification from the Board as to my remit, indeed at the last Board Meeting I received an unsolicited endorsement of my work. I have operated within that remit. Perhaps you should reflect on the fact that since my appointment, not only have the items been restored but have also been displayed more times than in the twenty years before. I appreciate your attitude to the collection and why you hold that attitude but we are, with respect, diametrically opposed on this and will probably remain so. I feel we need to view the matter in perspective. We are NOT dealing with priceless relics of a centuries old previous civilisation, we are talking about a few models made 60+ years ago about which probably less than a couple of dozen of our members have more than a passing academic interest in. We are at present, at least, thankfully, not bound, unlike Pendon with the Madder Valley, by the regulations of the Charity Commissioners, admirable though they may be in other circumstances.

First off, with respect Rod in my post I said:

Quote from: JulienW on November 14, 2017, 11:02

Now on to the second paragraph. Please don't take this the wrong way Rod but your (repeated) comments in this respect come across a little as though you view the Society's collection as your own personal property.  I am sure that this is not the case Rod but it might give some people the wrong idea (I think you realise that too), but I can understand that you do not want the work you have put in to be undone and  009 Society assets damaged through others carelessness.

As to your remit, as an ordinary member of this Society I do not have any knowledge of what that is and how it relates to the Heritage Collection (other than you 'look after' it - which has a broad range of meaning), as those conversations took place within meetings where I was not present and I have never felt the need to ask the current Secretary for minutes of each and every Committee meeting. Perhaps I should so that I may be better informed.

I am pleased that items have been displayed 'more times since (your) appointment than in the last 20 years'.  However, on reflection can only recall seeing any of the Heritage items on display at a handful of occasions (40th Convention, SWOONS members day 2017 and maybe 2 or 3 others), so either I haven't been paying attention or have not been attending the same events at the Heritage Items.  Equally I hope that you are not implying that during my time as Secretary and custodian of the Heritage collection I neglected my duties towards displaying it.  Whilst in my care a selection of items was displayed at every National Model Railway Exhibition at the NEC (so at least once per year) and other venues in the West Midlands when I attended with the West Mids Group publicity stand.  I would have been happy for them to be displayed at other Member's days and relevant shows (009 AGM, ExpoNG etc.) but I don't recall ever doing so because I don't recall ever being asked!

I am glad that you can recognise where I am coming from with my views on the collection, but I'm not sure that you do understand or appreciate them.  I agree that we are not talking about "priceless relics of a centuries old previous civilisation", but to denigrate the work done by the pioneers of our hobby as "a few models made 60+ years ago about which probably less than a couple of dozen of our members have more than a passing academic interest" is, to me anyway, an alarming statement to be made by Committee Member / Elected Officer responsible for safeguarding the collection.

Nowhere have I suggested that the collection become an 'official' museum and have no intention if inflicting the  Charity Commissioners et al on anyone - I know what they are like!  The point I am trying to make and seem to be failing to is that museums and museums professionals deal with this type of material on a day to day basis, so when it comes to the continuing care for the collection (for example) why are we not trying to follow what is already being done by those very same professionals, especially when such 'care of collections' advice is available (and offered) freely?

Quote from: rod335 on November 15, 2017, 11:12
To read your posts it would appear that I have savagely set about the collection without any regard for its importance. In the main, all I have done is carry out minor bodywork repairs such as resoldering broken handrails, as well as adjusting pickups and motor brushes and adjusting gear meshing. Hardly the sort of work that requires documenting.

There are three locos I have carried out somewhat more extensive work on. They are:-

1. AVR Anne. The original Triang X04 motor had one armature pole down. Since I did not have a replacement X04 and did not know where to source one I modified an unused and superior MW 005 replacement (supplied FOC by me) to fit. No other alteration was made to the loco, the work is completely reversible if necessary. It is exactly the sort of thing Derek would have done if he had still had the loco.

2. AVR Monarch. I made and fitted two replacement crankpins and reassembled the valve gear on one side of each bogie which was hanging loose. The loco now works.

3. AVR Forney. This had a severely bent chassis and both the trailing truck and headlight were missing. I made a bracket for the headlight and fitted the new headlight supplied for the purpose by Garry Whiting. I straightened the chassis and constructed and fitted a new trailing truck. I also made and fitted replacement cab steps which were missing and straightened and strengthened (internally with brass strip) the cardboard cab sides which had bowed inward badly. Although references in the RM at the time repeatedly state that the loco had a Romford Terrier motor, when received by me the motor was a Mabuchi Mighty Atom. Whether this was replaced by Derek or a subsequent owner of the loco is not known and to a degree underlines why we should not be TOO precious about these things. Incidentally, when I discussed these locos with Derek he was completely at ease with me working on them and gave me his blessing. What I would never do is alter the external appearance of the models.

Thank you for clarifying what you have done to the collection items as this is not something I think you have done previously.  As you had not told us what has been done it was difficult to know whether work was being done in sympathy with the items or with the aim to get everything up and running regardless of it's importance.

Were I in your position I would be keeping some form of notes so that we can avoid issues, such as those you mention with the AVR Forney's motor, in the future and have a better idea of what was Derek's original work (for example) and what is the work of you and subsequent custodians. Furthermore, keeping notes as and when any work is done avoids trying to recall what you did at some point in the future and will make life easier for those who follow you as custodian's as they can use your notes as established practice / guidelines (i.e. 'do not change the external appearance of the models') rather than trying to work it all out again from first principles. But I'm not in your position, and it seems that helpful suggestions from someone with a knowledge of how the professionals manage such collections (or even direct from those same professionals) are (still) not wanted by those on the Committee.

As an aside I also found Derek to be very helpful when I contacted him about his locos with a view to making a new trailing truck for the Forney (using K's wheel sets as per the original that were offered by another Socieity member) so that when displayed it did so with a horizontal boiler, but never had the opportunity to carry out the work I had planned to do.

Quote from: rod335 on November 15, 2017, 11:12
This has become a much longer post than I intended it to be. However, I do feel that in the period I have had custody of the collection, I have done much more for its well-being than any one elsetodate. Thanks are due to Mick Thornton for photographing  and cataloguing the collection, the only other person to my knowledge who has had any positive input. No one else has either seemed or wanted to do anything with it.

Again, apologies for the length of this post.

I am sorry that you feel that it is only you and Mick who have had a positive input and that "No one else has either seemed or wanted to do anything with it", despite my posting on this discussion what I did with the collection whilst in my care (to recap in case you missed it: a basic photograph of every item and a full catalogue in the form of a database which once handed over to the Committee we discovered was not compatible with Microsoft software so Mick ended up having to repeat much of what I had done) and my offer to the Committee at the time to serve as an co-opted officer to look after the collection and what I intended to do in that role - an offer that was declined at the time...

Perhaps part of my problem is that as someone who had an input and interest in the collection in the past I sometimes find it hard to let go of my former responsibilities.  It is just that based on my limited knowledge I remain to be convinced that what is being done with it and what is planned to do with it is the best thing for the collection.  I suspect that one of the main reasons for my lack of conviction is that neither "what is being done with it" or "what is planned to do with it of which" seem to be clear to me at the moment (at least), and it is quite possibly the case that none of the elected officers know for sure either when it comes to the latter, which I am sure does not help your position, and for that you have my sympathies.

Rod, I am pleased that someone - finally - is in a position to do something with the Heritage Collection and I am sorry if my comments have touched a raw nerve.

A quick notice:

Rod contacted me by phone this evening in response to a PM I sent him earlier today.

He has informed me that his laptop gave up the ghost this afternoon so he is, hopefully only temporarily, out of action and cannot reply to anyone at present. I have told him that I will make a posting on here with his apologies as he is concerned that anyone who has made postings about the heritage collection recently that prompts a reply from him may think that he is ignoring them.

Particularly appropriate as it happens in view of Julien's posting above, which I would imagine Rod would wish to reply to.

My own quick response to Julien as my name was mentioned:

I too think that Rod was incorrect in his feeling that only he and myself have made any positive input with the collection. I have informed Rod of the good work you did when you held it, to first of all bring it all together into one safe place which I remember was quite a task for you at the time as it took quite a bit of effort to get some people who had some of the items out "on loan" to return them, to make the first inventory of it as it stood at the time, and to try to get committee policy regarding safeguarding it and providing the means to make safe storage facilities for it etc. I think he realises the amount of input that you had and the contribution you made.

Mick

Which takes us back full circle to what several of us said many pages ago...

We as a Society need to decide what the PURPOSE of the collection is!!!


In my own view it is to show the early days of NG modelling and allow people to see how far we have come, thus encouraging people to join us and have a go. It can't do that only coming out 3 or 4 times a year...

I've seen (a very small number) of the collection even less times than Julien so I don't go with the assertion that it's been out and about. In Julien's earlier post he outlined a very good way for the collection to be seen by all of us who attend NG model railway shows, and even showing it to the wider public (a good way of getting new members I'd have thought, showing how far NG modelling has come, I can't think of any other Society that are doing the same) using the flight cases. This will mean that the collection will be away from it's "home base" for much of the year but it will be in safe hands (unless people think that the members who hold the display cabinets are not to be trusted?!). They can return the cases every so often (once a year?) for any maintenance to be carried out and for the various cases to be rotated around the Display Case Holders.

I really can't see any issue with that and it does get the Collection out and about to be seen by the many, not the few. I get the impression that it would not be acceptable to some, can they please explain why and also what they feel the purpose of the collection is and what their objections are to the collection being loaned out to trusted members of the Society for display purposes on a wider basis than at present?

Oh dear, what a kerfuffle all this has turned into, and all because clayliner came up with an eminently reasonable suggestion that the "Collection" be available as pictures with perhaps a potted history of why they are deemed to be worth collecting.

Quote:-  



The Society Heritage Collection

Quote from: MickT on November 16, 2017, 01:42
<snipped>

My own quick response to Julien as my name was mentioned:

I too think that Rod was incorrect in his feeling that only he and myself have made any positive input with the collection. I have informed Rod of the good work you did when you held it, to first of all bring it all together into one safe place which I remember was quite a task for you at the time as it took quite a bit of effort to get some people who had some of the items out "on loan" to return them, to make the first inventory of it as it stood at the time, and to try to get committee policy regarding safeguarding it and providing the means to make safe storage facilities for it etc. I think he realises the amount of input that you had and the contribution you made.

Mick

Thanks Mick - I was beginning to think I'd imagined doing that...

All, I have today sent an E-mail to David our society Chairman asking that time be given to discussing the collection at the committee meeting in January.

John Bruce No7.

Thanks John...

Thanks from me too John.

John, I don't want anyone to think I am getting my big wooden spoon out to stir things (further?) but might it be worth those of us who have contributed to this thread summing up our thoughts about the collection and putting them down on paper (as it where) and sending something to Charlie Insley for (formal) consideration at the Committee meeting?  I wonder if that may be easier than someone (you?) trying to submit the 6(!) pages of this thread or summarizing the same...?

edit: now 7 pages - sorry guys! :'(

Sounds like a plan Julien, do you want to take that on?

John.

Mine's quite simple, I think they should adopt Julien's original suggestion of the Flight Boxes and they should be circulated amongst the various Groups who have Society display cases so they can be viewed by more people and they should be returned every so often to the "Curator" for any maintenance required (every 12 months?). I have no strong feeling about running them, I tend to feel that being able to view them (even static) is more important than whether they can run, especially if they are not original in the mechanics side of things.

That's all from me you'll be pleased to hear. I can email that to Charlie if you want and I'm sure that others will want their (different) views heard as well...

Quote from: Turin 60 on November 16, 2017, 16:29
All, I have today sent an E-mail to David our society Chairman asking that time be given to discussing the collection at the committee meeting in January.
John Bruce No7.

Quote from: JulienW on November 17, 2017, 14:24
Thanks from me too John.

John, I don't want anyone to think I am getting my big wooden spoon out to stir things (further?) but might it be worth those of us who have contributed to this thread summing up our thoughts about the collection and putting them down on paper (as it where) and sending something to Charlie Insley for (formal) consideration at the Committee meeting?  I wonder if that may be easier than someone (you?) trying to submit the 6(!) pages of this thread or summarizing the same...?
edit: now 7 pages - sorry guys! :'(

Firstly just to say I have not yet heard back from Charlie re the decisions taken in 2008/9 regarding a] the then collection disposal programme and b] heritage collection policy.  In one respect this is now academic as we have now moved the discussion forward however I think it would be helpful to learn just what did [not] happen if for no other reason it may help bring a degree of closure for Julian and Mick and hopefully inform us their past efforts were not in vain.

I for one, would be very disappointed if the Directors have not logged in and kept abreast of this discussion on the forum and, have not realised that this matter has rapidly climbed up the agenda and no matter whatever more [supposedly?] important matters are on the January agenda adequate time is allocated to make meaningful progress with this matter.  I think they ought to be well aware of our thoughts over policy, access and maintenance but, I agree, it may make their job easier if the 7 pages could be summarized, even a cut and paste of the various arguments cutting out the froth would be helpful.  A few days ago I sat down to sumarise them and gave up after a couple of hours with a very sore arthritic typing finger, so I will pass if you don't mind!  However quite happy to e-mail Charlie direct if that is regarded as the best way forward.

Malcolm

I agree that some conclusions are needed.

21 members of this forum have posted on this thread so far.
There are 94 posts, but 22 of those are from one person!

Also not all the posters on here want any kind of change in the way the collection is managed, kept or maintained but some do.

However what would appear to be almost universal is a desire to have a record that is available to members of what is in the collection, its historical importance and background including a photo or photos of the models.

I suggest that this record made available to all members is what is given priority first.

The issue of how the collection is managed, kept and maintained is not going to be effected by the production of this record.

The society

Would it also be worth having a section entitled 'Heritage Collection' on this forum, both for announcements of the collection's presence at exhibitions and also for general discussion about historical aspects of 009? This might also get more people interested in this side of the hobby.

Quote from: Turin 60 on November 17, 2017, 14:47
Sounds like a plan Julien, do you want to take that on?

John.

Hmmm... if you mean trying to summarise everything then maybe not!

I'll get something off to Charlie and suggest that other contributors do the same as there may be more weight in 21 individual members making their own submissions to the Committee rather than me trying to work out who you are and what exactly was meant in your posts (I wouldn't want anyone to feel I had left anything out, or put words into your mouths). It may also give all of you chance to expand on your points, or decide not to bother after all...

Sound idea Julien, if all participants in this discussion so far would be so kind as to E-mail Charlie and or David (sorry guys) then all being well we can make a little progress at the meeting in January, although I do realize that 21 out of the total Society membership is quite a small number, silent majority and all that!

John.

Quote from: JulienW on November 17, 2017, 21:39

Quote from: Turin 60 on November 17, 2017, 14:47
Sounds like a plan Julien, do you want to take that on?

John.

Hmmm... if you mean trying to summarise everything then maybe not!

I'll get something off to Charlie and suggest that other contributors do the same as there may be more weight in 21 individual members making their own submissions to the Committee rather than me trying to work out who you are and what exactly was meant in your posts (I wouldn't want anyone to feel I had left anything out, or put words into your mouths). It may also give all of you chance to expand on your points, or decide not to bother after all...

I agree that 21 out of the Society membership is a very small number which is probably why Rod thinks there is very little interest in the collection.

A list of the items would be very interesting.  If there is no space or desire to put this in the 009 News then perhaps it could be a loose sheet.

I think we are lucky to have Rod looking after the collection.  Not only is he an accomplished modeller but he has the interest to restore and maintain the items.  Personally I am not worried if the new Forney truck is not exactly the same as the original.  It looks alright and is better than nothing at all. I am sure that if someone produced an exact replica with cardboard side frames then Rod could fit it.  However it would still not be the original one.
The motor in Anne was only replaced because Rod thought that the loco would be shown running. 

Modelling was very different in the 1950s and 60s.  A friend of mine built some freelance EM layouts and two were featured in various magazines at the time.  Locos and stock were built ''because it was fun'' and if they were no longer required or didn't work properly they were taken apart and scrapped.  Change seemed to be continuous, so I think that repairs to models in the collection are just carrying on with this tradition.

Rodney Stenning

Quote from: B.Meldon on November 17, 2017, 16:10
However what would appear to be almost universal is a desire to have a record that is available to members of what is in the collection, its historical importance and background including a photo or photos of the models.
I suggest that this record made available to all members is what is given priority first

If I may just remind folk of one of my other original suggestions, which was of a photo gallery on the Society website, using the photos and information already available. That would be 'available to all members' at any time, to access and refer to as and when required.

David.

Rodney
I would not be too worried that ONLY 21 members are interested in the Heritage Collection.  If you look at the list of members on this Forum I would suggest there no more than about 100 members who contribute to this Forum and even if there are more who pop in for a quick read and who do not contribute to the debates etc that leaves say some 1,400 members [assuming membership 1,600] who are not even aware the Heritage Collection is being discussed.  Now if we had access to all Society members and only had 21 interested in the collection I would be worried but we are looking at say 21 members out of 200 so pro rata that should mean something in the region of 160 members will have an interest in the collection.  Still only about 10% of the membership but large enough a percentage for the Directors to have to take notice.
I realise this all somewhat tenuous / smoke and mirrors / damned statistics etc. but I cannot accept there are only 21 members interested in the Heritage Collection [especially as there may be a substantial percentage of the membership who are not aware there even is a collection!]
Malcolm   

David

Something like this?

Rodney

http://www.s-scale.org.uk/history.htm

In view of recent comments I

Let's leave the numbers out of things, folks, Statistics can be made to prove anything as we see every day on shows with politicians on them... I could quite easily prove that those 21 (22?!) provide a majority with a little double speak!!

It's worth saying, though, that these models can be used as a marketing tool to get more members if we do things right, it's not just Members we should be showing them to...

I have sent an Email to Charles giving my views, previously aired in this thread:-

Pictures and a short description stating what it is, and why society members would be interested or in what context or magazine article was it first brought to the attention of members, to be printed in the 009 Magazine.

This gets the information to every member once only, will consume a lot of magazine space, and therefore take several editions of the magazine to get all the information out to the membership.  It and will require several further editions when or if, further items are added to the collection.

Pictures, posted in the members layout pictures, or another similar section created as the "Heritage section".  Or some other title, again with a descriptor of where or what context it was first seen in.

The second proposal is probably the best solution, as it is instantly available to all forum members, forever, and can easily be expanded in the future when more items join the current batch.  But looking at the membership list, an awful lot of members do not seem to avail themselves of the delights of this forum, so to be fair to all members, both options will probably have to be adopted.

As I said in an earlier post, both options require some member input, in the photography department, the caption writing department, and in the editorship department, which all requires some time consuming volunteering and cross referencing between those that know things, those that can photograph things, and our current magazine editor, bless him.

As several forum members know, well those that have followed the Glen Ogle thread anyway, some of those tasks I can do, but, others have demonstrated on these pages, they can do better.

Whilst I am willing to help in whatever capacity I can, I am a volunteer, But I would need help.

My demonstrably poor memory would be of little use in the "What I Know", department, the editors chair is occupied, that only leaves the caption department, and I suppose this little homily has probably demonstrated that short and pithy captions do not come readily to my typing fingers.

So get back to me if you think I can contribute.

As yet, I have had no reply from Charles.

Kind regards,

BrianT.

Quote from: Rodney S on November 19, 2017, 10:08
David
Something like this?      Rodney.    http://www.s-scale.org.uk/history.htm

Well, that's certainly an impressive narrative, and would be good to achieve if someone could not only put the work in but also have a comprehensive overview/grasp of the parallel story for 009 (presumably it couldn't be done by a group of qualified people as it seems from previous comments that no committee is capable of producing anything useful!)

But I was originally thinking of a simple picture gallery with captions, similar to the 'members layouts' section already on the Society website.

Brian, thanks for your willingness to help!

Given the general feeling that the 009 News might play a major role in getting the Collection to a wider audience it might be useful to have some comment from our esteemed Editor, but he tells me he's 'not on the forum' so I imagine we are unlikely to hear from him here. Presumably the same goes for the rest of the Committee, which seems a shame.

David.

Well that is interesting, the fact that the editor is not on this forum. :o

Although it does clear up why, when I was offering an article about Glen Ogle to the then new editor of the news, it seemed that somehow, my quite long scribing's about my efforts in building Glen Ogle on this forum, and the plethora of pictures attached, were not reflected in any answers I received from the editor about my submissions.  :)

Or there disjointed ultimate appearance in the magazine, which upon reflection, when I read them in the magazine, I thought were rubbish, and I should never have submitted them for publication in anything other than "The Beano"  :(

So perhaps even more proof that caption writing is best left to A N other, should this now eight page discussion ever get off the ground. ::)

But my offer of help in any capacity still stands. :angel:

Regards,

BrianT.

Having looked at this discussion I wondered why it had been brought up, as I can not recall anyone previously asking about the Heritage Collection.

I would like to ask David (Clayliner) why he brought the subject up ?

Was it his own idea or was it discussed with others at a previous get together ?

Did he volunteer or was he asked to bring it up ?

I note there was a group meeting in his location on the 21st October and a meeting that he possibly attended on the 26th October, the day he started
this discussion.

Just interested, as nobody ever discusses the Heritage Collection.

Stan.

Quote from: Stan Williams on November 20, 2017, 00:12Just interested, as nobody ever discusses the Heritage Collection.

Probably because very few people knew about it, Stan. I'd heard about it when Julien was involved as he told some of us, but I still didn't know what was in it!

I don't know what made David bring the subject up, but I am glad he did and I hope we can get to do something useful with the collection now we know it's there!


Brian I doubt we'll get an email back from Charlie, or at least I assume we won't, though just confirmation he's got them would be useful...

Seems to me if members read their 009 News they might well be aware there is a Heritage Collection.   There were two announcements in the past couple of years in the 009 News regarding additions to the Heritage Collection, namely P D Hancock's 'Angus' and 'Joan' from the C&MR.  Either members have no interest in such matters or don't read their 009 News........

Stan.  Whatever David's reasons for raising this subject now are I care not.  On a number of occasions since the Convention in Kegworth, I have considered raising the question of the Heritage Collection however, as I am not in a position to commit to devoting any time to the matter and did wish to place additional work onto the shoulders of others, I have kept silent.   If I was not under Lord Craig's thumb I would have been/be only too glad to have got/get involved.   I would add that I was given to understand at said convention that following the convention the Heritage Collection was going away to be photographed with a view to articles appearing in the 009 News thereafter.  Got the impression the then Editor, Tom Dauben, was quite keen on this idea.

Now back to drafting my e-mail to Charlie.

Malcolm

Two entries in two years when they've had them at least 8 or 9 years is hardly publicising it, is it! I suspect those are the two I was aware of... Oh well, let's see what comes of this...

Stan - your sleuthing would do Poirot credit!

I didn't attend the local gathering at Pat Collins's on 21st October and I don't know what meeting you are referring to on the 26th, but whatever it was I wasn't there. However, I was present at a discussion elsewhere where the Heritage Collection was mentioned, which is what later prompted me to ask questions here on the Society forum. No-one else knew I was going to start this thread and certainly no-one asked me to - having turned the matter over in my mind it seemed a good idea to use the Society's forum to air the matter and try and find out the current situation (which presumably is what our forum is for).

So it's as simple as that, I'm afraid.

David.

Good morning David.

If it is true that our magazine editor does not frequent these pages, and he has been mentioned enough times to think he would have responded in some way to this debate, and it would seem from the lack of response to emails that our secretary doesn't peruse his computer too often either, then the only way to get any response would have to be a letter in the magazine, which all the membership receives, to get any sort of movement on this subject.

Now considering the length of time between each print run, and the number of pages available in each print run, and the magazine editor already threatening to blue pencil some of the member group reports in the last issue of the magazine, because they are using too much of the allocated paper,  I don't hold much hope of anything meaningful coming out of that route either.

I know that a lot of 009 members frequent the narrow Gauge on Line forum, where any posting receives an almost immediate response, of help, critique or whatever, then perhaps the past eight pages of debate should move over to that forum, where it will get a wider response I am sure.

Well lets see if that little tirade will stir some movement, I have all ready commissioned a bricky to build me a wall. ::) ;D ;D ;D

As yet, I have had no reply from Charles. :(

Kind regards to the few who are reading this. :)

BrianT.

To be fair to Charles he's got a busy life outside the Society. It may be that he only checks the Society Emails every so often. However I'm sure that the Directors will be well aware of this thread by now, especially as we've asked for the subject to be raised at their next meeting. Rather than try to second guess what's going on why don't we relax (as I think we've all had our say on here and passed on our thoughts to the Secretary Director) and wait and see what happens next.

Hopefully after the next Director's meeting we'll get some feedback from someone that does look at the Forum! (One thing, though, when IS the next Director's meeting?)

Thank you David for answering my questions, so promptly.

I am sure you will agree with me and many other 009 Society Members that we should be careful in bringing up matters on this Forum that may
undermine an elected official of our Society.
Members can write to the secretary or chairman of the society, but the AGM is the correct place to have an open discussion.
If members cannot attend the AGM, they can still have matters raised by writing to the secretary prior to the AGM date.

There will be a committee meeting in January over the weekend of the Swoons event.

Stan.

I have e-mailed Charlie with my suggestions and can confirm he does read them and reply to them. 

Charlie informs me he is a member of this forum but is having access issues which have to date prevented him from posting.  Hopefully these will be resolved soon but in the meantime do e-mail Charlie with your views.

I seem to recall reading something recently to the effect the 009 News editor is not a member of this forum but perhaps Mods can confirm.

Going off topic for a moment.  Whilst I appreciate our Directors are busy people I would have thought all should be members on the Society's own forum even it is to do no more than keep tabs on what the membership is plotting.  A timely word or two from a Director could provide facts rather than allowing speculation to run out of control and so inflame a situation out of all proportion.  (Rod of course is a member of the forum just temporarily disconnected due to his laptop dying.  Get back soon Rod)

Malcolm

Hello All!  I'm now back on the forum, and have enjoyed (no, seriously) this thread.  The heritage collection is an ongoing conundrum for us, since we're a modelling society, not a museum, and not set up to be one.  We seem to have more or less stumbled into being custodians of what are significant items in the history of small scale NG modelling!   Thanks also to those who've emailed, and the very helpful suggestions from Malcolm, Brian and Blair, among others.  We will be discussing this as a committee in January and I will disinter the policy I first wrote in 2009 (!) as a starting point.  Keep on with the discussion - it's all very helpful.

Charlie

Hello Charles and welcome back to the forum.

Thank you for your reply and it would be nice to think that the society committee is going to give thought, and  act, on what is a subject that needs attending to.

We of an age that remembers the Railway modeller articles that have prompted the collection of some of the artefacts that I presume are in the Heritage collection, would find it gratifying to see pictures and references to them, so that the younger membership can appreciate our regard for them and the modellers who presented there effigies and stories on the pages of magazines in the past.

I certainly think that a photographic record of them, with suitable captions, would be best displayed in a similar way to members layouts on the forum, with a similar display in the Magazine, even though this will take considerably longer to cover the collection and take up many pages of Magazine space.

Thank you for your response.

Kind regards,

BrianT.

A quickie for the benefit of those who have posted here saying they knew nothing about the Heritage Collection, or they'd only ever seen a couple of photos of a couple of the items, can I recommend a visit to my photo report of the SWOONS members day held at Ilton, Somerset in January this year easily findable

http://micksrovingreporter.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/14-january-2017-swoons-members-open-day.html   (http://micksrovingreporter.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/14-january-2017-swoons-members-open-day.html)

And check out photos 65 to 69 and 73 to 81 where you will see comprehensive sets from the David Mander Stronachlachar collection, the Derek Naylor Aire Valley collection and the two locos that the Society has in the collection from PD Hancock's Craig & Mertonford.

There are also photos of items from the Heritage Collection in many of the other reports in the blogsite, notably the Society's Convention in Kegworth in 2013 where just about the whole collection was on display for all 3 days.

As nobody has mentioned this yet, it makes me wonder if it has been worth bothering going to the trouble of creating these photo reports if nobody looks at them!

Mick

Mick, rest assured your efforts are appreciated.
The collection is a priceless resource and deserves to be fully appreciated.

Andy

Agreed... Thanks Mick, looking at them confirms my view about having them in display cases next to modern models to show how far we have come... They are superb models and show the lengths they had to go to make models, something we are lucky these days that we don't have to do... With someone alongside to explain their significance I'm sure they'll make a good "marketing tool" to get new members into the Society...

Stan -  "forum n. public meeting place for open discussion; an event, broadcast or medium where views may be aired and debated [P*ID]." Do we really want to restrict (beyond the obvious, of course) the topics which can and can't be discussed here?

Brian -  you're right in saying that the NGRM forum is more visited, but as this is  a specifically Society matter I thought it more appropriate to post the thread here. If people want to join the discussion they can always contribute here (provided they're members, of course)!

Charlie -  welcome, and I'm pleased (and relieved!) that you're finding all this helpful and entertaining. Are you, as a Society Officer, comfortable with this sort of discussion being carried on here?

David.

*P=Penguin (I'm assuming that's published by, not published for)

I think this is a private forum rather than public, though I agree that the principle is the same, it's here to discuss all things Society (and modelling!) so it's the best place outside specific Society events (such as the AGM or Convention) to chat. I certainly don't think that NGRM is the place, quite frankly it's our collection and business!

I don't always agree with you Blair, but this time I certainly do!

This thread is specifically about Society property, and therefore is the sole business of the members of the Society, particularly where in this case, there have been some critical comments about the way that the Collection has been managed and evolved over the years (and going back to my own original posting in this topic, not always accurately but by assumption). It has NO business whatsoever on NGRM which has many members who are nothing to do with the 009 Society, don't pay subs to it and therefore don't need to know the ins and outs of how the Society goes about its business!

Chatham House Rules please - what goes on inside the club and is discussed inside the club stays in the club!

Mick

With due respect David, i do not think you read my answer correctly.

I certainly was not stating that discussions should not take place on the Forum, my objection was the possible singling out of an elected official or committee members.

I certainly hope that no one would go to those measures in our Society, but if they did, I am sure the Society Directors would look on it very
seriously.

Stan.

Chaps, no problem at all with the discussion that's taken place on here - in fact the most appropriate environment for it, since as has been pointed out already, this is our forum and our collection.  As I say, this is all helpful discussion and I will feed it into our deliberations in January.  I would just reiterate the point i think that Stan was trying to make, which is that we're all quite busy people, so may not respond as quickly as you like, and may not spend as much time on these forums as we'd like.

Carry on!

Charlie

Mick T. I look at your photo reports on your blogspot thingy. i find them really useful to see shows i couldn't attend and often see things i missed at shows i did attend! i for one would miss your reports, Regards, Paul.

Quote from: Paul Ludlow on November 22, 2017, 22:39
Mick T. I look at your photo reports on your blogspot thingy. i find them really useful to see shows i couldn't attend and often see things i missed at shows i did attend! i for one would miss your reports, Regards, Paul.

Second that.

Thank you Danny and Paul.

I made the comment regarding (sic) I wonder why I bother...........etc simply in the context of this topic as I have frequently included photos of Heritage Collection items that have been presented in Society display cases at events in my reports including captions with summary information about them, and particularly cited the 2 events where I can remember a number of the significantly historic items were photographed and included, yet a frequent comment that people say is that "they've never seen items from the collection", "they have only ever seen a couple of photos in the last xxx years" etc.

As a number of members are aware, i have had to severely curtail my roving reporter activities this year to the extent that I am currently unable to continue doing them for the foreseeable future , but this is because of ill health in my family which has taken all my time and energy, nothing to do with throwing toys out of the pram about the Heritage Collection.

Once it has been established what the current status and content of the collection is, I would be happy, if asked, to take a new set of photos showing items from the collection posed in a scenic setting as distinct from a bare background catalogue setting to support somebody else doing historical summary write ups for the News, or/and for the Society website, if I am invited to at some point.

Hello Mick and thank you for the link.  :)

The pictures with suitable captions, just want transferring to the members layout page or a new page created similar, called "The 009 heritage collection", or whatever, and away we go. ;D

The Magazine can draw from this at it's own pace with reference to the online version, for none forum members, who might not want to wait for the magazine to find it's Roundtuit gizmo. :laugh:

Very well done as ever sir. :angel:

Kind regards,

BrianT

PS. I posted the above, not realising that a further page had materialised, and I thought we were at the bottom of page eight still.

Having now read page nine, and seen the reference to my comments re the Narrow Gauge Online forum, are we so insular to think that no one else could possibly be bothered about the models and modellers who preceded us and gave us so much enjoyment through the pages of magazines and books.

Yes we have the toys, and they are being looked after very well, so well done.

But what I said was:-    I know that a lot of 009 members frequent the narrow Gauge on Line forum, where any posting receives an almost immediate response, of help, critique or whatever, then perhaps the past eight pages of debate should move over to that forum, where it will get a wider response I am sure. 
This was reference to the very few members who populate the 009 Forum, especially if some senior members do not appear to take part

If nothing else, my reference to the NGRMO shook a few trees, and if that dislodged a few conkers, then so be it.

Regards,

BrianT.

Mick -

Thanks for your very generous offer to re-photograph the Collection for the benefit of us all.

I presume you will have to wait until after the Committee meeting in January to get a definitive response.

David.

May I also give you a vote of thanks Mick for volunteering to take some new photos of the collection.  However I must admit a little surprise at this offer.   As a former member of HM armed forces  :police: did you momentarily forget your training ????  You should know never take one step forward whilst everyone else takes one step back!!! ;D :-* :laugh:

Well done, I'm right behind you! ;)

Malcolm

Quote from: gtmspyder on November 23, 2017, 18:34
The pictures with suitable captions, just want transferring to the members layout page or a new page created similar, called "The 009 heritage collection", or whatever, and away we go. ;D

The Magazine can draw from this at it's own pace with reference to the online version, for none forum members, who might not want to wait for the magazine to find it's Roundtuit gizmo. :laugh:

Note that the members layouts page ( http://009society.com/mems_layouts.php ) is accessed from the main 009 society website, you don't have to be a forum member to access it. Even those who are not society members at all can view it  :)

I would also like to thank Mick for his offer to photograph the collection. Would it be sensible to include images of related historic items - e.g. the Edinburgh and Lothians PDH collection - on the same page? (obviously with permission and with captions pointing out that these items are not owned by the 009 Society)

Quote from: clayliner on November 24, 2017, 19:20

Mick -

Thanks for your very generous offer to re-photograph the Collection for the benefit of us all.

I presume you will have to wait until after the Committee meeting in January to get a definitive response.

David.

I wouldn't think so David, it doesn't need have a committee meeting for one of the elected Directors to invite me (or anyone else who has a camera, you only have to point the things nowadays the camera does all the rest!). It might need a committee meeting to decide (I have to remind everyone that this is deciding again, 9 years after the committee previously unanimously decided) what the direction and policy for the collection is to be (again!) but it doesn't have to wait for that to happen to be able to photograph it!

Mick

PS Thanks Danny for your words. Your idea about including non-Society owned but equally historic items such as the PDH collection in the care of the Edinburgh and Lothians MRC sounds very attractive - If this is possible. Malcolm may be able to offer an opinion on this one.

I wouldn't think there would be a problem in non-Society members being able to see photos of the collection, that is one of the points of it all - helping to encourage people to join the Society by letting them see some of the historical models from the early days of the hobby.  In fact non-Society members can see the photos I linked to now on my own website and nobody has ever complained about that (although as I said earlier, it seems that very few people have bothered to take note of the photos on my website anyway, judging by the comments about never seeing photos of the heritage collection items!).

The thing that non-Society members should not be party to is the sort of discussions going on between members here, which is why this sort of thread should be confined to this forum and not opened out to NGRM-Online.

Malcolm, you are quite correct, an age related aberration on my part to ignore Rule 1 - never volunteer for anything, but I've done it now, fortunately the cost of film and developing is much reduced since the introduction of digi cameras!

Quote from: MickT on November 24, 2017, 22:30
I wouldn't think there would be a problem in non-Society members being able to see photos of the collection, that is one of the points of it all - helping to encourage people to join the Society by letting them see some of the historical models from the early days of the hobby.  In fact non-Society members can see the photos I linked to now on my own website and nobody has ever complained about that (although as I said earlier, it seems that very few people have bothered to take note of the photos on my website anyway, judging by the comments about never seeing photos of the heritage collection items!).

Sorry, I probably didn't make myself very clear initially. What I meant was that since the main website is accessible to non-forum members we don't necessarily have to worry too much about providing an alternative way of seeing the collection via the 009 News. It would still be interesting to have a few articles but I suspect some people would like to look at the photos on the website at their own pace while others may have little or no interest. As you say, complaining just because non-members can see photos of the collection would be exactly the wrong way to do things! Anyone can see the collection when it attends exhibitions after all.

Quote from: danny on November 24, 2017, 21:32
I would also like to thank Mick for his offer to photograph the collection. Would it be sensible to include images of related historic items - e.g. the Edinburgh and Lothians PDH collection - on the same page? (obviously with permission and with captions pointing out that these items are not owned by the 009 Society)

Danny
As far as I, as custodian of the E&LMRC PDH Collection, am concerned I would be delighted to have items from the E&LMRC Collection included.   As there are three PDH items within the 009 Heritage/Historic Collection at the very least a cross reference to the E&LMRC Collection would appear in some respects to be eminently sensible.  Any such 'add on' to the Society webpage would need to be cleared with the appropriate 009 Society 'heid yins', the E&LMRC Committee and most importantly, Lord Craig.

That said there are some photographs of the collection on the internet.   I admit they are somewhat random and were placed on the net as items were donated to the collection or as the result of queries.   They are in a Google Album Archive and are labelled CMR 01... etc etc and hopefully can still be accessed here https://get.google.com/albumarchive/112904466287746079405?source=pwa (https://get.google.com/albumarchive/112904466287746079405?source=pwa)  A proper PDH web area is on my list of to do jobs, as I think I alluded to in an earlier post this is a rather long list!

Malcolm

Quote from: Malcolm on November 25, 2017, 17:54

Quote from: danny on November 24, 2017, 21:32
I would also like to thank Mick for his offer to photograph the collection. Would it be sensible to include images of related historic items - e.g. the Edinburgh and Lothians PDH collection - on the same page? (obviously with permission and with captions pointing out that these items are not owned by the 009 Society)

Danny
As far as I, as custodian of the E&LMRC PDH Collection, am concerned I would be delighted to have items from the E&LMRC Collection included.   As there are three PDH items within the 009 Heritage/Historic Collection at the very least a cross reference to the E&LMRC Collection would appear in some respects to be eminently sensible.  Any such 'add on' to the Society webpage would need to be cleared with the appropriate 009 Society 'heid yins', the E&LMRC Committee and most importantly, Lord Craig.

That said there are some photographs of the collection on the internet.   I admit they are somewhat random and were placed on the net as items were donated to the collection or as the result of queries.   They are in a Google Album Archive and are labelled CMR 01... etc etc and hopefully can still be accessed here https://get.google.com/albumarchive/112904466287746079405?source=pwa (https://get.google.com/albumarchive/112904466287746079405?source=pwa)  A proper PDH web area is on my list of to do jobs, as I think I alluded to in an earlier post this is a rather long list!

Malcolm

I particularly like the 'Official Charter': 'trains must be operated every February 29th'  ;)

Some of the collection is at Warley in the display case and there was a fair bit of interest in it, especially as it was just below that Meyer kit mentioned elsewhere!

Thanks for the update Stephen.

I know (from experience) that the wheels of the committee do grind very slowly but hopefully the update will appear in the News in the not too distant future.

Quote from: cornelius on January 15, 2018, 11:33
The Society's Heritage Collection was discussed as an agenda item at yesterday's Committee meeting at Ilton, with submissions from members taken on board. The result of our deliberations will be published as an update in the 009 News, to ensure that the entire membership is informed.
Thanks,
Stephen Fulljames
Communications Officer

Stephen
I had rather hoped the update would have been in the March News but it appears not.  Do you have a date for publication?
Thanks
Malcolm

Don't get too impatient Malcolm. I raised an agenda item regarding the Heritage Collection at a committee meeting in January 2009 which was unanimously approved but I'm still waiting for the action agreed to take place......................Documented fact, not spurious exaggeration.

Mick

What, me impatient?  You should meet Lord Craig!
Malcolm

Members may be interested to know that some items of the Heritage collection will be on display at the AGM on 7 April at Eastleigh.

Regrettably they will probably not include the two locos returned from the Warley show in a damaged state unless I have been able to repair them satisfactorily by then.

Which ones? Is the damage serious?
Danny

The locos concerned are the Stronachlacher L & B loco which has a bent rear coupling and cowcatcher, damage consistent with the loco having been dropped on its rear and the Aire Valley 0-4-0 'Anne' which has had the left-hand side expansion link mounting broken away from the chassis. The locos were not damaged when packed for transit by me and despite what has been alleged, all packaging provides adequate transit protection.

I am disappointed that these models have been treated in this way by persons unknown especially after the suggestion from the group concerned that the collection should be broken up and dispersed round the area groups. Not a great example of their standard of care and respect. It is particularly galling that whoever caused the damage must have been aware of it at the time and has not bothered to mention it. As has been pointed out these are significant and delicate models and should be treated as such.

As a member of that group I can confirm that on the day I was on they never left the display case...

Also reading that post I note "despite what has been alleged, all packaging provides adequate transit protection" which would indicate that they were ok when they left us...

I think this is something that should be dealt with by the Directors and those involved rather than flinging accusations around, Rod.

No accusation as far as I am concerned, just that the items were OK when they left me, damaged when they got back. That is fact. Accidents DO happen. But it is good manners to say when they have.

Rod, you need to re-read your post, you have accused us of damaging them, look at my italics.

Just as an example I have several items of stock which are on semi permanent loan to the Group including a very delicate Px48, that has gone to dozens of shows over the last 4 years and suffered no damage whatsoever.

I would suggest again that you discuss this with the Directors and the Group concerned and stop accusing people of things they may not have done.

You are entitled to your opinion, I am entitled to mine. The items concerned were in good condition when they left me. They were damaged when they were returned. That is a statement of fact. Sometime between leaving me and returning to me they were damaged. I think people can draw their own conclusions from that statement.

Sorry, Rod but you are out of order here. They may have come back damaged but that may not be the fault of the Group as you suggested in your original post "Not a great example of their standard of care and respect."

I again ask that this be taken up with the Directors in the correct manner.

As the person responsible for the 009 Society's display at the Warley show I can confirm that the heritage items didn't leave the cases during the show.  I unpacked the models when Geoff Bowyer delivered them to the stand on Saturday morning, and repacked them on the Sunday evening when Geoff took them away with him.

Had any damage occurred in this time it would have been noted by me and Geoff Bowyer - present on both days of the exhibition - would have been notified.

As the person responsible for the 009 Society's display at the Warley show I find it somewhat disappointing that Rod has seen fit to announce on the forum that heritage items sent for display at the Warley show appear to have been damaged at the show rather than to contact me in the first instance to ascertain the facts before making accusations.

As the person who unpacked the models when Geoff Bowyer delivered them to the stand on the Saturday morning, put them in the case and repacked them at the end of the show Sunday evening the implication is that I have damaged these locos and have not owned up to it.

In making these accusations on this forum Rod has a published false statement - that I am, or someone in the West Midlands Group is responsible for the damage and have not owned up to it -  that is damaging to a person's reputation (i.e. mine).  This is the very definition of Libel, i.e. a written defamation against me as an individual and the West Midlands Group members who helped to man the stand, unless I have misunderstood Rod's posts.  If that is the case perhaps Rod would like to either clarify his statement that I or a member of the West Mids Group have damaged these locos, or offer an apology.

It is a fact that the Warley show took place on the 25th and 26th of November, so one is left to wonder what happened in the 11 weeks between me packing them up in an undamaged state at the show (roughly 5 pm on November 26th 2017) and handing them back to Geoff Bowyer for their journey south, and Rod's announcement at almost 5 pm on March 12th.  

In that 11 weeks if there had been a problem Rod and/or other Committee members / Officers could have contacted me via e-mail or approached me in person when we were all at the Ilton members day on Jan 13th, or asked to attend the Committee / board meeting held on the 14th Jan to acretain the facts and to account for the damage.

It is a fact that none of the Society officials, elected or appointed, have chosen to contact me directly or indirectly on this matter in any way in that time, and Rod insinuations are the first that I have heard of the matter.

The fact of the matter is that at some point in the 11 weeks between me packing the locos away in their mix of tissue paper and bubble wrap at the NEC and Rod's announcement 2 locos were damaged. As they were apparently undamaged when I received them and they were in the same condition when I packed them in the same manner  (as far as I could ascertain) as when they arrived this would suggest that the damage occurred at some point between Geoff Bowyer taking them away with him and Rod's Announcement yesterday evening.

On the basis that no enquiries have been made in my direction at any point prior to Rod making his causations I'm assuming that the damage was noted by Rod when he unpacked them yesterday.

I am therefore somewhat concerned that it seems to have taken 11 weeks for items sent out to be checked on their return for damage, as the overly long time interval makes it that much harder to pin down when the damage occurred, and who may or may not be responsible for it.

Unfortunately because of someone behind the scenes the Heritage collection has become a political football. This and the point you are complaining about is under discussion by the Directors. In the present instance, I merely replied to an enquiry from a member. The facts as I stated them ARE indisputable. The items were OK when they left me. They were damaged when returned. I consider it impossible that the damage, by its nature, could have been caused in transit. Therefore it must have been caused by persons unknown whilst at Warley. I cannot see anything will be gained by continuing this discussion and do not propose commenting further.

Julien, the only comment I will make is that I did not libel anyone as I did not and could not identify anyone. I have no way of knowing who handled the items at Warley. I will add that I have considered your posts in this connection and the unsolicited scree you submitted to the directors to be an unpleasant and unwarranted public and private personal attack on me. But apparently in your book that is all right. May I suggest that if you want to continue this discussion further it is done in private?

Quote from: rod335 on March 13, 2018, 11:06
Unfortunately because of someone behind the scenes the Heritage collection has become a political football. This and the point you are complaining about is under discussion by the Directors. In the present instance, I merely replied to an enquiry from a member. The facts as I stated them ARE indisputable. The items were OK when they left me. They were damaged when returned. I consider it impossible that the damage, by its nature, could have been caused in transit. Therefore it must have been caused by persons unknown whilst at Warley. I cannot see anything will be gained by continuing this discussion and do not propose commenting further.

You have no proof that we damaged them and went much further in your earlier posts by accusing us directly, as you have done there. As another member of the Group that looked after the Collection and saw no damage being done to it I regard that as out of order and would like you to remove all your posts in this respect. I have reported your posts to the Moderators.

Quote from: rod335 on March 13, 2018, 11:15
Julien, the only comment I will make is that I did not libel anyone as I did not and could not identify anyone. I have no way of knowing who handled the items at Warley. I will add that I have considered your posts in this connection and the unsolicited scree you submitted to the directors to be an unpleasant and unwarranted public and private personal attack on me. But apparently in your book that is all right. May I suggest that if you want to continue this discussion further it is done in private?

Rod, what is the point of discussing this in private seeing as you have decided to open the matter in public?

You chose to state that items were damaged at Warley whilst in the care of the group and individuals manning the 009 Society's stand at the Warley show on this forum without having the good manners to contact any of those individuals or the group concerned first to inform them that items had been damaged or to ascertain what may have happened to said items whilst they were in their care to cause such damage.

I apologise yet again if you have seen my posts on the subject of the heritage collection on this forum and the item I submitted to the January Committee meeting as a personal attack on you.

Despite my apologies you seem to have taken it upon yourself to retaliate by making vile insinuations that a group of members of which I am a part have damaged Society assets and then tried to cover it up rather than own up.

Apparently this is acceptable behaviour of an Elected Officer/Director of this Society...

 Gentlemen,

This topic is now locked.

Garry Whiting
Content Moderator