Stoker

Actually a lot more common than people realise. By 1930 lawns had been commonplace among the middle class for 100 years, since Edwin Beard Budding introduced the reel mower in 1830. Prior to this, lawns were painstakingly cut with a scythe, and then rolled into nice lines with a roller. Only the "formal" lawn though, the rest of the grounds of a stately house was more likely tended to by a flock of sheep. It wasn't until the war rationing of the 1940s that many began to turn their gardens back to vegetable plots as a way to keep the family fed.

This is great to see. In my youth I spent many a happy hour here, firing locomotives, shunting coaches, track bashing, odd jobs in the shed, etc. Always a pleasure to work around Roger and his dog Simba, Richard Bowhill Snr, or chat with Maurice Dart in the shop, even if he hated model railways! I think it gave him great pleasure to see it all preserved. And to sell his books, of course! I dearly miss him now that I'm in Canada. I look forward to watching this project progress.

The hobby has moved on a bit since "Pig Lane", Clive.

You just know for a fact that there's plenty of teabags and chocolate digestives in there. Nice job bud it looks the part. Just need a few careless kick marks on the bottom of the door. Maybe where the paint flaked off to reveal an older colour... I'd recommend an ugly shade of dark red.

Are you going to ever be disassembling it? Because if not, why not just use wood glue and screws?

That's a lot of photos of a lot of things and yet at the same time, nothing at all.

It's just the name: "Limited run pre-order only crowdfunded IPA". It's a small batch, naturally.

Without meaning to sound unsympathetic, I think you just have to take this as a lesson to be more careful about who you put your money with when it's a limited run, pre-order only, crowdfunded model. If it's someone like Kernow or Hattons (sorry Phil) who have an actual physical location, has been around for a long time, and has tangible assets... then that's fine. But for start-ups that have little more than some fancy 3D CAD files and maybe only a handful of releases under their belt, not to mention a slightly shady past, I think you should understand that there's some risk. It's not like this has never happened before. I've been saying for years that I don't like this recent business model, it seems ripe for abuse and very risky... while I appreciate some of the models that might have never existed without it, sometimes I wonder if it was really ever worth it in the first place. Here in Canada we have one that is miraculously still in business (although doesn't seem to really be producing anything lately) called True Line Trains. They once had a partnership with a bricks and mortar hobby store, which took a whole load of cash deposits on a caboose that TLT was going to produce, only to then close their doors and run off with all the money. TLT then had to produce the cabooses practically at a loss for those who had pre-ordered, but only did so begrudgingly after it didn't go down too well when they went around telling everyone "we don't require a deposit, we never received your money, so you still have to pay full price". Further down the line they started taking preorders for an SW1200RS that they'd made CAD files for... 5 years later and still no product, and then they got angry at Rapido who ended up producing their own SW1200RS because they thought that was "unethical"...! For my part in it, I told TLT that I thought they were being absurd and that Rapido had every right to produce a model that TLT were very clearly never going to get around to producing. Their response was along the lines of "but we invested a bunch of time and money in it"... okay, well then why did you stop? The answer is it usually all boils down to the people running the show. TLT were just as capable of producing a product as Rapido, the difference is when you have someone like Jason Shron at the helm, stuff gets done. Another classic case in point was Railflyer models, who produced some incredibly fine scale locomotive detailing components, probably some of the finest ever produced, but he also had the absolute worst attitude on the forums and at trade shows. His smug sense of superiority was just unbelievable and in the end he drove away all his customers. If it wasn't for that, he likely could've gone really, really far with his company. Many companies like his have ended up merging or partnering with the mainstream manufacturers to provide detailing parts for their new releases. That's essentially what happened with BLMA, an excellent detail part manufacturer, which got purchased by Atlas. A very similar company, but two very different people in charge.

A fair enough answer. I will backtrack through the thread to read your impressions on the rod drive version. My apologies, I was under the impression that they weren't included. In that case I will likely order a set or two as I've got quite a few sentinels planned.

They do but they don't have sandbox covers. If you gain seamless valances but lose sandbox covers, that feels like a net zero to me.

@Michael Edge have you ever considered doing a dress-up kit for the Hornby Sentinel? Valence overlays, pipe railings, side filler fuel tank, air compressor box and intake, behind-wheel brake linkage overlay, etc.?

Yes thank you for your "valuable" input to my "pointless thread". Maybe next time you can find something better to occupy your very valuable time.

I see the naysayers have stepped in to give their 2 cents. We could go back and forth forever about whether there's "demand" but I've always found it to be a rather pointless discussion. This is a growing hobby, and a great many naysayers have been forced to eat their words over the last decade with a lot of releases that many said would "never happen" because "there's no demand". To be frank, unless you're the head of Pew and have just conducted market research among railway modellers, I really don't care what your "opinion" is, and I doubt anyone else does either. We can also pluck figures like £150k out of thin air all day long and make silly claims that a company with a $146 million revenue would have qualms about "tying up" that amount in a production run. Let's put aside for a minute that a £150k production run of wagons with a paid off tooling would be a slightly implausible run of approx 5000 units. Even if you spent that much on one wagon and made a loss on it, that doesn't mean you're making a loss overall, there is such a thing as a "loss leader" which can generate profitable add-on sales elsewhere. There are for example many locos people won't buy without suitable wagons to go with them. Maybe the wagons aren't profitable, but selling more locos with a loss leading wagon will still give you a net profit provided the loss on the wagon isn't too large. Ultimately though, I don't care to get into these kinds of discussions with people who, to be brutally honest, clearly know nothing about the industry and are just making useless speculation. If you want to doom and gloom, maybe consider starting your own thread titled "stuff that people will never make". It will give us something to laugh at in another 10 years.

Well in terms of detail and quality, I'd say it's on a par with the offerings of Tangent and Athearn Genesis in the US. For a more complex freight car from either of the aforementioned, you can expect to pay $50 or more. At current exchange rates, that's £38. Add VAT to that and you're up around the £45 mark which seems to be the norm for high-end rolling stock. I think that's about what I paid for my PBA wagons from DJ Models, which I'd say are roughly on a par with the Polybulk in terms of complexity.

So you're the one behind "Albion Yard", finally we meet! I've taken a lot of inspiration from your blog over the years, especially "Wharfedale Road", so thank you. Just a quick question: Looking at your 08, I can see what appears to be Shawplan glazing, and etched siderods... am I right? If so, who makes the rods? Thanks, Scott.

They were definitely out before that, the 2001 catalogue refers to a "new version" with a single exhaust. As for how you wear one out, I seem to recall there was a "factory issue" with some early releases of Bachmann 08's that caused the motor to die prematurely. Bachmann were inviting people to submit warranty claims. Pissed a lot of people off though and you had the usual "rah rah the Lima one never had this issue rah rah". Gonna derail this thread somewhat, but some people on this site either aren't old enough to remember, or haven't been in the hobby long enough to know what it was like 20 years ago, Bachmann ARE the original "game changer". They're the only reason why any of the other manufacturers have now taken things seriously at all. When you asked their reps at trade stands back in the day why they don't produce detailed models like those on the continent they'd say "there's no market". It took Bachmann entering the scene to prove them wrong. Their 08 is the whole reason we have the Hornby 08, which is the definitive model of the most numerous locomotive ever to grace British rails. Amazingly, that wasn't a priority for anyone until Bachmann introduced theirs. Bachmann had several "game changer" releases, some recent: Class 08, 04, and 03 Class 24 and 25 Class 37 Class 40 "whistler" Class 43 "Warship" Class 44, 45, 46 "Peak" Class 57, leading to the 47 Class 66 Class 150 Class 158 Class 410 and 411 4BEP and 4CEP Many items on this list have encouraged other manufacturers to attempt a competing model of a higher standard, or to enter the market with a complimentary model. People forget that years ago, basically nobody made DMUs, you had to go to DC Kits for that, and you'd get LAUGHED OUT OF THE ROOM if you ever suggested a ready to run EMU! Now Bachmann are arguably the multiple unit kings, and once again we have Hornby stepping up to the plate with some fantastic SR EMUs. I agree that Bachmann's venerable 08 is a wonderful model and we owe Bachmann a belated thanks (although, they did get a lot of rave reviews from the hobby press back then).

The "high mileage 08" comment got me curious as to when Bachmann first introduced their 08, and I was able to find photos of the 1997 catalogue showing it listed... so they hit the scene 22 years ago! Funny, I don't remember seeing them until around the early 2000's.

Anyone in the UK show and press loop know if there are any plans to re-release these? Right now they're selling for 100 quid a piece on ebay. Keeping my eye out as I'm in need of one or two more. Seems there's demand but as usual with the UK no supply.

Hi Amanda, Great choice with the pre-nationalisation GWR terminus, you're basically going with hands down the most popular layout theme since... well... since nationalisation actually! So you'll be well catered for. There's LOTS of books, kits, models, etc. all themed around GWR, and specifically terminus layouts. GWR made most stations to a standard design, so a lot of the buildings are available in kits. I'm sure others will be able to recommend some good books to read on the subject. Regarding coal, the terminology in Britain is a coaling stage - GWR did have some larger ones and scalescenes make a kit, although they tended to use smaller stages like this one at their small rural terminus stations. There was no shortage of coal in Wales, as there were a lot of coal mines there, particularly for a type known as steam coal which is what the locomotives used. In terms of choice between 4mm and N, in my opinion the only good reason to choose N scale is if you want to fit a large scene into a small space. It's great for southern region EMUs that can have as many as 16 pickup axles per set. Apart from that, I don't think N scale is worth all the performance issues, and it isn't well suited to running small panniers and prairies. I found shunting in N to be a chore with all the issues the couplers gave. It's also a great time to be getting into 4mm scale, as Peco just recently announced a new EM gauge track product line, which as far as I know is actually the first time anything like that has been offered. If you'd like to go with 00, Peco have also just released their very nice bullhead product which you'll be pleased to know has it's turnout sleeper arrangement based on GWR standards. Personally, I think with 12 feet you have plenty of room to model a GWR terminus in 4mm scale AND have a fiddle yard without having to resort to an L shape.

Very good to know, many thanks. Javis is a name I haven't heard in a while, good to know they're still around.

The chain drive version is a good fit for P403D "Denise", although there were a few minor detail differences. It was fitted with railings instead of side panels, the brake gear was run behind the wheels rather than in front of them, it didn't have the air vents on the roof, and by the time it was in service with ECC it'd lost it's sentinel swords. In vacuum braked form it had a vac tank on the right hand side of the engine, in air braked form the vac tank was removed and it had an air compressor compartment added on the left hand side of the engine. The locomotive was delivered new to British Steel in 1960, who painted it orange, with yellow stepwells, black valances, and wasp striped buffer beams. ECC bought it in 1970, and they retained the British Steel paint scheme, although the shade of orange varied over the years from high-vis to ochre. P401D "Sharon" was an English Electric Vulcan Foundry 0-4-0. To the best of my knowledge, nobody has made a kit of this type yet. As far as I know, ECC only owned one other Sentinel, an 0-6-0 which they operated at one of their stone quarries outside of Cornwall. This was later divested to CAMAS.

This is looking really good. I like the blending you did on the sand ground cover, really ties in the colour with the ballast. The ballast is a really nice mix too, is that a mix you made yourself or one you bought? Props on the cement wagons too, those are nicely weathered. I'm thinking of doing a similar layout as a way to testbed some embedded track and scenery techniques. I'm leaning toward an esso oil terminal, using the sentinel painted in a faded red.

I assume you meant "mounting" not "mountain"! Yes I've thought about going that route too. There's an art and framing store a short walk from where I live that could probably supply the material. The only thing you'd have to be careful of is the thickness. Using fine sand to partly fill the gaps between the card and the rail you could hide the sleepers while leaving enough room for the flangeway. Then For points where you won't be able to use the sand trick, I think I'd be tempted to use the card to fill the gaps between the sleepers. I think I might just have to pop up to the model store to get some cheapo code 100 points and track to test this out.

It feels like a bit of a waste to bury such nice trackwork under concrete! But nonetheless I look forward to seeing how you tackle it. The real thing was done in two pours - the first pour established a base slab onto which the track was bolted, the second pour brought the concrete surface level with the railhead. The second pour was shuttered on both sides of each rail, and so far I've yet to see anyone model this detail. The idea was that the track could be removed and replaced since the bolts were still accessible. I think you could probably do it with a first pour to fill the gaps between the sleepers, and then glue some styrene angle section either side of the rail up against the chairs to act as a form for the second pour. If you wanted to be super realistic, use some fine sand to partially fill the gaps. In less travelled bits plants and grasses would grow in the sand, another detail perhaps. Another detail I never see on model clay works is hose pipes for hosing down the concrete after loading. The loading edge wall would have spigots and coiled up hoses hanging on hooks. You can see what I mean in this photo on the right hand side just below Elaine.

Just checked and there are a couple on ebay in the 40-50 quid range. Might be a good alternative if this one needs a lot more than just a motor to work.