Jump to content

Tree

Members
  • Content Count

    44
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6 Neutral
  1. Sounds a very interesting experiment - i will follow this with interest as I too would like my road transport to move in a meaningful way.
  2. Looks really cool - thought it was 4mm to begin with, until I read about the LT logos you need.
  3. According to http://www.brdatabase.info/locoqry.php?action=locodata&id=1881&type=D&loco=D1881 the loco was allocated to Thornaby from 1968 to 1971, then Tinsley for a year or so and then Immingham for a year and back to Thornaby, where it got its TOPS number
  4. If you fancied narrow gauge for a change, the Guaqui Railway in Bolivia is a fascinating prototype - trams and trains on the same tracks climbing steeply from La Paz.
  5. Judging by the lack of a D on the loco, it is just pre-TOPS. The line looks a secondary route, not a real main line, as it is still bullhead track. There is evidence of spoilheaps on the right. The train appears to be descending on a moderately steep gradient. Maybe it is a diverted Sunday working somewhere in the Sheffield/Leeds/Doncaster area?
  6. .........presumably a very quiet period, especially on the LNWR side where a set of steps has been placed one of the running lines, next to the platform face.
  7. I have an etched kit to finish in 4mm scale and was thinking about the best wheel standards to use. People generally recommend OO wheel standards due to the clearance problem - but at the expense of very wide gaps in the track for the flanges. I was wondering about using 2mm scale wheel standards, as their wheel treads are thinner than P4. You have to join the 2mm Scale Association though, which would be an expensive option for just one tram.
  8. I think you may find the warning is a general one, rather than specific to that particular model. I remember getting that same warning a few times a few years ago when they changed my trading status. The message had nothing specific to do with what I was selling at the time.
  9. Looking at the OP's original post he clearly has tried P4 and should (by now) have a reasonable appreciation of what advantages if any EM has to offer. maybe we should ask him to make a comment before plunging even deeper into the whirlpool?
  10. I believe the main line was transferred from open air to tunnel. There was also a narrow gauge rack railway. See photos at various places here and also a collection here.
  11. Tree

    Dapol FGW 153 "N"

    Mine arrived this morning and looks as good as in photos on the web. Well done Dapol! Hopefully the missing FGW MkIIIs for the HST won't be long. Now, all I need is for Farish to issue their 150 in FGW livery, which will probably never happen, unfortunately
  12. Tree

    Dapol FGW 153 "N"

    Sold out already at Hattons, by the looks of things..... glad I pre-ordered!
  13. Other examples of private locos on BR - or the other way around - include hiring BR locos out to other companies. At one extreme, BR inherited a 99 year contract to supply locos to a steelworks in North Derbyshire. Other locos could be given to BR and predecessors by manufacturers for trials in the hope that they might be interested in buying. Slightly off-topic, but some locos and railcars manufactured for foreign nations were run over BR tracks to test the design - even narrow gauge ones fitted with standard gauge bogies. There are a number of photos of this kind of thing.
  14. And trains ran on tramways too....... http://www.srpsmuseum.org.uk/10014.htm
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.