7 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

 

Tony,

 

I have to agree with Mick with regard to the cost of a chassis ....... However, I don't think that the Bach / Rep, whatever body is that awful, with a bit of work it can be made better than the Hornby one. Replace the dome, chimney and smokebox door and it is instantly propelled ahead of the Hornby body.

 

You will be hard pressed to find a B1 with the Bach / Rep smokebox door, 1022 had the rather elegant LNER standard door, with its graceful curvature and generous diameter. The closest to the Bach thing is probably the flat faced type fitted to the preserved B1 1264. However, this type was flush riveted and had a very prominent flange to the edge of the door.

 

I find it a shame that you don't have the same love for your B1's as your A2/2's, the latter get much more attention as individual locomotives. It would seem that some layout locomotives are a little more equal than others.

Good morning Andrew,

Love of A2/2s?

You mean as models? 

I think the big modelling point with regard to the difference between Thompson's only really successful design (yes, the O1 was OK as well) and the unloved and pretty hopeless rebuilds of the P2s is that they have to be made completely. There are the Graeme King conversions of a Bachmann A2, but you're still stuck with the same (if much better than the split-chassis B1) mechanism. Thus, because everything has to be made, then (in my view) one might as well get it 'right' at source rather than accept a compromise (or two). 

I have made B1s as well.

Here's a Nu-Cast one running on Stoke Summit. A better dome? It's on a Comet set of frames with the original too-short eccentric rod (don't believe Roche drawings!).

It now runs on LB (apologies for the over-scale lamp). Its smokebox door is the one provided by Nu-Cast, and it's probably the rarest type, with close-together hingestraps and numberplate above the top one. It's right for Retford's 61208, though. 

This type of 'door.

This is the earlier NER-style 'door. Bachmann's would appear a cross between this and the next one?

And the most-common? Unusually, the BR device is the small one. Extremely rare on B1 tenders.

This one most-nearly looks like Hornby's B1 door.

Please observe copyright restrictions on the prototype images.

With regard to which RTR B1 is better, here is a picture of both of them, the Bachmann one at the top. This one has the much-improved chassis.

Just look at both sets of bogie wheels! Ugh! 

Regards,

Tony. 

5 minutes ago, davidw said:

Tony, am I correct in thinking that portholes and possibly other Ex LMS coaches found their way into ECML trains as strengtheners?

They did, David,

And not just as strengtheners. On occasions (even behind Deltics) complete ECML rakes were formed of LMS-designed carriages. 

I might have shown these images before (copyright restrictions apply, please), but they answer your question. I have some more, which I'll try and find.....................

Great to see you at Bristol, by the way.

Regards,

Tony. 

18 hours ago, 31A said:

 

Quite agree; here's one I made earlier:

 

 

Although the 4 wheeled brake is from a Chivers plastic kit.

This is splendid work, Steve,

Thanks for posting.

Isinglass also makes an LNER milk van kit.

There's something about sheet brass models which makes the completed things look very attractive in my opinion. In fact, several commentators at shows (often women) I attend with models in this condition think it's a 'shame' to paint them. 

Regards,

Tony.

I have been a fan of the LNER Coronation for as long as I can remember (and at my age that is a long time). I have watched various topics on RMWeb where people have attempted to build either the Mailcoach kits or etched equivalents.

During a recent clear out prior to house alterations I found some Mailcoach Coronation kits and felt in the mood to give them a go. In spite of several attempts to search various sites for peoples experiences in finishing these kits I was surprised to find very little. I had a few ideas in my mind that I wanted to try out so the contents of a Mailcoach MC10 LNER Coronation Brake 3rd/Kitchen 3rd were laid out for inspection. The kits are clearly based on the Isinglass drawings however studying the prototype in as much detail as possible it was clear that some aspects of the Isinglass drawings were misinterpreted.

I decided that it would be easier to paint and line the sides before they were assembled into complete vehicles.

A small block had some fine wet and dry glued to one face and the various raised beading was filed smooth to remove the machine marks from the moulding. The end vertical beading line on the model is in reality a rebate and this was carefully filed down. All handles, hinges and handrails were also removed and filed smooth:

A piece of Frisk masking film was fixed to the inner face of the side, then the windows cut around 1mm too large and the remaining parts of the film removed. I apologise for trying to photograph transparent sides with the transparent masking film in place:

A piece of masking film was then added to the front face and the windows cut out along the panel lines then the waste removed:

Both inner and outer faces were then sprayed with Halford's matt black followed up with grey primer:

A homemade mix of Vallejo acrylics were then mixed up (more later) and the upper Marlborough Blue sprayed on the outer sides (I have subsequently removed the outer masking film as I was impatient to see how it had turned out):

The inner face uppers were brush painted in Vallejo Buff (120) then a day later the sides were masked ready to paint the lower colour:

Here the lower panels have been brush painted with Vallejo Black Green (100) and the masking removed when dry:

For the outer face a new piece of masking film was applied over the upper Marlborough Blue panels and trimmed along the horizontal trim strip then the homemade Garter Blue sprayed on the lower panels:

So far so good.

1 hour ago, thegreenhowards said:

This is my latest project - a Becs J17 rescued from Ebay. I paid £46 and it was described as 'not very well built 30 years ago' and incomplete, so I wasn't expecting much. But what is there seems well built and the chassis was well put together - square and free running. It was let down by pick ups and the X04 motor and didn't show any sign of life. So, I spent yesterday morning ripping out the pick ups (which had been built at right angles to fit round the springs behind the wheels) and replacing with nickel silver wire. I cut off the springs behind the wheels on the insulated side to make a good run for the wire (as 'Sir' taught me). After this it worked a little, but the X04 was very noisy and got hot quickly. So that was ditched for an ECM motor/ gearbox combo out of my spares box, and it now runs very sweetly.

 

I have a couple of questions for the LNER cognoscenti:

1. The chassis looks purpose built for the kit and the wheelbase matches the splashers on the kit body, but the wheelbase is too short for the prototype - 7'9+8'3 instead of 8'10+8'10 on the prototype. Does anyone know why this might be?

2. I'm sure I've seen a picture of one of these on a freight somewhere between Hitchin and Hornsey on the ECML. I'd like to model that engine, but can't for the life of me remember where I saw the photo. Can anyone remember such a photo?

 

Andy

As Jonathan has said, Andy,

The BEC J17 body was designed around an original Tri-ang Jinty chassis - as was the same firm's J11 and several contemporaneous Wills' 0-6-0s. Actually, I've never asked the question - was the Tri-ang Jinty chassis right for a Jinty? 

Beware the cab spectacles. I can't see from your pictures, but the original BEC ones followed the radius of the cab roof at their tops. They should  be semi-horizontal at their tops. 

Like these.....................

I suppose this is a 'standard' J17 (with holes drilled in the buffer beam to take a snowplough?).

This one has a tender cab for working on branch lines with no means of turning the loco at the terminus. 

This one has a small tender. And a screw shackle, even though it's not vacuum-braked. Not only that, the conduit to its clack (at least on this side) is not joggled as normal. Ah, those joys of 'loco-picking'.

This one has a small tender as well; and its cabside numbers appear to have been applied by a very short painter! 

The coupling rods are really massive. Those on your chassis look a bit 'thin'.

I hope these are of use but (all) please observe copyright restrictions. 

Regards,

Tony. 

After having chance to look at the model today I would say it's superb apart from a couple of minor niggles ( I won't comment on body being right etc as I don't know if it's right or not)

1st there s no instructions for mounting the headcodes discs or buffer detail. Not a great problem if u have access to pics I suppose but could catch 1 or 2 out e.g. disc folding to the side not up like a cl20.

Also disappointed that there 7 open and only  3 closed discs. Ok not a problem if u have a spares box, or feel comfortable cutting a full 1 in half I suppose. Also that the closed discs are painted white not yellow or green as per body colour surely it wouldn't of cost a huge Amount to supply 8 closed discs (either all green or 2 green,6 yellow depending) that way u won't have to try matching the factory colour. 

The supplyed hook for the 3 link seem a tad to big and fouls on the bottom of the cab front which would make things a bit difficult in real life. (Again having a spares box comes in handy)

While there is a fine mesh scavenger fan grill there's no (on mine anyway) fan under it and u can see the wires for the lights through it. Now of course I don't know if this is just missing on mine or an ommision in general as I take it the speaker would sit on chassis under the grill. So perhaps some one could comment if theirs has 1.

Thank you Dapol for finally producing this class and can't wait for the 29s to follow.

7 hours ago, gr.king said:

Busy as ever Jamie?

 

On the topic of Darlington designed K3 cabs, prior to the final group-standard version with long sides and flat topped windows, do we need to be careful?

 

My impression is that there were three variants of that NE inspired sub-family of cab:

1. Original, purely NE type with low side windows and hand rail above.

2.. Windows raised about 3" to try to address complaints from crews (especially outside of the NE area) of windows being too low down, this type still with handrails above windows.

3. Cab windows raised about 6" in response to continuing complaints, leaving no room for hand rails above.

 

The remaining three types were the original GN wrap-over type, the short-lived A1/A3 style on a small batch of K3s (the cut out around the driver's shoulder causing complaints of cold draughts from those not accustomed to "rather basic" GN cabs) and the eventual group-standard type with straight rear edge (and longer sides enclosing nothing but an extra 5" of firebox).

Thanks Graeme,

We certainly do need to be careful (and I wasn't careful enough). 

Looking again at the cab on Dennis' Anchorage K3 it looks to be the one attached to Nos. 135 to 231 as built. I'm taking this information from page 101 of Part 6A of the RCTS green series, where six different drawings of K3 cabs are shown. It would seem to me that by just filling in the top holes for handrails, a BR period K3 could be represented (if one can live with the 2mm!). It could well be that Tony Geary did this (unless Anchorage produced other cabs). 

Certainly, by later-LNER/BR days there were just two K3 cabs. the 'earlier' style side-window cab, with rounded-topped (ecclesiastical?) windows (drawing D in the green book representing Nos. 17-231 from 1930) and the 1300 Series onwards, from 1930, with square-topped windows (rounded corners; drawing F in the green book). This latter, longer, cab is the type produced by Bachmann. 

A few examples.........

The first one. It would seem that those K3s built with the original GN-style cab received later-style side-window ones. GN buffers, right-hand drive and stepped-out GS tender. 

Identical to 61800. Would anyone model a dent in the boiler cladding like this? Some earlier-build K3s later received left-hand drive. 

Abandoned at Retford in 1961. Group standard buffers and GN tender. Diagonal strip still in place on spectacles in earlier-style side-window cab. 

This is the one (below) I based the model I made on. 

Another (identical) K3 with GN tender.

RH drive, earlier-style cab (with no diagonal strip in the spectacles), straight-sided tender.

The same, but with stepped-out tender.

Later series with longer cab and LH drive. 

The same as the previous one.

One of my SE Finecast K3 models. Earlier-style cab, RH drive, flush-sided tender. 

Another of my SE Finecast K3s (a rebuild after acquiring the model from a friend). Later-style, longer cab (and I should have removed the diagonal spectacle strip - ah, those joys of loco-picking!), LH drive and flush-sided (original Wills) tender. 

Please, all, observe copyright restrictions. 

Regards,

Tony. 

1 hour ago, ScRSG said:

Tony,

From your knowledge of the A4 tenders could you please list those with the extra strip on the tanks and any suggestions you may have as to modelling this?

Ta

Chas

With pleasure, Chas,

Remember, some A4s did exchange tenders, but here's the BR list of all those A4s which (at one time or another) towed a tender with the extra strip at the base of the tank..............

60001

60002; both 60001 and 60002 had streamlined non-corridor tenders with this feature.

60003 (possibly, with a corridor tender)

60006; with a corridor tender

60008; with a corridor tender

60009 (but not with every corridor tender she towed; maybe never)

60010

60011

60012

60013; with a corridor tender

60021 (but only when she towed a 1935 streamlined corridor tender)

60022 (but only when she towed a 1935 streamlined corridor tender)

60024 (only up until the last months of her life, when she then lost her corridor tender with the feature)

60026; with a corridor tender

60027

60031

I think this list is right (if my memory serves). Anyone finding mistakes, please advise.

It's a feature which is so-rarely modelled on A4s, and I think it deserves highlighting. 

How do I represent it? by using 1.5 mm brass strip, soldered to the base of the tender's soleplate. I suppose for (lightweight) plastic tenders, Plastikard strip of appropriate size would do, glued on.  

Perhaps the following pictures might help....................

It's easy to see the strip on a streamlined non-corridor tender.

And easy to see when it's not.

It's more difficult to detect the strip on a corridor tender of full width. The easiest way to tell is that the base of the strip lines up with the base of the loco's valance. Like here.

And here.

No strip here, and the base of the valance is lower than the soleplate on the tender.

The same here. The ends of the triangular outriggers supporting the tank are also visible. The strip covers these up. 

All of these above require the 'eye of faith', but I hope the detail is apparent.

How do I know all this? Do you think I have some sort of condition? 

Please (all) observe copyright restrictions on these images.

Regards,

Tony. 

1 hour ago, thegreenhowards said:

Thanks Tony,

 

I always know I’m going to get some homework when I post on here! In fact that’s one of the benefits for an unobservant modeller like myself. Once you point these things out it’s obvious, but frustratingly I don’t see them for myself.

 

The Cartazzi frames were easy to fix. Although you would have had a triumphant ‘told you so’ moment when one of them came off in my hand because the glue failed! It’s now soldered back on.

 

 I find the whole valve gear business very confusing with lots of names which I have to look up so please excuse my ignorance and can I check that I understand your comments? The union link was loose on both sides and is held in with a tiny bolt. Is that supposed to be done up so tightly that it can’t move?

 

As for the return crank, is that the small rod which connects the main pin on the centre driver to the eccentric rod (Wikipedia call it the eccentric crank)? If so, am I right to assume that when the main coupling rod is top dead centre, the return crank should point at c. 5’o'clock as in the picture below? And on the opposite side it should point to c. 7’o’clock?

 

Thanks

 

Andy

Good morning Greenie,

I think Tony means the drop link where it is attached to the  crosshead, it seems to be pivoting back and forth. I would also have a look at the mechanical lubricator, I think the A1's, even the superb roller bearing locomotives, had a larger two gallon capacity type that was taller than that on the model.

With regard to the return crank, you have identified it correctly, It is easier to set up with the coupling rod at the bottom dead centre for both sides. The return crank then leans forwards from the twelve O clock position on most locomotives.

P.s. I've been watching the videos of your train formations in motion, they are most entertaining.

7 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

@Michael Edge of this parish was going to model it but decided (I think) that as it was in a cutting with an overall roof it wouldn't look very exciting and might be awkward to operate. He has of course modelled Brunswick shed and Herculaneum Dock instead.

 

Edit: see @Barry O's post above:

 

 

Not quite right John, Central was the original idea (my earliest plan was drawn up when I was still at school) and Herculaneum dock was its planned extension. It wouldn't be difficult to operate so much as impossible for anyone to see if it was exhibited, it would be very interesting to operate. Some suggestions in this thread have left me thinking again now though - I hadn't thought of the idea of looking into the side of the train shed although that was the proposal for the Mersey Railway station below platform 1 and 2.

Following Tony's reminiscences above I realised that I used the same route in the other direction on trainspotting trips - Eccleston Park to Lime street, walk to Central, underground to Rock Ferry and train to Chester. We used to go on to Crewe then and preferred this to the rather more direct route from Lime Street. We used a similar route to get to Manchester as well, via the CLC and Manchester Central - rather than just walking a bit further to Rainhill and a direct train to Exchange, no idea now why we didn't use the obvious routes but this was back in the 1950s.

This might help

http://homepages.enterprise.net/iainlogan/modelrail/free.html

Alan

49 minutes ago, rowanj said:

My latest model is this LRM N8, a pleasure to build. I'm posting it here, largely in the context of Tony's build of the Isinglass Pigeon Van, and because of the extensive knowledge base of the thread's followers. If I understand correctly, Isinglass will produce a 3D model from drawings on their list, which includes a fair selection of ex-NER non-corridor coaches. I need to know which, if any, diagrams survived into the 1950's, so my locos wont be forever towing Hornby Gresley and Thompson stock- or at least not exclusively. Any help gratefully received - by PM if Tony would rather not clog up the thread on this issue,

John

 

John,

Being a GN area modeller, I have a very limited knowledge on this subject, but do have some information on the use of ex NER stock on the GN. I know that some of the NER Lavatory third stock was cascaded to the GN for use on King’s Cross outer suburban workings (amongst others?). There is a good picture in ‘Power of the B1s’  of 61121 heading a six coach train in 1949 of which the leading two coaches are ex NER - a BTL and a TL of diagrams NE.113 and NE.111 respectively. This information comes from a Steve Banks article in Model Rail Oct 2005 in which he shows several pictures but mainly pre-nationalisation.

 I also believe that a NER non corridor third was used in the Ally Pally push pull set into the ‘50s, but I can’t find the reference material for that, so I can’t be 100% sure. 

Sadly Isinglass don’t list these diagrams, so I guess I have to wait for the D&S kit to be re-released!

I’d be very interested in the answers to your question and I’m sure Tony would welcome that sort of discussion, so please keep any responses on the forum.

Andy

1 hour ago, thegreenhowards said:

I have been having a ‘finish off projects’ session. This Wills A4 was started a couple of years ago and I gave up in frustration a couple of times because the fit of the parts was so poor. But after a lot of filing and filling with solder, it’s as good as it’s going to be.  I’ll have to replace some rivet detail with decals during painting.

It had no chassis, so I’ve mounted it on a Hornby example. It’s a long way short of a Hornby version in detail (and shape?), but it’s heavy and will pull very well - 24 RTR mk 1s with no problem.

 

Tony, I have a couple of questions for you:

1. I want to model Seagull, partly to pull the Elizabethan (which is a heavy rake). My rake is the 1957 formation and you’ve previously queried my use of ‘13’ on the basis it didn’t haul the ‘Lizzie that year. Did ‘33’ make many appearances?

2. I know Seagull had a cut down tender. I’m trying to work out exactly what I have to do to model that. Is it just removing the metal on the rear of the tender which I’ve coloured black in the shot below? And then reinstating the beading. The Wills tender seems to have rather high sides which will make blending in the cut out part challenging. Do you have a solution for that problem?

 

Regards

 

Andy

What I'll do, Andy, is take some pictures tomorrow of the cut-down tender I've done for my LORD FARINGDON. That might help. 

What you'll also have to do is remove the flange from the base of the tender tank, both sides. The corridor tenders (being at least nine inches wider) had no flange. It was feature only found on the non-corridor tenders. The Wills A4 tender was designed from the Roche drawing. Oops! 

The A4s used on the 'Lizzie' in 1957 were 60015 (ten trips), 60017 (14 trips), 60022 (50 trips) and 60025 (eight trips, with a single chimney), all from Kings Cross, and 60009 (four trips), 60012 (78 trips!) and 60027 (four trips), all with single chimneys and from Haymarket. Source; What's on the 'Lizzie'. Your problem is that out of all those A4s only one towed a 1928 corridor tender at the time - FALCON, and she had a single chimney! 

Regards,

Tony. 

12 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I don't think both rakes are exactly the same, though the service probably is.

 

Don't be deceived into believing the extra doors have not been added. They were probably on the opposite side, and just in one of the cars. Otherwise too much space was lost for dining. 

 

I'm not even sure if all the ex-Streamliners got the extra doors. The Silver Jubilee cars don't seem to have them. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

So far as I can establish, and with reference to the amended diagrams that (if I recall correctly) Clive sent me, none of the Silver Jubilee ones were altered but all of the others were, except the two twins destroyed in the Huntingdon fire, which is what led to the alterations.

The Twin-FOs had the doors on one side of each vehicle such that the doors were on opposite sides of the train. Viewed from the outside, the additional door was visible on the right-hand vehicle. Each vehicle thereby lost two seats.

The BTO-TO twins and the RT-TO twins each had the extra door on one side of the TO (the side with the single seats, thereby losing two seats). The TO vehicles were laid out opposite ways round in terms of which side had the single seats so that on the BTO-TO twin with the brake to the left when viewed from the outside, there was no additional door visible, as shown in the photo of E1727/8E in LNER Carriages (Harris) page 70. Harris is incorrect in stating that this twin was not modified - he was looking at the wrong side.

On the RT-TO twin with the RT on the left viewed from the outside, there was an extra door visible on the TO.

On the BTO-RT twin, the extra door was on the BTO on the side with the single seats only, so with the RT to the left and BTO to the right when viewed from the outside, you could see the extra door on the BTO.
 

3 hours ago, robertcwp said:

So far as I can establish, and with reference to the amended diagrams that (if I recall correctly) Clive sent me, none of the Silver Jubilee ones were altered but all of the others were, except the two twins destroyed in the Huntingdon fire, which is what led to the alterations.

 

The Twin-FOs had the doors on one side of each vehicle such that the doors were on opposite sides of the train. Viewed from the outside, the additional door was visible on the right-hand vehicle. Each vehicle thereby lost two seats.

The BTO-TO twins and the RT-TO twins each had the extra door on one side of the TO (the side with the single seats, thereby losing two seats). The TO vehicles were laid out opposite ways round in terms of which side had the single seats so that on the BTO-TO twin with the brake to the left when viewed from the outside, there was no additional door visible, as shown in the photo of E1727/8E in LNER Carriages (Harris) page 70. Harris is incorrect in stating that this twin was not modified - he was looking at the wrong side.

On the RT-TO twin with the RT on the left viewed from the outside, there was an extra door visible on the TO.

On the BTO-RT twin, the extra door was on the BTO on the side with the single seats only, so with the RT to the left and BTO to the right when viewed from the outside, you could see the extra door on the BTO.
 

Hi Robert and all

The diagrams.

Twin open first.

Twin Open Brake Third

Twin Restaurant Brake Third

Twin Restaurant open Third.

I hope these are of some use. Well worth the couple of bob each from Collectors Corner back in the 80s.

4 hours ago, stewartingram said:

Do we know when 60502 gained a lipped chimney? I wish to change my 60501 to 60502 in late life, and Hornby have it as a stovepipe.

 

Stewart

Good afternoon Stewart,

In The Power of the A2s, Gavin Morrison, OPC, on page 27 there are pictures of 60502. On the 5th of September 1953 she still had a rimmed chimney, but by 'c1955', in the next picture, it's lipped. The numberplate is still above the crossrail, though. So, 1954/1955 for the chimney switch? 

The numberplate was still high up as late as 1957, but by by 1959 it was on the top hingestrap. In 1957, she still had the early BR totem, but by 1959 she had the device (The Book of the A1s and A2s, Peter Coater, Irwell Press, pages 148 and 149. 

Regards,

Tony. 

Regards,

Tony. 

The Isinglass Drawings for these coach sets contain all the information you need.  Here are some notes I made:

Hi, great to follow your progress.  I've sort of stalled with my layout of Mallaig.  But thought I'd share these with you - I made my curved platform from 2 layers of XPS insulation board - 10mm and 6mm.  They are light and easy to cut to curves, for example.  The top layer I cut a chamfered edge to it to try and simulate the platform faces on the West Highland.  I actually made these before my first ever visit to Mallaig last year, and maybe could have done better.  But they are ok for my standards.  I've used bought card pavings for the edge, and I plan to fill the gap for the platform surface with Woodland Scenics snow, which is easy to smooth and level.

The station laps are the closest I could find to the 1970s version, cheap LED models from ebay, painted in appropriate colour.

And the oil depot is a mixture of Knightwing and scratch built.  The large tanks are plastic drain pipe, with plasticard top, all painted silver, awaiting weathering.  Well, everything on the layout is awaiting something or other!

My plan for the station was to have a removable roof, and retaining wall in 3 sections to represent with roof, without roof, and current day.  I may have been a bit optimistic, and that has stalled too! 

I was too late to see the Interfrigo wagons in use on the Mallaig line, but I did photograph them when they were stored in Mallaig Junction Yard, Fort William, in September 1987.

David

16 hours ago, Portchullin Tatty said:

 

The maroon observation cars were something I had not known much about.  I am familiar with the old beavertails and the converted DMU end cars, but what are these.  I am only looking at them on a small screen but are they (or at least one of them) a converted Thompson?

 

Information gleaned from my favourite book, Tom Noble's 'The West Highland Extension In BR Days' (OPC.)

LOCHABER : 

ex.LNER saloon DE 902260 designed by Thompson, built 1945. Single ended, random seating for up to 30 passengers. Named at Fort William 6/6/80 numbered Sc1999. Appeared on the Mallaig line for the 1980 and '81 seasons in Blue / grey livery (this included the ends, ie no yellow), photo p.30, was in LNER 'beech brown' by the 1983 season.

LOCHEIL :

ex.LNER DE 900580 used by the Eastern Region as the Chief Engineer saloon for many years, built 1936. Double ended (with lower end panels also glazed) and named at Glasgow QS on 27/5/83, also in LNER 'beech brown' in 1983. Numbered Sc1998, photos p.64.

A London Midland Region saloon was used for the 1984 season.

I'm sure that there is more information out there regarding the two LNER saloons, I've seen film about them somewhere, either on You Tube or on a DVD in my collection ...I'll check when I get chance.

Regards,

Ian.

24 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning Brian,

 

Speaking with Sandra Orpen yesterday (Retford's now owner), the plan is to shoot another video before too long. 

 

Amazed at the vast expanse of baseboards? Indeed!

 

The following shots show Retford as you must have seen it at Watford..........

 

 

 

 

 

Not long after it was installed in its home, complete with the great man looking on.

 

Much work then progressed...........

 

 

 

Until..................

 

 

By 2015, scenery was appearing and the fiddle yards were expanding.

 

And, by 2019/20...........

 

 

 

 

I was able to get shots like this. .................

 

Realising Roy Jackson's vision, now under the stewardship of Sandra, the highly-skilled team is now working to complete this masterpiece. I consider it an immense privilege to have been able to take photographs throughout..............

 

Years ago, in print, I stated that Retford had the potential to be the greatest model railway ever made. I see no reason to change that view, especially as it begins to approach that potential.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's moved on since Tony's 2020 photos too. Engines now have lamps - although I noticed that the K2's lamp had fallen off - and the named trains have headboards. Most passenger trains have carriage boards too. The fleet has moved on a lot, with new motive power and various gaps in the stock plugged, although there is always work to do. Buildings, signals and other details are moving on and the broken ground signal in one of the photos has been replaced - I found the broken off bit in a wagon! The Elizabethan might soon have an A4 more typical for 1957 than Merlin, which did not receive a double chimney until after the 1957 summer, good though Roy's one is.

Incidentally, the 1957 Elizabethan A4s, with number of workings, were:

Source: 'What's on the Lizzie?' by John Aylard, Tommy Knox and David Percival.