cctransuk

Always paint tins - I've never used the Phoenix Precision spray cans as they do not have the best reputation. From the tin - brushed or airbrushed - I always get an excellent finish over Halfords grey spray primer. Regards, John Isherwood.

Phil, This time - hand painted; though I have sprayed it in the past. BR(S) coach green - I invariably use Phoenix "B.R. (S) Coach Green" - it looks spot-on to me. Regards, John Isherwood.

Phil, Well - yes and no. I have just completed a BR-era West Country; (from an Airfix kit, Kemilway chassis amd Romford Terrier motor); and painted it with Precision BR Loco Green paint. Placed next to a Hornby 'Wilton', finished by Hornby in their Camouflage Green, the difference was intolerable. I have therefore applied several coats of Klear to 'Wilton', which has certainly improved matters - though no-one could pretend that they were the same colour when placed side-by-side; (or double-heading, as they did on the S&DJR). I just can't get my head round why Hornby insist on using this bilious shade of non-green. Regards, John Isherwood.

No - the rest of the loco should match the centre splasher !! What is it with Hornby? Is their livery paint specifier colour blind? If they can specify the correct colour for a tiny part of the model, why not do so for the rest? It beggars belief !! Regards, John Isherwood.

I use nothing else - in the form of the Peco R2 coupling; https://railsofsheffield.com/products/17602/peco-r-2-oo-gauge-peco-r-2-simplex-auto-coupler , and I have hundreds of items of rolling stock. Recently, I've been adapting them to fit in NEM pockets. Regards, John Isherwood.

Tony, Being out of step is a wise precaution when crossing some of the more dubiously engineered bridges, increasingly seen in the model press !! Regards, John Isherwood.

It is indeed - and it would not be difficult to re-hang the coupling, using a small pin in place of the melted-over lugs. Regards, John Isherwood.

Looks like a (mis)assembly error to me. Regards, John Isherwood.

Let's be honest; you're struggling here, aren't you? The Johnster posted "When Airfix introduced the 14xx, a big deal was being made of having daylight visible beneath the boiler in the correct places .....". Melmerby posted "What daylight? It has a solid chunk of mazak where the underboiler clearance should be"! You posted "That's the Dapol 'improved' re-engineered chassis. The Airfix original had 'daylight'". Now where in that exchange is there anything to suggest that by 'daylight' you actually meant solid mazak? It is clear that your memory let you down - why try to pretend otherwise? Regards, John Isherwood.

Kemilway chassis were, and are, really excellent - though I prefer to build them solid rather than equalised as designed. I currently have an Airfix West Country at the final stages of painting, which is fitted with a Kemilway chassis, Markits wheels and a Romford Terrier motor, and which runs beautifully. (It's an ancient model that formerly ran on a Tri-ang Princess chassis fitted with Tri-ang BoB wheels)! I have in stock, thanks to Ebay, a full Kemilway BR 3MT 2-6-2T kit, plus a chassis kit for the same to go under an old Tri-ang body that I detailed. Also on the 'to do' list are two Airfix and one GBL BR 4MT 2-6-0s, each to go on Kemilway chassis. I can recommend these chassis to anyone who comes across them, and they can often be picked up for a reasonable price. Regards, John Isherwood.

.... take some thinnish phosphor-bronze pick-up wire, and wind your own spring tightly around the brass pin on the motor. That's how I produce springs for holding down loco bogies, etc. I came upon the idea in the instructions for a Kemilway chassis; ( for the Kitmaster - Airfix - Dapol BoB / West Country plastic kit). The chassis kit included a length of PB wire with which to form the front bogie spring. Regards, John Isherwood.

Firstly, if you have a problem such as dyslexia, ignore the following and accept my apologies. ..... otherwise, either type slower or check what you've typed; and don't forget capital letters, punctuation, etc. That way, we may well be able to understand your postings. Regards, John Isherwood.

That tends to suggest that all concerned should devote rather more time to reading RMweb - none of us regulars could possibly be unaware of the Coopercraft 'issue' !! .... you haven't anything upcoming that might mention Falcon Brassworks by any chance ?!? Regards, John Isherwood.

Warm / hotish water with a drop - literally - of washing up liquid does it for me. If you want to neutralise flux at the same time, add a couple or three caustic soda crystals - as used for drain cleaning. Regards, John Isherwood.

It would appear that the supposedly optimistic advocates of KR Models are surprisingly nervous that any form of negative, or even ambivalent comment could derail this project. If this proposal was being promoted in an open and transparent manner, there would be no opportunity for some of us to be cynical - and we might even be motivated to place orders. Just my two penn'orth, John Isherwood.

... but I only count eight vehicles including the BG. Regards, John Isherwood.

Tony, I like to think that I use English reasonably correctly - I DID get a Grade 1 in 'Use of English', after all. Nonetheless, I will happily admit that I too have been, for some seventy years, under a misapprehension as to the true meaning of 'plethora'. I shall henceforth refrain from its use when referring to a quantity or condition better described as an 'abundance'. Thank you for educating my aging brain - you can teach an old dog new tricks! Regards, John Isherwood.

It's supposed to suppress radio signal emmissions, and thereby avoid interfering with radio and television signals. The capacitior, IMHO, serves no useful purpose in this day and age, and I always remove them. Wire it one rail to one motor terminal, and the other to the other terminal; simples !! Regards, John Isherwood.

Have you got an accurate drawing of the Manor chassis? Where should the axle centres be? How high above the axle centres should the top of the frames be? Get these dimension correct - making allowance for the thickness of the running plate if necessary - and everything else should follow OK. That said, Comet chassis are usually pretty accurate, in my experience; just be aware that they are designed to go under a thickish RTR plastic body, rather than a thin sheet metal one. Regards, John Isherwood.

One tiny detail for future reference - the overhead live wire plaque should not have black lettering - they were entirely red on white. Regards, John Isherwood.

Whooo-hooo !! Someone else can see what I see !! It is abundantly clear that there is very little difference between the thickness of the buffer base and that of the bufferbeam. So, both models are wrong. Regards, John Isherwood.

Are you both talking about the same object? In the photo in question, I see an open-framed handbrake(?) pillar with a somewhat simplified(?) S-shaped handle; to the right of which is a light-coloured object protruding from inside the enclosed body. I'm guessing that the latter is the piece of coffee-stirrer, and that the handbrake(?) pillar is possibly missing from Coline33's model - if he has one? On the other hand, I may be trolling a complete red herring !! Regards, John Isherwood.

I have no vested interest in this discussion - I will not be buying either version as there can be no possible reason for running one through Evercreech Junction in 1961 !! (Though that begs the question as to why I have bought RTR models or kits for 43 out of the 91 locos in my collection)! I read the thread out of general interest, and cannot pass over statements which do not seem to be supported by fact. At least the square-on cab spectacle plate photo seems to have produced a concensus on the issue of the spectacle spacing. Regards, John Isherwood.

Regards, John Isherwood.

Hornby - and I'll explain my reason. On the LH (Dapol) view, the red ends flush with the face of the bufferbeam, with pretty much all of the buffer base and bufferbeam projection painted black.. On the RH (Hornby) view the red also ends flush with the bufferbeam, and the thickness of the buffer base is roughly that which should comprise both buffer base and bufferbeam projection. To achieve the correct impression of a thinner buffer base and a black bufferbeam extension, it would be quite simple to recess the buffers into the bufferbeam, and paint the rear half of the buffer base black to represent the bufferbeam extension. However, as the Dapol buffers do not have sufficient forward projection of their bases in front of the bufferbeam, correction would be far from simple. Don't overlook the fact that both versions appear to have little or no projection of the footplate, into which the buffer bases should be recessed. Regards, John Isherwood.