Rob Haigh

Couple of relevant posts over on "When the real thing looks like a model" earlier this month...

True!! Although I have a few favourite film franchises (The Railway Children isn't one of them) and as a collector I would rather have the livery applied in a way to approximate what I'm sure was how the movie studio had intended for it to look, rather than "accurately"* replicating the actual 'prop' they ended up with. But that's just me! And I expect this will be made in low enough numbers that they'll sell them all anyway. * I wasn't aware of the fact that the loco used was a Midland 3835 Class until someone else on here mentioned it this morning!

Yeah I think that's what they've gone for, I just thought it was odd that they'd produced a loco livery that immediately cuts out traditional modellers looking for another half-decent LMS-liveried 4F! I wouldn't like to speculate on what went on behind the scenes! Best avoided on here! Also just noticed this on the product page (https://uk.Hornby.com/products/lmsbr-class-4f-no-43924-railway-children-era-3-r30221):

I do think the livery application of the 'Railway Children Return' 4F is odd. Looks like they're recreating the temporary LMS 'stickers' that I'm guessing were only applied to the K&WVR's loco for the days of filming. Why not just make an accurate LMS livery without the look of the stickers? Also, both the Hornby and RMWeb site seem to have coped much better with the traffic this year!

Thanks! I did find one reference to the '5G' rating on the Wikipedia page for the S&DJR 2-8-0, but not much else.

I don't know the actual answer, but my guess is that it originated with the practice of painting a black box on ex-private owner wagons (that were still in there original worn out liveries) in very early BR days, since the original background colour could vary, before they started painting all ex-PO wagons BR grey. (Couldn't find a real-world example but this will do for now, not my photo): Secondly, if the number had gotten worn and hard to read, it was probably easier to slap some black paint over the top (since black paint could be found everywhere?)and reapply the white numbers. This would be clearer than just re-doing the white numbers on the worn wagonside, and easier/neater than finding the correct shade of grey?

Maybe more recently, referring to their communications equipment Joking aside, I've never heard of a railway using 2G (for Goods) etc, for power classifications. Which company was that?

Interesting question; I think the answer is indeed 'all of the above'! I often wonder about freight/goods, seeing as both terms have combined usage in the UK, e.g. a Fowler 4F employed on a local goods train (a Dean Goods on a mixed freight?), some more officially than others!

It also remained on some diesel shunters into the 1970s!..

Interestingly (to me anyway), it appears that Ford will be digitally 'de-aged' for this portion of the movie, as suggested by these more recent on-set photos. So these scenes may be set in the 1930s/1940s after all (probably a flashback in a movie mainly set much later): https://www.gamesradar.com/new-indiana-jones-5-set-photos-tease-de-aged-harrison-ford-and-a-new-cast-member/

Cool video, thanks for posting! I'm guessing these movies would be set in a complete alternate history now. Seeing as Harrison Ford is currently 78 years old, Indiana Jones would be a similar age in the 1970s, so possibly Nazism re-emerges in the 1970s in the movie universe (surely this movie isn't set during the 1930s/40s again given Ford's appearance). It's for that reason I don't think people should get too hung up on a BR Standard being painted up to portray an approximation of a WW2 German (or French?) loco! Who know what else goes on in this alternate history!

Hi there @B18 DUD, any update on this project? I am from Chesterfield so was curious how you'd got on since your last post!

Yep I'm sure they would. But one of the manufacturers in the examples above were fine with using an inaccurate body type or chassis, as very few match! If they can take liveries with the body/chassis type, why not with a running number which in my opinion would be more obvious when looking at a rake on a layout!

Yeah I understand that, and it is a good point. If so, I just thought it was interesting that they seem to generally feel limited to producing running numbers that they have photographic evidence for, but seem less bothered by using an inaccurate body/chassis for said prototype!

You might be missing the point of the question. If was more about why manufacturers don't use different running numbers ever time they produce a livery that has been produced before. It's absolutely reasonable for manufactures to look at competitors products and produce the same liveries, but why not choose a different running number each time?

Thanks for the interesting replies. A couple of good points from Phil: ...Yeah I can kind of see why manufacturers may want to play it safe by not modelling a number that they don't have photographic proof of. Especially when considering so many numbers may not have even existed... Overall though I'm still thinking it to be laziness or lack of research! Surely subtracting a few from the number on the last produced example in model form would please modellers as it would mean a little less renumbering?! But then again a large rake would need to be renumbered anyway if the modeller cared about such things,

This is on the borderline of being a 'general musing', so apologies if this is in the wrong area! Is anyone aware of the reason that manufactures often like to reuse the same running number for wagons? In many cases a single individual wagon has formed the basis for multiple models across manufacturers, sometimes after a gap of several years (or decades) too. With dozens or even hundreds of prototype wagons in an owner's fleet, why not pick a different number each time? With such different lettering it can't be a case of tooling being passed around. ...Is it just some sort of running joke?! A few examples below for fun:

Is it me or are they far fewer new private owner open wagon variations this year compared to previous years? I always look forward to the wagon section to keep an eye out for companies local to me and there doesn't seem to be many!

It will never be finished!! Looks fantastic by the way!

Thanks, these two didn't have screws into the body (the only screws under there were for the couplings) but trusting you on the other type I used a Stanley knife and they did pop out after a careful wiggle. I'm now left with disguising or removing the ugly weight in the hopper wagon; it's in the hopper itself rather than in the chassis like the Hornby version! [Edited to include photos for anyone else wondering the same thing]

Is there any easy way of removing the factory-fitted loads from Dapol wagons? I can't see any lugs, clips or screws on the underside of the wagon body. Are they clipped in internally? Are they glued in?! The types of wagons I'm referring are shown in the image below. Thanks!

Thanks both, very informative!

Apologies if this is a silly/basic question... Why were some mixed traffic locomotives in the BR steam era painted in lined black while others of the same class were unlined (e.g. Black 5s)? Was it just because certain works just didn't bother with the lining in general? Or most/all works stopped bothering after a certain time? Were certain locos more regularly used on one traffic duty (either freight or passenger) so painted accordingly? I've wondered for a time, and couldn't find any previous threads. Thanks!

Perfect, thanks 31A and knitpick, I was not aware of Bachmann's 36-025 or 36-026. Having had a quick Google/eBay of them I think they're the solution I was looking for for my example couplings 2, 3 and 4 (even if they might require some of the edging taking off for 2 and 4). I will order some 36-025 for now and see how they cope with the curves, although they are quite gentle. Thanks all!

Many thanks for the excellent and detailed replies, however my intention is not to just identify the types of coupling shown in the images as shown, nor to add NEM pockets to the stock that doesn't currently have them. What I'm trying to do is find easy to source narrow couplings that would fit each of the items above. For example, I know that coupling 1 is of the old Dapol/Airfix type, but I have identified that Hornby's R8099 couplings would be an option to fit this stock with narrow couplings (see image included with this post). I'm trying to find out what replacement narrow couplings would be accepted by 2, 3 and 4. P.S. The Johnster, I have also recently eliminated all plastic wheels from my current stock, also favouring Hornby's metal ones. The visual difference too is worth mentioning! Cheers, Rob