Jump to content

Ventnor

Members
  • Content Count

    67
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ventnor

  1. Thanks Oliver Will you also include black handrails on the SOUTHERN wartime black version? Kind regards Andy.
  2. Totally agree about the handrails on the black versions. Kind regards Andy.
  3. Also; the ejector pipe is on a diagonal from the smokebox to the cab, it should lie flat along the boiler until it "dog legs" up if it is to reflect the prototype. It could be twisted back into position maybe? It might be worth asking Rails if they'd replace it given the number of potential issues with this particular model. It could also be left as is of course, sorry to flag it up. Purchased Rails model: Prototype 32655: Kind regards Andy.
  4. Good morning I believe that Graham may not have been aware that Hornby have already retooled the front guard irons and tank top recess on their model (recess doesn't seem as obvious as the Rails model though). This has been discussed in the Hornby Terrier thread. The retooling is evident on the latest models of A1 "Leadenhall" and A1X No.10 "Cowes" so I don't think there's any further retooling to come. Graham's mention of the Rails model having firebox flicker in his review has already been highlighted in another post. I will admit myself, it is quite difficult at times keeping up with manufacturers developments, updated information and related or relavent information contained in other threads / subjects. It all moves so fast even with COVID-19 restrictions in place!! Kind regards Andy.
  5. Good morning everyone I think Graham's review is honest, ballanced and objective, certainly when compared to some YouTube reviews that are either almost hostile or ignore any shortcomings completely. If you read this, thanks Graham. Kind regards Andy.
  6. Pete Again, happy to help. Until the advent of COVID-19 we had planned a 5 week holiday to the UK in mid-June this year. My parents retired from London to Paignton so it was to be a stay in London to see the sights and museums (for the kids), some time spent in Paignton as a base to explore Devon and a week staying in Padstow as a base to explore North Cornwall. Return was via Bath and London again. we seem to have been able to re-book similar dates next year but pardon the pun; flights are still up in the air!! We've also still lost a bit of money on deposits etc. Anyway; thanks for the offer re: the IoW, unfortunately we won't make it this trip (next year). If I happen to come across photos of the other ex-PP fitted 02s with doors I'll let you know but won't go looking for them; saying that I'm now curious myself!! As you're no doubt aware, mainland 02s and withdrawn G6s were cannibalised to keep the Island 02s serviceable. I seem to recall, I think in one of the Oakwood Press histories on the Island lines, that no new boilers, fireboxes, frames or cylinders had been made for the 02 class since 1936 (or some 1930s date anyway). If true, Just goes to show what efforts went into keeping the Island locomotives going that lasted into 1966 and the two that lasted into '67. Again, fascinating!! Happy modelling!! Andy.
  7. Thanks Ian, I’ll get some vac pipes for my dual fitted locos on order. Cheers Andy.
  8. Pete Glad to hear I was of help. Like you I am more comfortable with the Island O2s, you may of noticed my “avatar” name, not just a location but locomotive!! Don’t know why it’s a favourite. Always had a love of the Island lines since my first visit in the early 80s as a boy, many visits since to walk the closed lines and of course ride the remains of the Cowes line. I’m now in Australia, in fact one of the last holidays I had before leaving blighty was to the Island. My partner at the time is now my wife and is Aussie, what she must have thought I don’t know but she thoroughly enjoyed the “hiking” and me standing staring at abandoned bridges and repurposed station buildings!! My father made two visits in steam days as a young lad and took some photos in ‘64 and ‘65. Unfortunately I don’t have any here in Oz. Anyway, the photo of 30225 was just from a quick web search after I saw your post. To me it looks like a scrap road at Eastleigh or a temporary “storage” road post withdrawal. However; I have a number of books with shots of 30225 in BR days showing her with cab doors, I can dig through them and give you the title, author and page numbers if you like? One of my favourite SR mainland branches is the Callington branch. As you probably know, 30225 was a regular before permanently replaced by Ivatt tanks. If you’ve never done it I can recommend a visit to this area, the views from the old station site at Chillsworthy are quite stunning on a clear day (or were in 2000). After the Kernow / DJM model was announced I did a bit of research into the mainland 02s. It would appear that it wasn’t only 30225 that kept its cab doors after removal of PP equipment. Again I’d have to revisit my sources to give you the number(s) of the other locos. You are quite right saying that it appears that only PP fitted and Island 02s received doors. Island allocated Terriers in SR days also received them (caveat; ALL may not have). In short, I don’t believe any such rule existed regarding removing cab doors post PP removal!! Kind regards Andy.
  9. Hello PJT 30225 with cab doors in its later BR days. I don’t think the rule was ridged about removing cab doors when PP equipment was removed. Hopefully this will mean you won’t have to undertake any surgery on your model!! Kind regards Andy.
  10. Thanks, I was also unsure whether they were actually vac pipes so took Jenny’s word for it as it was hard to see them in the video. At the end of the day vac pipes can be fitted to the dual braked locos without having to remove the pre-fitted air brake pipes. My main concern was air pipes fitted to vacuum only locos and the removal of them (if you chose to). It may have been better to have all pipes optional extras. I’ve made at least four post (or more) on this subject and feel I’ve said enough. It looks the bunker rails are becoming a burning issue however.
  11. Thanks Jenny and thanks for confirming the inclusion of vac pipes. You may have noticed this was a concern (obsession) of mine in recent posts!! Andy.
  12. Agree, it will be interesting to see if there is a detailing / separate parts pack. My first model hasn't arrived yet and will probably take weeks or months as I'm in Oz and overseas mail is almost non-exsistent at the moment. Anyway, all is not lost, still a very good model by the looks of it. Andy.
  13. Hello Gary Yes, a shame, it is the location of the bunker top lamp iron on the Dapol model that prevents a correct representation of the bunker rails, maybe a tooling / cost compromise? Hornby have designed their bunker top lamp iron similar to the prototype and is "cranked out" where bunker rails are fitted. Kind regards Andy.
  14. Hello Edwardian I agree that the rivets may not have been visible and flush in early LB&SCR days and some evidence points to this being the case. My main concern was the paint finish to the cab backsheet of 643, it appears to have a "mottled" glossy finish compared to the flat finish of the rest of the model. I accept lighting can change the appearance of colour but the mottled, metalic effect? As for air / vacuum brake fittings; yes, the Rails models of 32655 and 32661 correctly do not have westinghouse air pumps as these were vacuum brake only locomotives in BR service. My point is that Rails / Dapol seem to have fitted a generic brake pipe to all BR versions (and other dual braked versions) that in appearance look very much like an air pipe: 32655 - BR in service condition and Dapol model: 32661 - BR in service condition and Dapol model: "General" arrangement of dual braked locomotives in BR in service: Hornby have done the opposite and appear to have fitted all models with a vacuum pipe and stand regardless of whether they were dual braked or air braked only (e.g. IOW locos). Removal and replacement with correct brake pipes I assume would be relatively simple task but it looks like redundant holes would be left in buffer beam of 32661 if the existing pipe was removed and a vacuum pipe fitted on the correct side of the buffer beam...............alternatively, don't be so pedantic and live with it, which I probably will!! Given all of the above, I still think that the Dapol model captures the look and character of the "Terrier" better than the Hornby model and I do not regret waiting for this version to appear. Kind regards Andy.
  15. If the photos on the Rails website are of the production models that are in stock I'm a little worried. Enlarging the photo of the rear cab sheet of LB&SCR 643 shows a very odd paint finish and no rivets on the cab seam. Compare this to the BR version of 32661 which has a consistent, smooth paint finish and correct rivetted cab seam. Full payment has been taken for my 643, I am now having second thoughts after studying the photos more closely. It would appear that quality may be inconsistent across the model variations. As far as I can tell from these initial models there is now very little to choose between the Hornby rendition of this loco type and that of Rails; particularly now that Hornby have corrected some of the mistakes / omissions of the earlier releases. I will caveat my observations of 643 by saying that there are very few photos of the rear of these locomotives in early LB&SCR days that clearly show the cab seam to be rivetted. Some of the class gained single piece rear cab sheets in later life (32655 Stepney for one). The fact remains that 643 has an odd paint finish in this area!! Andy.
  16. I flagged up the potential pit falls of vacuum and air brake fittings (or lack of them) in a previous post back in March 2019. I suppose I should have directed an email direct to Dapol rather than assume they read every post on RMWeb. Anyway, we'll see if they get the brake pipe arrangements right on the versions just delivered. Quite a major compromise or mistake if they don't. However; I still have 6 versions on pre-order. Andy.
  17. Les Quite right, more so as 32655 and 32661 were vacuum fitted only so the air brake pipes / equipment should also be abscent. Andy.
  18. Rodney Despite some detail anomalies or omissions they are still a lovely little model. I can understand why you're loathed to repaint!! Cheers Andy.
  19. I can't comment on the tank recess as I've not seen any photos from above looking down. However, it seems that the guard irons have been altered and look more prototypical which is a big plus!! The Isle of Wight Terriers in Southern Railway days were fitted for air brake only operation of fitted rollingstock. Unfortunately, as well as a Westinghouse air pump, the model representation of W10 Cowes has a vacuum ejector pipe fitted from the cab to smokebox and associated vacuum braking pipework below the running plate. This could be removed if required I guess. Cheers Andy.
  20. Hello Dave Are you considering 4-wheel full brakes also? Cheers Andy.
  21. A return to a "Design Clever" style of approach to reduce costs, reduce R&D time and speed up production maybe? Andy.
  22. Hello I'd like to wade into this debate on detailing. I have already commented on A1X smokebox rivets but there is something else that has not (to my knowledge) been touched on. This is the arrangement of air brake pipes and vacuum brake pipes. Very noticeable on the real thing, particularly the dual braked locos, is the arrangement of air brake pipes and vacuum pipes on the front and rear buffer beams. The dual fitted A1Xs tended to have the vacuum pipes on the right hand side of the front buffer beam (as you look head on) and the air brake pipe on the left hand side. The vacuum pipe being in a lower position than air brake pipe on the front buffer beam and the vacuum pipe higher than the air pipe on the rear. It is noticeable that the Hornby representation of these features show a vacuum pipe only on the left hand side of the front and rear buffer beams of both BR representations (to reduce costs no doubt). Rails model of 32661 also shows the vacuum pipe on the left hand side (head on) which is incorrect for this loco. Neither model show any representation of the pipework along / under the running plate that connect these pipes to either the vacuum ejector or the air pump. This is maybe due to the Rails model being a 1st EP(?) and the Hornby model to keep costs and price down. However, and this is another detail minefield, 32670 (formally KESR Bodiam), is a vacuum only fitted loco and at some point (I guess when sold by the LBSCR) was vacuum fitted with a vacuum pipe on the left hand side of the buffer beam (as you look head on). 32655 (formally Stepney) which ended up as vacuum only fitted also appears to have this arrangement. It would also appear that post preservation, 32678 (formally Knowle), has had the brake pipe arrangement changed from that carried in SR / BR days. I'm sure that there are other variations of brake pipe arrangement and don't envy the manufacturers in getting every variation correct for their chosen prototypes. The fact remains (and this is my point) that there is a significant amount of pipework associated with the train brakes. This also makes the front and rear buffer beams look quite cluttered on the dual brake fitted locos. Both the Hornby and Rails models have their merits and omissions but I do tend to be swayed towards purchasing Rails models. Even with the issues regarding cab spectacles and the chimney (which are to be addressed) I think it captures the essence or a Terrier better than the Hornby model. I wish them luck with their enterprise. Regards Andy.
  23. I suppose better to be obsessed by rivets than nuts......... I will stop there....
×
×
  • 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.