Ventnor

Or one of the L&LSR Hudswell Clarke 4-6-2 tanks..............and Tralee & Dingle locos with a whole set of rollingstock!! I'll stop now!! Andy.

There also appears to be two handbrake recesses in the cab backsheet (bunker) of the 16xx i.e. one drivers side and one firemans side........unless 16xx's were fitted with water pick up apparatus ; ) !! I've not seen that picked up in the 16xx thread unless I've missed it (apologies if I have). Only just noticed it myself. I guess wait and see the models in the flesh.......which will be imminently. Cheers Andy.

Further to my previous post, I'd still like to see rear shots of W9, W13 & W14. As I've previously stated these were painted on the mainland before shipping over. W11 was already on the island pre-grouping and painted there when the SR took over. This is the livery the Isle Wight Steam Railway have applied to W11. Would be good to confirm any livery differences between mainland / island painting, if for no other reason than to do a bit more research. Another excuse for me to delve into my books!! Andy.

Thanks Nick, that is pretty clearly black. It also shows the state the cab sheets got, looks pretty dirty thus justifying the black paint! It has also reminded me to look through my Ventnor West branch books! Cheers Andy.

Thanks for the photo comparison Paul. I have RoS W9 on its way to me, together with Boxhill. IOW Terriers are a minefield of detail differences probably no different to their mainland counterparts. Ex No.50 Whitechapel was shipped to the island in May 1930 by the Southern in A1X condition with extended bunker and became W9. It also carried a Marsh pattern chimney throughout its stay on the island as per the RoS model. It also had the 12 studs / bolts on the tank sides as per the RoS model. From what I can see from photographic evidence (and the two examples still on the island) the locos rebuilt to A1X condition on the island generally retained (and I say generally) the 8 tank side bolts / studs, they also generally retained their sandboxes above the running plate. Those shipped over from the mainland by the Southern in the late 1920s / early 30s had sandboxes below the runningplate i.e. W9, W13 & W14. Ex No. 78 Knowle was shipped to the island in 1929 also in A1X condition with extended bunker, it was initially numbered W4 but was renumbered W14 as the numbers 1 - 4 were required for the E1s when they were shipped over. Terrier W3 becoming W13 at the same time. Yet another twist in their history. It appears that W14 initially also carried a Marsh pattern chimney but this was replaced by a Drummond pattern one sometime in the early 1930s, possibly 1932 (source "The Island Terriers" published by Kingfisher Railway Productions). This is the condition produced by Hornby. All island Terriers were Westinghouse air brake fitted in Southern days, not vacuum or dual fitted, the Southern standardised on this braking system (on the island) as the larger pre-grouping companies on the island had adopted this system. The Freshwater, Yarmouth & Newport Railway had used vacuum brakes. The Hornby model is incorrect in carrying the vacuum ejector pipe along the top of the boiler and associated pipework below the running plate. They appear to have perpetuate this mistake on all of their IOW based Terriers. Of course, on return to the mainland vacuum brake equipment was fitted. What the RoS model does lack is lamp irons over each of the front buffers but that should be an easy fix and not obvious at first glance. As for black painted cab backsheets vs green painted? The two preserved examples on the island today in Southern livery have black painted rear cab sheets (or at least they are in the photos and video I've seen). There are very few clear images of the rear of these locos in Southern Railway days to determine which livery detail is correct unless a painting specification exists. It could be that W9, W13 and W14 which were overhauled and painted at Brighton works prior to shipping to the island had green cab backsheets but those painted in Southern livery at Ryde or Newport works on the island had black rear cabsheets!! Or, the green was painted over black after operational experience with the green paintwork becoming ruined by coal and coal dust. So both could be correct. To be honest I have not done that research. If anyone else can confirm this detail that would be welcome. Any other shortcomings of both of these manufacturers models has been done to death in previous posts e.g. cab roof, bunker rails (RoS), bullet holes in the cab front sheet (Hornby) etc, etc. I'm hoping that despite the apparent saturation of the market by Hornby with their IOW versions and other examples Rails are not put off in releasing further examples of theirs. By the way, all of the above is accurate to the best of my knowledge and happy for any of my statements to be corrected!! Kind regards Andy.

Thanks Oliver Will you also include black handrails on the SOUTHERN wartime black version? Kind regards Andy.

Totally agree about the handrails on the black versions. Kind regards Andy.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Thanks Ian, I’ll get some vac pipes for my dual fitted locos on order. Cheers Andy.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Les Quite right, more so as 32655 and 32661 were vacuum fitted only so the air brake pipes / equipment should also be abscent. Andy.

Thanks Richard. Andy.

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.

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.