Pteremy

A few pages back there was a discussion about end plates/gangway protectors, and a nice photo of the end of a siphon was posted. Did we ever get more info about the date/location of the picture?

From a quick look at Atkins, Baird & Tourett I can't see any reference to conversions. But there was a specific diagram - AA21 - under which 100 Vacuum fitted vehicles were built in 1939/40, financed by the government at the outset of WWII (AB&T p478)

Did they ever provide an update anywhere on the corridor versions they intend to produce, since the reference in the original announcement?

I was thinking that Rapido seem to like the opportunity to provide variety rather than simplicity. Perhaps the availability of any preserved vans would influence the choice.

Possible the first issue is 9ft (1920s) or 10ft (1930s) wheelbase? It isn't my direct area of interest, but when I looked at LMS vans a few years ago it seemed that there was a family of 10ft vans starting with D1808 which evolved through the early 1930s.

So I have to be honest - i don't think that the crews have worked. Too 'furry' and too translucent. I would rather have paid twice as much for something that really worked. Please don't stop innovating - but do please admit that this are not quite right.

If there is a straightforward conversion hopefully someone will post it on here before long. But i have found the availability of Dapol spares a bit hit and miss - starts off with stocks of everything but gaps start to appear quickly.

Are the crews on double time (or similar) if they have to wait for their locomotives to arrive?

Have spent a couple of days researching the Bow End family of GWR corridor coaches. In doing so used the really excellent Great Western Railway Coaches website: http://www.penrhos.me.uk/c/index.html Then checked what it said about E140s and E145s and was astonished to see that 24 E145s were built with 7ft bogies and 26 with 9ft bogies. Which suggests to me that the distinguishing feature between the 2 diagrams was probably the design of the underframe - 2 truss rods rather than the 4 of the E140s?? The gift that keeps on giving!

Comments earlier in the thread suggest that a few made it into the 1960s but with a 9ft wheelbase they would not have lasted long (1964 is mentioned as a possible cutoff point). There is photographic evidence in the 4th volume of David Larkin's Acquired Wagon series.

For the record my brick loads arrived. I am not an expert on 3D printing but they appear to be rather low grade 3D prints, with as much striation as intended detail. So not very realistic - I will have to cover them with a Tarpaulin and use them as 'covered loads' in something else. Perhaps someone else will produce a better version.

It is the colour of the droplight window frames that are the difference between 'as built' and what I assume to be 1950s BR 'standard' (from the photos I have seen), not the lining. But if you can find photos of 'as built' frames persisting late into the 1950's I would be interested to see them.

An entirely separate point but I hope that there is a Modelu tie in to this - some figures to populate the excellent interior.

It is an excellent book. I seem to be in the grip of 'Titfield fever' - whilst waiting for the Rapido models to arrive (including the entirely unnecessary wagons) I have accumulated a Peco station kit, a WSS Dutch Barn kit and have an Oxford diecast steam roller in the post. If anything else is announced with a Titfield theme I may have to relinquish retirement and get a job.

I have a note saying that 80976 was allocated to Taunton when new 20/8/49 - but (annoyingly and unusually) I don't have a reference for that info. I am surprised that it still had a SYP in 1978 - I had assumed that it would have been FYP long before that. But then again I am surprised that it is still in WR chocolate and Cream at that time. Perhaps there will be a 'standard' 1950's version in a second batch.

There is a photo of 80976 with SYP, the livery being made, on the 'Taunton Trains' website (being towed by a Hymek). https://www.tauntontrains.co.uk/photos/gallery/class35/4 The date is April 1966. I don't know when the SYPs were applied or how long they lasted. I know of photos of unidentified Inspection saloons at East Anstey in April 1963, and Bideford in September 1964 which have yet to receive a SYP. I suspect a version in WR chocolate and cream without SYP (other than the 'as built' version also being made) would have covered a longer operational time span in the 1950s-early 1960s. But that hasn't deterred my preorder!

is the canopy a fitted part or does removal require surgery?

Does anyone make a decent version of the Steam Roller that featured in the film?

So they are! Quite neat in fact, but difficult to see with the bogie in the way. The lug on the fitting is a clue of course, but missed that in all the excitement.

I don't disagree with the point you are making but I do not think you have chosen a good example to illustrate it. Accurascale are very good at explaining/communicating delivery timescale changes - so not 'all over the place' rather an explained rescheduling.

Was there an answer to this question?

So I bought a second 033, a carmine red one to go with my maroon preorder. I actually prefer the carmine red. And I am looking forward to ordering a suitable (for my era) O62 in the next batch. But my reason for posting is this. As I was removing the clam shell from the box a coupling hook pinged out - it must has worked loose in transit. Fortunately it hit something metal on my desk rather than simply looping through the air on to the carpet. And the rod attached to the brake lever is wonky because the support bracket on the opposite side is not secured. These are easy fixes (providing nothing gets lost). But what is the factory specification for this sort of thing? There is no evidence of glue - are they just a push fit? I certainly don't want excess glue spoiling things - but is there a risk that other things will just 'pop out' when trundling around a layout?

I ordered a set of bricks on 27th April and got what I take to be evidence of their despatch 2 days ago.

'Look into my eyes.....'

Yes. This was covered earlier in the thread. Although you will find lots of references along the lines of 'the two diagrams were the same, except that E145 had different bogies' it is more accurate to say that the E145's had different underframes, to accommodate the longer bogies.