Tramshed

What about passengers using the lav for its intended purpose? Unless the passenger fitted sets included a ticket inspector there would be no need to hide!

I know this is way off topic but I strongly recommend this operation. I have had mine done and it gave me the best vision since my childhood. In an effort to bring us back on topic, your colour vision may improve so I hope whatever is announced on 7th will have the livery details correct!

and the 'frothing' window usually opens around the last Wednesday of the preceding month!

Careful. There are some on this forum who will now want the hats supplied separately in an accessories bag. Feet and legs too probably!

92134 is listed as being paired with a BR1C in 1959 when 9Fs were still being delivered.

From the evidence available, including the learned contribution from Pint of Adnams, it appears that you have made the right decision re changing to the lower arc roof. Many thanks for your positive response to feedback on here (particularly given it is a Sunday). My order is secure and I am sure you will be rewarded with many more.

Bucoops makes an important point. Checking the Yeadon register, no.27 had it's roof lowered during a general repair at Stratford between 14/4 and 20/8/1925. The same date given for it's renumbering to 7027. It should therefore have the same cab profile as that you have already tooled for 68646, ie lower than the chimney top. Happy to wait a little longer for mine in the interests of accuracy.🙂

You may be a bit late for that. They have announced a J67/68/69 'Buckjumper'. By all means start a frothfest about their 3rd though!🙂

On the other hand the photographs posted on pages 2 and 3 of this thread of the blue and maroon liveries show the end doors in blue and black respectively. Are sure these were fibreglass? The bi-fold nature of the door design requires several hinges and one wonders how this material would perform in daily use.

Not for ages yet. What we are witnessing is history in the making. The longest ever unboxing video in freeze frame format. I'm lapping up every frame 😁

Collected mine from my local shop on Thursday. Had to return one of the brake thirds the next day as it had been supplied with the chassis from the BR green version, resulting in the boarding step appearing beneath the toilet window! Shop was able to swap for a good 'un. After Bachmann had gone to so much trouble to re-work these with the right numbering, lets hope it's an isolated case but one which intending purchasers might want to watch out for.

Off the top of my head two Jubilees were sold by BR directly into preservation, the pioneer Crab is in the NRM so too is light pacific Winston Churchill. BR Standard 5MT no 73050 went to Peterborough after withdrawal from Patricroft shed thence to the NVR. Doubtless further research would yield other examples.

If the mail order v high street retailer argument is still live can I post on behalf of the retailer? I pointed out the missing '3's to my local shop who advised me that they could fix the problem via a contact they use for weathering. In response to demand, Fox transfers have made up sheets with the correct number of 3s for a pair of brake thirds. You can order via their website and fit yourself. Enough to go round the whole production run apparently. My local shop charged a very modest fee to have them applied and matt varnished. Result, a happy Tramshed and a happy retailer who can now shift more units.

Probably not worth the effort (unless you want something to contemplate over a pint of the Sole Bay nectar) but thanks all the same.

Another question for the experts... Did the quad-arts 'pair for life' to make up the 8 car sets? The table shows 'third' and 'composite' half sets making up set 90, set 74 and so forth, but I imagine the advantage of being able to split them in the middle (rather than have an 'oct-art' so to speak) is that they could be taken out of service for repair and maintenance while keeping the 'good' half available. If 97 were built, this suggests at least one 'spare'. As this is a fairly expensive project (this is not a rant about price - I understand the reasons) some might be tempted to, for example, pair a set with a ducketted/recessed guards compartment with one without. Would this be prototypical? Presumably the ability to split up an 8-car set had advantages when it came to repainting. During transition periods, would this have extended to pairing teak with crimson or crimson with maroon?

<pedant mode> It seems that the pattern of vehicle numbering increases by increments of 1 as we move from the brake end to the middle of the train within each half set. The composite half of set 90 appears to be the exception. Have you numbered them the right way round? Shame to issue incorrect instruction to the factory on what is an otherwise excellent project. </pedant mode>

Do any of the learned contributors to this thread know the difference between diagram 72 brake 3rds and diagram 72B? or between 68 and 68B brake 2nds? Also a note to Clarks. The 'tricomposite' end of sets 79 and 74 appear to have been given the same vehicle running numbers. Probably nothing more serious than a copy & paste oversight but mention it in case🙂. This seems to be the only duplicate.

Thanks P of A for this. However, Yeadon 48 shows this loco as having its 4 digit (+7000) number applied from the date it emerged from its Oct-Nov '24 shopping. Searching around other examples in the volume suggests that the '+7000' numbers were applied from as early as January '24 and so the 'E' suffix was only applied for a short time towards the end of 1923. So it appears Accurascale have got this right (or at least beyond reasonable challenge among learned RM Web folk). According to Yeadon, the GER grey paint, if deemed to be in good condition, was retained after 1/1/23 and several even had +7000 numbers applied in large numerals over it. Perhaps another variant to emerge in due course! The various painting/numbering schemes must have made perfect sense at the time, and it is something of a bonus that it sustains discussion a century later!

The particular loco (7)359 if given the 'LNER' without the '&' would still only be good for '25/26 as it was 'shopped' in 1/27 and given additional coal rails on the bunker. Then in 1929 had the condensing apparatus removed. The significance of this is that '359' (built 1892) was one of the R24s that were retro fitted with condensing gear from 1893 and so did not have the raised 'screen' portion on the side tanks. Later ones had the characteristic shape of the S56s. When the tanks were enlarged during rebuilding in 1904 the original 'straight top' side tank profile was retained. From the shape of the red lining on the Accurascale model, it appears, from what I can see, that this variant has been correctly observed. My only ask is that Accurascale investigate whether the number 359 should have an 'E' suffix. I have ordered an L&NER black one and a GER blue and congratulate Accurascale for taking on this complex project. I expect other livery versions will appear in due course. From the sequence of SKU numbers it looks as if there are sufficient gaps for at least another 8!

Have we been told exactly what will be inside the box? Is "BEE condition" the condition it was in around the time of the exhibition or the condition it was actually displayed in? RCTS 'Green book' vol. 2A fig.5 shows the loco displayed with a 6 wheel tender borrowed from class K3 (for display space reasons iirc). If the Locomotion version comes with an 8 wheel tender then this leaves yet another version for Hornby to exploit in 2024 for the centenary of the exhibition itself!

Yes you are right. With apologies to Sonic they do offer a BRITISH RAILWAYS version. This or the BR early crest would suit you. The LNER black with red lining would have gone by 1940. Another trap to avoid is the bunker coal rails that were changed from 5 rails to 3 (or more accurately 2 plus angle iron) from sometime in the 1930s following the installation of mechanical coaling plants from 1932. The LNER black with red lining has the 5 rail arrangement. The varnished teak (or teak finish) rolling stock would have been the Gresley or Thompson stock. It is doubtful whether all these would have all received crimson paint by 1950.

Garry, I have nothing to add to the advice from learned contributors on the question of the rolling stock, but your other question related to the locomotive livery for 'mid 1940s to very early 1050s' overlap. My advice would be to go for an early crest version as I believe the late crest did not appear until around 1957. By the mid 1940's it is likely that the A5 would have lost the LNER lettering in favour of just 'NE' on the tank sides as a wartime economy. The next development would have been the 1946 renumbering scheme which gave the A5s numbers in the 98xx sequence. Nationalisation from 1948 saw many locomotives given 'BRITISH RAILWAYS' in full lettering on their tanks. Neither of these three variants are currently offered by Sonic and would require the customer to apply their own paint, transfers etc. I believe the early crest appeared from about 1950 and thus closest to your target time period.

Look at it this way. The holiday is probably cheaper than a divorce. At least this way, JSpencer gets to keep the D1!

The B2 had larger diameter driving wheels. Think Hall and Saint if it helps 😉

Photos in the RCTS volume of these taken at Grantham and Doncaster works, the latter in 1939 so not just from build.