newbryford

Hurst Models did etched overlays for this coach. It was a twin pack of Royal Train Staff coaches 2905/2906. They sometimes come up on ebay or similar. 17105 was 2905. 2906 is now 977969 and regularly used in test trains. (I really must finish my 17105.....

The AAR MU connector is also a 27-wire cable. I believe a similar adapter arrangement is used for the 67s in test formation use. (Big Jim may be able to confirm/deny)

From 4 pages ago.

Probably, but as per the previous poster, if the 220/221 v 222 is anything to go by, then at least the cabs will be a slightly different shape - thus nullifying any model manufacturer simply "tweaking" the tooling - or calling the proposed 93 an 88/1.

A late night musing: Just perusing another topic and the OP is remarking upon how his 15 year old model railway item needs modifying for reliability............ The item in particular is normally kept in the garage and only brought into the house when being worked upon. (Thus ensuring a mix of temperature and humidity changes that just aren't conducive to anything other than basic garden tools IMO) It leads me to ask - of all the hobbies/pastimes I've been involved with over the years - it seems to be that railway modellers are the worst culprits for expecting

Agreed. If the intention is to sell it later, then just leave it in the box. As an aside: My brother has a collection of EFE/Corgi (etc) buses and constantly tells me how much they are worth as he trawls the various "collector" publications/websites. I ask him if he plans to sell them and his answer is "no". My reply is that they are then worth nothing......................... He's the one with an accountant brains and can't comprehend my valuation of them.

As the 93 hasn't materialised yet, there is no way of knowing - or even speculating - what they will actually look like yet. [speculation mode on] If, as reported previously, DRS "own" the design rights to the 68/88, then at least the minimum difference will be in the cab end profile - in the same way that Virgin Voyagers - 220/221 - differ from the later 222 builds. See my previous comment a few weeks ago (page 1) re: the 93 being a 6-axle loco. [spec mode off] Not quite sure what effect that turning round the pantographs on a 92 would do.......

Is it really 12 years ago... 18/6/8 and 60040 in a new layer of paint waits in the down loop at Blackburn with inbound reels of paper via Gilbraiths transhipment shed. An unidentified 66 is in charge of the Preston Docks - Lindesy empty bitumen tanks Backing into the shed a few minutes later. Three years later and a smoky 60040 on a chilly 1st Feb, departs Blackburn eastbound in charge of the steel empties that have been unloaded at the same shed (I have it as 6Z40, but can't remember where they worked in from.) The view is from the top deck

ISTR that only a few 67s were actually cleared for 125mph running - the norm being 100. And there haven't been any regular scheduled services at 125 with the 67s. They struggle to reach those speeds in thunderbird duty hauling a 91 set.

Almost as much yellow as mine - although yours is a dirty mustard shade.........................

Ta to a fellow RMwebber for spotting this. It doesn't always work correctly: (It was only two cars passing me.........................)

Going back many years, I remember waiting for a S&D 7F (13809?) near Hellifield in the early 80s on a railtour . Reason given was that it had struck a bridge and removed the top lip of the chimney. A bit of digging and it happened on the Wyvern Express 31/10/81 in the Manchester area. https://www.sixbellsjunction.co.uk/80s/811031pg.htm

Shouldn't this be in the 144 section then...........?

Not often seen as a 2+4 formation

Surely there's a standard livery for RHTT locos. (pics from flickr)