Pennine MC

Confirmed Bob, FWIW - maybe not the best choices, but no reason to think any are incorrect from that info.

Nice pic, caption is thought provoking also. I'd initially thought it was a bit off the mark as I thought the Mond 45T caustic tanks were early enough to be vac braked (1965 build), but having checked, there was also a 1966 batch with air brake and vac through pipe - and those tanks do look very smart and new. The first two vehicles, though they probably there for braking, are a Prestwin and a Presflo, which as bulk powder wagons are too specialised to be there for that reason alone - other photos at this period exist of them mixed in with the 45 tonners so it's likely they were just part of the pool at the time.

Thanks Mike - not able to check numbers ATM but if that's what I think it is and is formed correctly, it's what I mentioned earlier: Only a hadful of sets, IIRC.

As if Cant remember where I read it, but looking at the RCTS listings (power cars numbered 51425 - 444 and 51495 - 514), it makes sense - there are enough cars for twenty triple sets, but listed as delivered as ten power twins and ten quads.

I did say 'typical' I always choose my words carefully Sean, what with all the nitpickers round here I'd have to check, but I think that was due to some sets being ordered as triples but being delivered as twins and quads.

As Gary says, an unfair comment. It was the commissioning retailer's choice; using an existing model for that purpose is a world apart from the (theoretical) possibility of cocking up a new one. Given that the 108 was the first ever decent 1st gen DMU, the Cravens improved on the 108, and the DLW has in turn improved on the Cravens, I'm certainly not fretting at this stage. Not saying it's a non starter Brian, just pointing out the necessary considerations; not just for yourself but for other readers who might not be so clued up on DMU formations. If I were a betting man, I'd say a 3-car Bachy 101 is very likely, in due course.

The thing with the 'centre car' mentality is that you can't (authentically) just add them at will as one would have with the old Triang sets of the '60s, because your usual 2-car DMU is usually a power/trailer combo which in reality, wouldnt have sufficient power:weight ratio. What's needed is for the driving trailer compo to be modified into a motor compo, which then gives two power cars that can either run together as a 'power twin', or can cope with up to two trailers. This is what Bachmann have already done with their 108, and could theoretically also do with the 105. As I commented earlier in this thread though, a typical NER 4-car set had the brake in one of the trailers, which would necessitate a further body tool

Very probably, IIRC it also has its tare weight (on one side or t'other) high on the body, which is another known effect of replating.

In light of recent discussions, I'm not sure Hornby think in terms of 'needing' a presence in any particular market sector, I suspect the Limby 101 will roll on as long as it keeps selling, just as other Limby models that are duplicated do i'm puzzled. Why do you need sprung buffers on a 4mm DMU? No, it probably isnt worth it for a twin, but if they were to go on to 3 or 4 car sets, it would come into its own. Something that would really move the short frame DMU game on IMO is a proper 'NER quad', with an MCL each end and the van in the trailer. Froth alert... I'm sure there were others Steve, but I think it would date from around that 1968/69 kinda time - they probably came south as replacements for withdrawn Lightweights

That's pretty much it Sean (as an aside, I converted a Triang one back in my teens). They were 'loose' AFAIK (in the respect that they werent delivered as part of sets like most DMU cars). As long as the buffets were operational, I think their main routes were Newcastle - Carlisle, Newcastle - Middlesbro and the Calder Valley.

Gary, Richard - thinking about it now, I'm not sure if any of the four-lamp Blue Square sets were delivered as twins, other than the very early 501xx MBS/560xx DTCL, which IIRC had Rolls Royce engines and were thus 111s.

I cant see them compromising too much on this Phil, not after the excess of riches that was/is the Lightweight. I think the green 'uns will have the short gutters and the refurb will be a proper refurb. There might even be an early four-headlamp variant, though that is very conjectural on my part

Doesnt mean you have to stop though, eh Tim

Probably the same AC 'bus that we used a Colour Rail shot of in 'Modelling the BR Era' - that was dated the previous summer and I think I've made reference to it before. Obviously this adds another seven months onto the 'last whiskers' date.

Do you mind? It was nice and quiet in here

The Sankey ones are fairly new out AFAIK, a mate has recently picked some up for me. Not had opportunity to use them yet but I cant see them being radically different. I also cant see any significant difference in quality, both are well printed and 'look' right. It would be easy to assume that the Sankey are a copy of the Hollar. but that's not the case - they do some that Hollar dont, such as Aberthaw Cement, plus some of those that are 'duplicated' are actually slightly different designs when you look closely. As you say, the Sankey are more varied whereas the cost of the Hollar mounts up if you want a range of designs. Against that, the Hollar includes some ready-distressed, though it's quite fun doing that yourself - I like to cut through them in line with the plank gaps for a really worn look

Quite the sage, aintcha. There's a twist to that though, and that's if someone *does* want to amount to something but manages to hide it well enough. There's another angle of course to 'making it', whatever 'it' may be. The communication of ideas and enthusiasm can also come with - but isnt limited to - those who are well versed in knowledge or have well developed practical skills.

As ever, it's about balance isnt it. As long as one's chosen meaning for 'recognition' didnt smack of being some sort of 'celeb', I'd go along with that summation. I'd certainly never crave the approval of any single individual, that would be putting them on far too high a pedestal even if they truly were a doyen of the hobby. But at the other extreme, there's sometimes an almost kneejerk reaction, to the effect that nobody's appreciation matters. Some who say they're not bothered, truly are, and others like to tell you how good they are before you get chance to... A few examples I've seen of late (not from this forum btw): Admittedly they're snipped and out of context, but one seems just a tad OTT and another seems to be a sort of affected modesty. Any thoughts?

Somersaults would be nice, but they're not gonna turn the world upside down.

Oh well, if we're gonna start name dropping...

Yeah, it was before I knew you