Rhydgaled

Isn't that Serco-Abellio Northern, not First North Western? I did wonder whether the text on the website is an error and they mean 'Northern' rather than 'First North Western' but if that's the case why are they saying they don't need to know which variation of 'Barbie' at this expression of interest stage? Thanks for the quick response. The way you have 'class 180 in First Barbie' listed as a single item suggested to me that the 'Great Western' and what your website refers to as 'North Western' (do you actually mean the Serco-Abellio Northern livery, which seems too dissimilar from the FirstGW one?) are virtually indentical and would be ordered as a single batch from China with the final branding differences applied by yourselves once the models reach the UK. This is why I wondered whether you might be able to produce a 175 in debranded First North Western - I completely understand that it would probably be too niche otherwise.

The expressions of interest form mentions a Class 180 in First North Western Barbie livery (not shown), but a quick Google does nothing to dispel the notion I had that First North Western never operated the 180s. IF they did indeed run in First North Western livery, any chance of a picture? Also, any chance of you producing models class 175s in debranded First North Western livery (as seen here - as used in the early days of ATW use), or even completely unpainted? I'm interested in having a model of a 175 but not in ATW, TfW or fully-branded FNW.

Yes, that looks like it, specifically this one (single image from the page you linked).

I have a .jpg file downloaded from the internet (can't remember where I got it from, so not sure if I should post it due to copywrite) which shows diagrams of interior layout for the mark 4 TO (Tourist Open), TOD (Tourist Open Disabled), PO (Pullman Open) and SV (Service Vehicle) coaches. Interesting that there was a TOD (standard class with wheelchair space) but no POD (first class with wheelchair space). The same JPEG also shows the formations for 8-coach sets: The standard formation (29 sets) would have been: TOE, 3x TO, TOD, SV, 2x PO The Pullman formation (2 sets) would have been: TOE, TO, TOD, SV, 2x PO, SV, PO So, not only would the Pullman formations have had an extra PO (for a total of three), they also would have had an extra SV, meaning they would have had just 3 standard class vehicles (1 each of TOE, TO and TOD) and five first class vehicles (3 Pullman Opens and 2 Buffets). Where would the 31 extra coaches needed to increase the rakes to 9 coaches have come from if it was a late change? I had always assumed the image was showing the initial plans but BR later increased the order (before all coaches had been delivered) to allow all the sets to be lengthened to nine coaches soon after introduction (if not sooner). However, that could easily be an incorrect assumption.

According to this Rail UK topic, no mark 2 BSK vehicles were built, yet I am seeing some pre-owned Hornby mark 2 BSK models advertised for sale. This archived RMWeb topic suggests that Hornby's mark 2 was actually more dimensionally-accurate than Bachmann's mark 2a (so, side-question, why does Bachmann's look right to me in photos and Hornby's looks wrong - is it just the paint job (eg. awful chrome window frames on Hornby's)?), with the Bachmann BFK also having incorrect roof vents while Hornby, apparently, got it right. However, I'm struggling to 'spot the difference' between the exteriors of the BFK/BSK/BSO coach diagrams in the diagram book I stumbled across (BRB Vehicle Diagram Book 200, I think from this page). So, somebody please let me know if there are any physical external differences between those coaches? I'm most interested in the Mark 2 BFK vs BSK question, since if they were the same the Hornby (fictious?) BSK could be made into an (accurate) BFK simply by repainting with a yellow stripe to indicate first class.

A while back fiftyfour fiftyfour posted some pictures of a mark 3 TRBF created by moving windows around on some Lima coaches. While a project like that is still way beyond my skill level it is something I would like to work towards. I've also been thinking more-ambiously at whether it would be possible to use the two corridor windows left over from the above conversion to convert the doner TF/TS into one of Chiltern's GFW coaches (Galley First Wheelchair, although some sites seem to list them as RFM). However: some of the window sizes on the GFW seem to only be found on TGS or SLE/SLEP vehicles (which were only made by Lima) the mark 3a type roof (for Chiltern coaches) can only be had from Hornby's sliding-door coaches or Oxford Rail etc. models which have body/underframe issues I have one Hornby-tooled mark 3 TS (from the GWR train set I bought mainly to get the new Railroad motor rather than an old preowned Lima pancake one) which I've decided is probably going to have to be a mark 3b given that it has Central Door Locking lights moulded on and other differences from my otherwise Lima/Limby IC125 sets So, my question is whether the bodyshell/windows/rooves from the three sets of mark 3 tooling (Lima, Hornby 1999 scale-length and Hornby 2020 sliding-door) are sufficiently similar (depth of window frames etc. and equal sizes of windows which should be the same) that a window from a Hornby TS could be used to convert a Lima TRFB to TRBF? Or a window from a Lima buffet in a sliding-door Hornby TSD to make a GFW (with incorrect doors admittedly, but I'm wondering if a push-in insert could be made for the XC/ScotRail/GWR sliding-door model to resemble the Chiltern plug doors)?

Presumably Accurascale know who has commissioned models, or is it only the factory who knows? If Accurascale know, then just saying "there are X retailer exclusives/commissions still to be annouced" (without saying which retailer(s) or giving any details of the models) would be helpful - at least we would then know how many more announcements are forthcoming and can wait for them if we want to see the full picture before. Would that breach any NDAs?

Thanks both for the replies - I have renumbered one of the Model Rail 16xx pannier tanks but I am not particularly confident and certainly not willing to risk using any form of paint stripper to remove factory-applied nameplates/numbers on such an expensive model. Removing the old numbers wasn't necessary with the 16xx since the new 3D numberplates just went over the original 2D printed ones. None of the models currently listed on the Accurascale website seem to fit the bill for me so I'm expecting to wait for a second batch but I just thought I'd better check there are no more retailer-exclusive ones (such as the Rails of Sheffield 50020 'Revenge' announced above) for this first batch.

So, they're the same on both sides now then (they always looked like that on one side I think, or is there a change I'm missing)?

Well, don't think I've ever noticed that before. In my defence though, it seems to be that the livery changed at some point since my 2002 Hornby catalouge has some photos which show the full width of the door in white (there was still the fade-to-blue on the lower half of the door). I think you're right - it's hard to see but the door at the far end of 42360 also has only part of the door in white on the picture I was referring to - so I think that confirms it had four normal doors when running as a TS. But did it have the guard's doors during its previous life as the TCSD?

Ah, I was going to ask whether there were any retailler exclusives in addition to the 'general sale' and Accurascale-exclusive models. Any others planned or is that it for now? I've been meaning to grab a Hornby class 50 in large logo blue - once I'd worked out which name/number I wanted. However, I still haven't worked that out so I still don't have a class 50 model, but since the Accurascale one is expected to be better value for money and rather limited in supply I think I better get on and decide - although the locos I think I've narrowed it down to* don't seem to be available from Accurascale so far. * It's got to be either whichever one I saw on a heritage railway (Paignton & Dartmouth I think) when I was about 5** or one of the (three?) preserved 50s used by Arriva Trains Wales (and previous operators in South Wales) on Rhymney, Fishguard and various special (eg. for the Royal Welsh Show) services. Two of the three(?) 50s used in South Wales are 50031 and 50049, at least one of which seems to have spent some of its time in Wales carrying the name (and sometimes also the number) of a scrapped classmate on one side. On that basis, I think what I'd want is 50049 named "Defiance" on one side and something else on the other*** - but still not 100% decided. ** but could but several years either side of that - I'm waiting for my mother to have time to fish out her photo albums and figure out exactly when that holiday was *** it can be "Defiance" on both sides as long as the plates on the model as-supplied can be covered by seperately purchased new plates for one side - hopefully Railtec do them.

A whole load of conversions which haven't been mentioned here are the various vehicles which have had wheelchair-accessible toilets fitted, many of which have had changes to their window layout as a result (although some appear to just have half a window blanked off on the inside, the full window frame still being visible externally on those examples). I read somewhere (probably this forum, but I can't find the right topic now if so) that on the Western Region / (First) Great Western (Trains) IC125 sets the TS(D) was at first added in the coach E position (between the buffet car (coach F) and the rest of the standard class accomodation) but later moved nearer the TGS and became coach C (why?). I was wondering when the first of these wheelchair-accessible conversions happened (and whether the Lima and Hornby coach C / coach E models of a TS in GWT and Swallow liveries are correct or should have been TSD) - photo of GWT set (power car and first six coaches in shot) on Flickr appears to show the half blanked off window (inside only) on the coach next to the buffet car but it is rather far away.

According to this page (Rail Express), the TCSD started life as TGS 44084 and was later converted to TS 42360. I have found a couple of pictures of it carrying the latter identity here. Interestingly, in the earlier of these two photos (showing the coach in 'Barbie' livery) the door nearest the camera appears to be painted plain blue. That suggests it was a staff door not-for-public-use; however it is labeled as coach D which should be a normal TS with four public doors shoudn't it? The blue door doesn't appear to have the extra openning panel that the guard's door on the TGSs and BFOs have though. The other photo shows it in dynamic lines livery with a normal bright pink contrasting door at both ends. Therefore, assuming that 44084 started life as a normal TGS (with the special guard's doors), the guard's doors have been replaced/converted to standard doors at some point. My question is, did they do that when it was converted from TGS to TCSD or later during the convertion from TCSD to TS? The model shown on the Rail Express link above appears to have normal TS-style doors, but another model seen here (https://rtc-derby-london-road.weebly.com/rev-intercity-era.html) appears to have an extra-long footstep under the door at the far end - suggesting it may have a TGS style guard's door (unfortunately the image isn't clear enough to tell for sure).

I thought the engines in the GWR and LNER class 800 sets were actually the same but with the software set to limit power output on LNER units to improve reliability (further to this, I was under the impression that should 1 engine on an LNER unit fail the remaining engines would automaticlly uprate to the higher GWR rating). What I don't know is whether things like the brake resistors (and possibly larger fuel tanks) on the class 802s (some of the features of which were later adopted on the GWR 800s due to the electrification cutbacks) are actually visible or hidden behind identical panels (just like how most of the underframe equipment on mark 3 coaches is behind panels, which I've always assumed are identical on all coaches though I've never actually bothered to check).

I don't understand how the NRM have managed to keep the level of interest on the full-size lineside so high since surely the famed locomotive that so many non-enthusiasts know is in Alan Pegler style LNER Apple Green without those sideplate thingies that make it look a little bit like a rebuilt Bulleid pacific. Certainly I'm far less interested to go out and see it in BR green. Even without a decoder, I've wondered for ages whether an electro-magnet could be made to look like a scale BSI coupling with the polarity linked with the directional head/tail lights on stuff like the old Bachmann class 158s. So, when running a pair of units together in the same direction they would couple, but if you carefully parked a pair of units either side of a rail joint with isolating fishplates and set the power to run in opposite directions, they'd uncouple. Presumably with DCC you wouldn't need the isolating fishplates or the accurate 'parking'.

Yes and no. On the one hand you have the two mark 4 coaches in the 1990s INTERCITY 225 train set - these are missing the orange cantrail line and probably the coach-end data panels etc. but they look the part (at least until you mix them with coaches that have the cantrail line). My tender drive, train set, Flying Scotsman loco is also fine livery wise but at least some versions of the Railroad model went too far in terms of livery simplification (just a single colour for the letters LNER and numbers 4472 which should really be several colours giving a 3D effect) and the end product looks wrong as a result. How about these mark 2s at Fishguard Harbour behind a class 37? Not sure if they are the exact same coaches (as in vehicle numbers) and there's only four of them but it looks to be the same EWS livery. Is this just speculation or do you know something? Perhaps not even speculation. I have zero 'inside knowledge'. I don't even know what external visible differences (other than livery and number of coaches) there are between the various existing class 80x units and/or Hornby's models of them. For example, I got the impression that after the GW electrification scope was cut back the GWR class 800/0 and 800/3 units ended up having more in common with the class 802 fleets (eg. larger fuel tanks possibly?) than they do with LNER's class 800/1 and 800/2 units but I'm not even sure of that. This is exactly the sort of thing I was wondering - had Hornby assumed that they could get away with using the class 800 tooling as-is for the 802s and 805s but have now been told that there are visible differences with the real thing and are having to make a new tooling for the 805s to include these differences? Yes, that's another possibility. I was really just wondering whether the differences between the various 80x were actually visible externally.

Are the equipment boxes etc. on the underframe very different between the class 142, 143 and 144? If not, could they possibly tool up new basic class 142 and 143/144 bodys (two bodies representing the three classes) to fit their existing class 142 chassis as a 'Railroad' model for the modeller on a budget. Or is it just not econmic to produce new toolings for 'budget range' products and only super-detail models are worth the manufacture's while?

Could it be significant, I wonder, that the Realtrack website has been advertising class 143s in GWR and Regional Railways liveries (presumably sans sewage) for some time? Despite what I wrote here on Sunday, I've not been able to bring myself to send the e-mail to Rails Of Sheffield requesting a refund-return - I've had a ValleyLines Pacer on my model railway 'wants list' for years so I'm finding it hard to part with this one. So perhaps you can help me out by answering a couple of questions: are those coreless motors (in the EFE and Realtrack class 143s)? can the interior (and destination blind) lights on the EFE class 143 easily be disconnected/turned off/disabled without breaking them or going DCC?

Not for long in this case for me - the big nasty world outside came crashing down onto my layout as soon as I tried to couple the DMS and DMSL of my shiny new ValleyLines Pacer. The 8-pin electrical coupling is angled upwards and therefore doesn't line up with the 8 little holes on the other carriage - so the two won't go together. I showed my mechanically-minded brother who said that, even if I'd received one which wasn't broken, he didn't think the coupling was very robust and would soon break if one was to couple/uncouple it often. I've not had a model with an electrical coupling between coaches before, so I don't know if the lights on the dummy car are supposed to work when not coupled to the motor car (the head/tail lights on the old-tool Bachmann 158s are certainly supposed to work on both cars without being coupled, but then they don't have an electrical connection). If they are supposed to work without being coupled to the motor car, then the dummy car lights are another thing that is broken on mine. For something that cost me £212.45 I expected to have knocked off or broken several tiny seperately fitted detail parts by now, but the only thing that fell off is the hook from one of the tension lock couplers - which I have put back on ready to return the model. This Pacer is very disapointing for the price, the fact you get a full interior / the motor is hidden being the one big win I can see. That aside, it seems we are being asked to pay for things like sound (I think I read that there is a speaker in the thing somewhere) and interior lighting which cannot be taken advantage of without futher expense converting to DCC (or a stayalive of some sort for the lights). I tried to turn the lights off with the switch underneath but that only took out the directional lighting - the interior lighting still flashed on and off as I turned the power dial... Maybe I'd keep it if it had been sold at the £170 price tag of the FirstGW-liveried example on the RealTrack website, since nobody is likely to do a ValleyLines Pacer in 00 again, but even that would be a bit expensive for me.

I'm in agreement with those who are questioning the rather large number of premium, special-edition, models. At least one other person has already pointed out that there are two blue Mallards. I suppose one is era 10 and one era 3, and one is die-cast and the other not, but surely it would make more sense to do one this year and save the other for next year? The same with the die-cast 'Great Gathering' and 'Flying Scotsman' collections - do the six 'Scotsmans' this year (for the 100th anniversary of the loco appearing) as the die-cast offering for steam this year and save the 'Dublo' A4s for future releases - perhaps one a year for the next six years instead of all at once. I thought it was the other way round - apart perhaps from train sets and some steam-era items in the Railroad range - all 00 model rolling stock was produced as a limited production run. I would guess that the number of units produced for some products is closer to 10,000 than the 2,500-3,000 made in the case of a limited edition, but I probably could do with being educated on this topic. Personally I might (big if) have been tempted by a model of Sir Nigel Gresley in BR dull blue as seen in preservation (and this image from Wikipedia https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2011-04-24_SirNigelGresley.jpg) if it was issued as a normal release and not with a limited/special/die-cast edition premium price tag. Has Hornby ever done it as regular release or only as some kind of special edition? Turning now to the hand we have been dealt, I think the steam product that interests me the most this year is the GWR 14xx; did Hornby ever make these into reliable runners? Also, while I wouldn't be in the market for one anyway, what's with the wheels on the 1924 edition of Flying Scotsman (the one with something like a coat of arms on the cabside and both 'LNER' and '4472' on the non-corridor tender)? The leading bogie in particular looks somewhat toy-like compared to all the other versions in this release.

Interesting. Does that suggest the 805s are not just reliveried 800s but Hornby assumed they could just repaint an 800 model and Avanti have told them otherwise?

So, I decided to take the risk and order a pack... Here is Railroad 43165 with a 1990s mark 4... ... and with a Lima mark 3 (goodness knows how old)... Even on this gloomy layout, I can see that the light greys don't quite match (I think the various different colour bands are different widths too and don't quite line up) but given how dusty the mark 3s are I decided it wasn't quite worth the hastle of returning it. I may have to swap the motorised loco onto a dummy chassis (to keep the dust out of the motor) and leave the two dummies on the layout for a bit to gather dust and thus give a slightly 'weathered' look to better fit with the coaches. While I am stuck with tension locks anyway (due to the Lima coaches having them moulded as part of the bogie), I do wonder why Hornby bothered retooling the Lima power car bogie to include a 'NEM Pocket' on the Railroad power cars. There are two cylindrical tanks where the NEM pocket should be, so it doesn't appear possible to mount the couplings at the correct height and there don't appear to be any alternative couplings that compensate for this. While Bachamann do produce 'cranked' versions of some couplings as spares, these are cranked down while the power cars need one that is cranked up (and, it would appear, to a greater extent than the Bachmann ones are cranked down). The last picture shows the Railroad power car with a straight Bachmann DMU coupler and a Bachmann class 158 vehicle with it's original straight coupler replaced by a cranked one for the purpose of this demonstration. As you will hopefully be able to see, the straight one is still below the downward cranked one. I think there would also a risk of the straight coupling set at such a low height hitting the sleepers of code 100 track on layouts with changes of gradient (I expect it would be particularly bad with code 75 track but I don't have any gradients or code 75 to test with). Effectively therefore, owners of model HST power cars are stuck with the tension lock supplied with the model, regardless of whether it is the newer 'Limby' power car (with 'NEM Pocket') or original Lima one (with mouled couplings). At least you get hooks on the new Limby couplings I suppose so can run them as back-to-back power cars without coaches (the Lima ones have no hook so you need at least one coach between them).

Don't know if it's just what I'm used to, but for some reason I think I like the version with the East Coast purple stripe better than the LNER grey one although it's still a great livery. According to the Hornby website R30166 is a VTEC class 91, so the livery change on the real thing is irrelevant since it wasn't advertised as LNER livery. I know 91111 gained a little 'Virgin' logo when the franchise passed from East Coast to VTEC, but I'm not aware of what (if any) changes were made to the livery of 91110 by VTEC ('11 had an 'East Coast' logo for Virgin to replace, but '10 did not). I cannot see the roof logo on the Hornby website illustration (although I'm aware those are normally photoshops, not actual models, and I'm not sure it would be visible from that angle anyway) or the Warley photos adb968008 helpfully posted above. Is that something that had already disappeared by the time East Coast passed to VTEC and therefore exclusive to the version of 91110 that 'Model Rail' commissioned in East Coast livery using Hornby's old tooling?

I think I linked to the post that contained the picture (along with several others of the Midland Pullman HST) - although the display text (along with preview of the post) that RMWeb has automatically inserted is just the topic title if you click the right part of it you should be taken to the post rather than the start of the topic. In case it doesn't work for you, the specific image can be found here: https://content-eu.invisioncic.com/y320084/monthly_2022_11/93137870-B321-4789-AC28-0422BCE69923.jpeg.6ce52c7a4750eb4e68d94684a37ddc08.jpeg - remember that is not my picture and I can take zero credit for it.

For those such as @ianmacc and (possibly) @Pedro32 who have the latest Railroad (INTERCITY livery) power car pack (R30177) have you tried running them with Lima coaches? If so, could you let met know whether Hornby's livery application matches that on the Lima coaches or are the shades of grey different, depth of each colour wrong etc.? I'd really like to obtain a pack but if the livery doesn't match the coaches I would run with it (Lima ones, I already have a TGS and a TS) anyway then I might as well spend a few quid more on the GWR train set version and get an oval of track and a Hornby mark 3 TS thrown in. The Railroad pack seems to be starting to sell out so a quick response would be much appreciated.