John Tomlinson

I don't want to teach you to suck eggs, but in the top photo, where the misalignment is clear, were the cranks in line on the other side? Sometimes there is play in the motion so that the cranks seem out of alignment, but in fact it's just play showing on both sides. John

If you were aiming for something like the rolling hills of the North Downs, then that's exactly what's happened. Looks great! John.

I'm pleased to have found this layout, and enjoyed watching some of the videos. I wish I'd done more in Belgium back in the day. A few of the ADL "Along Different Lines" tours and shed trips, plus a bit of linesiding for photography. The latter focused mainly on Athus - Meuse, and seemed like jolly hard work for not much traffic. This was in the late '90's, and although full freight timetables were available (IIRC in Lok-Report, or maybe Today's Railways), they seemed mainly to be honoured in the breach! Happy days nonetheless, and I shall follow this thread with interest. John. John.

I'm not more knowledgeable, but would suggest the same. IIRC the S69xxx numbers are on other catering vehicles in emu's, the 4-CEP's for one. John.

These two really look the part, and you should be well pleased with the outcome. They prompted me to dig out the old David and Charles book on the Stanier 4-6-0's, written back in the 70's, which despite being a slim single volume tells us much of what we need to know about these and the Jubilees, the kind of super-detail we now get in the Wild Swan and Irwell loco books being far into the future. I've always found the numbering of these rather confusing, a bit like the sub classes of 37's, as they start to go backwards in batches after the first big tranche, and had forgotten that 44687 was in fact the last one built, at Horwich, and into traffic in May 1951. My grandad who I never met worked there until his death in 1950, and I've always liked to think that he might have made bits for some of the others built there in the late 40's and numbered in the 44xxx series. If 44744 reminds us how economical in beauty this batch was, 44687 is quite the other way, with its high running plate that was carried on into the BR Standards. Thanks for posting these pictures of a very interesting time in British railway loco history. John.

I think they're all acrylic now, BUT BEWARE. Acrylic doesn't mean water based, some of them if not all are solvent based. Which means that if applied on top of other paints they can cause damage. This happened to me some years ago when I sprayed on top of Humbrol traditional enamel, just blistered the whole thing and needed stripping back to the base. John.

Thanks for this, a good tip. I've used Lendons a few times, very reliable and as you say often extremely competitive on pricing. It seems to be a case with them of looking in on a regular basis to see what's become available - I never thought I'd say this, but where would we be without the internet! John.

I hope you are recovering from your fall. I'm afraid that, particularly as we get older, such events take a bigger toll and it takes longer to shake off the effects. I wasn't aware of the Peco carrying units, or if I was I'd forgotten (another ageing thing). Sounds just the ticket for my Rapido APT-E which I'm quite frightened to dismantle. Could well be useful with other units that are tricky to assemble without damage, such as some of the longer emu's, so many thanks for the post. John.

Thanks for that. The photo in the Docks is a stunner in its own right, so much of interest that is no longer with us. John.

Many thanks indeed for such a full and helpful answer. The loco body is certainly of the long bunker type, looking like the ones in your picture above. Mainline gave it the number 69001, which as we know isn't always correct for any particular model, but appears so in this case. The body moulding quite possibly is the one used by Bachmann, it looks identical to the bodies on your 68724 and 69003 in terms of the chimney, dome and trumpet shapes, and also the moulded on worksplate on the splasher. It has the original Mainline chassis and motor, the latter unfortunately filling the cab. What it doesn't have are the large rear sandboxes that you mention and which are clearly visible on your examples, but which should be simple enough to make out of Evergreen plastic of a suitable size. Thanks again for your reply. John.

Plummeting this thread a long way, I have an old Mainline J72, bought decades ago for not a lot, which surprisingly runs very nicely indeed on its split chassis mechanism. Would this be the same variant as your 69003/10, so a late one built by BR? Many thanks, John.

That may well be true in principle, but apparently the A3's were 7P6F, at least before they got Kylchap exhausts and double chimneys. Some of them were blue in the late 40's, early 50's. Sounds like yet another rule honoured in the breach!! John.

Happy to be corrected, but whilst the Peppercorn A1's carried early BR Blue, I'd thought that the timing of the A2 builds meant that none of them passed through Works at the time that livery was being applied, so going direct from LNER Apple Green to BR Brunswick. Obviously the owners can use whatever colour they wish (though hopefully not Porterbrook Purple!) and I'm sure it'll look absolutely stunning when the lining out is complete. John.

FWIW I have the same problem, a missing buffer, also two vertical handrails and a windscreen wiper, all on a secondhand purchase off Ebay where I should have studied the photos more carefully! At some stage, I assume Hornby will rerun the model, maybe in a different livery, say the darker green with or without a yellow panel. I'm hoping a few spares may become available then. John.

Well that video was quite fun! I wonder if I'm the only one who thought that Peter Kay (Bolton comedian) had grown a beard and taken up model railways? I'd agree with much of what he said. "Gatekeeping" is one of those modern phrases, belongs a bit to the under 40's, and I think I'd use the word "snobbery" from my era. It isn't anything new, and took place in spades at the end of steam/ early diesel era. I recall going to the RCTS in Preston in the early 70's as a teenager. Lots of chaps remembering the old days, slide shows of Duchesses on Shap (nothing wrong with either), and a total disdain for anything after August 1968 and "diseasels" (lots wrong with that). They might as well have said "sit down, keep quiet and learn from your betters". I was lucky. I found an older friend who was interested in diesels, and presented in the right way it was a pleaure to learn from him and listen to his experiences about growing up in Liverpool near Edge Hill in the 40's and 50's. I'm also a contrarian by nature, so the more people tell me that something is pointless, the more interested I get. I could otherwise have been lost to the hobby of railways, and modelling, and I'm sure many people of my (and Clive's age) were. So I've a lot of empathy with the message in the video, and I still keep thinking of Peter Kay! John.

Your other option would be to go for a new Hornby mechanism which uses the Lima, now Hornby bodyshell. This isn't as good as the Dapol chassis as it involves a motor bogie at one end only, but might perhaps be more economical. John.

I have posted this picture before, on the Bachmann 45 thread. Done with the first edition of Bachmann 44's, Olivia's grilles and some other detailing. I've since fitted black card inside the grilles to stop the "see through" look. Obviously SYP not original, and also open water filler areas on the roof, as I think the covers fitted as built tended to come loose. Click on pic for details. John.

I don't know if this snap adds anything to the discussion, it certainly gives a clear view of the point at which the bodyside meets the bufferbeam cowl, and also the relation between the headcode box and the cross handrail, Click on pic for details. John.

There's a very interesting picture of Heljan's new D1960 running on the Little Bytham layout in "Wright Writes" - the latest page no.3170. Taken some distance away, so showing the setting, I'm sorry to say that even to my unfussy eye the loco doesn't look right at all, too tall and too thin. The position of the front handrail and headcode box don't look right either. Funny how sometimes a less forensic image can be quite revealing. John.

One of the (few) interesting things about Lord William Hague is that if you close your eyes when listening to him he sounds just as I remember Eddie Waring. Mr Waring was, in any other respect, a far more appealing person. John.

I noticed this recent post on the Rails of Sheffield website, which sounds as if Oxford Rail isn't down and out just yet. https://railsofsheffield.com/blogs/news/🚂-oxford-rail-announce-additional-lner-j2 John.

I have done this using a Dremel, but with the Dremel clamped vertically in a vice that has been suitably padded. Wheel on axle, axle in the chuck of the Dremel. Apply the fine file to the wheel flange very gently, and like you finish with fine emery. For some years now I've been fairly religious about using safety glasses whenever any drilling/ turning is involved. Better safe than sorry! John.

Yes, that's pretty close! I saw the exchange on "Wright Writes", a classic case of how one subject can bring forth useful knowledge on something else. I don't have a triplet either, other than an unmade Kirk/ Coopercraft kit in the "one day" cupboard. I really do want to make it sometime, and was interested to see the comments about white windows on both sides of the kitchen car, something I didn't know before. Every day is a school day in our hobby! John.

That's very helpful, thanks! I shall have to buy a new underframe and have a go. At least it will tell me whether I've the determination to do the rest, or not. I'm not really sure how many I've got, seem to remember they were something like £35 - 40 a pop, so probably quite a few. John.

I've just been reading through the last few pages of this thread, and wondered if you'd reached any further answers about the Class 25 underframes. Like you, I have several of the first edition of the Bachmann 25's, and whilst reading through the Jim S-W creation of a new scratchbuild, never actually faced up to doing one. I hadn't twigged that Bachmann's updated 25 had corrected this error, and that the new moulding might be an answer. Looking at the Bachmann Spares website there seem to be a range of these now available, but it isn't possible to tell if the old chassis block and mechanisms will transfer. Obviously you've found the one with the weight block doesn't work, but I wonder if you or indeed anyone else had tried any of the others. Many thanks in advance, John.