Jump to content

N gauge Class 50


Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, MGR Hooper! said:

UPDATE:

 

The Dapol N gauge Class 50s have arrived in the UK.

 

That is good news. Where'd it come from? Is it confirmed by Dapol (I didn't notice mention on their Digest forum) ?

 

With customs, checking and distribution to retailers they could be on sale at TINGS.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, grahame said:

 

That is good news. Where'd it come from? Is it confirmed by Dapol (I didn't notice mention on their Digest forum) ?

 

With customs, checking and distribution to retailers they could be on sale at TINGS.

 

 

 

I had come across the news on Facebook. It was posted by DCC Supplies. They uploaded a video of their limited edition on in the BR Civil Engineers Yellow/Grey livery. An individual asked about it's arrival to which DCC Supplies replied stating thay they had already arrived. They're undergoing QC and DCC fitting etc.

 

They've even fitted it with DCC sound. Sounds amazing to me!

Edited by MGR Hooper!
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

A prototype question regarding 50037 Illustrious, the Dapol model of which portrays the loco in early NSE livery.

I have only been able to determine a timescale of between 1987 and pre-June 1990 for the loco wearing this early livery before it was altered. Could someone help me with a more precise timescale please?

Thanks in advance,

Martin

 

<edited end date>

Edited by MartinTrucks
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, MartinTrucks said:

A prototype question regarding 50037 Illustrious, the Dapol model of which portrays the loco in early NSE livery.

I have only been able to determine a timescale of between 1987 and pre-June 1990 for the loco wearing this early livery before it was altered. Could someone help me with a more precise timescale please?

 

October 1986 to March 1990.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just looking at 50037 in early NSE and it is a bit different to it's classmates that wore that livery, so a simple renumber it ain't.

The white upsweep between red and grey is too wide for all, but most of the others had a slightly less deep grey with a narrow white and the red was then lower, and the blue came down lower too. They also had white around the door windows and a wider white cantrail stripe. So might aswell start with a plain blue refurbished one....

That roof pod and the MU jumper recepticle still grate with me in the photos though. Guess I'll have to seek one out in the flesh for a better look.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just returned from picking up 50040 and 50037 from my local model shop. I’ve not had a really close look at them but from first impressions I’m really happy with them. They’re excellent, quiet runners too. 

 

David

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My two, oddly enough the same identities (040 and 037), have arrived in the post this morning. They're both unpacked and currently being scrutinised. They're nice enough models with things that I particularly like about them and also some things that I'm less happy about. But I guess that the way it is with all models. I've not yet test run them and will probably do that next but that means setting up an oval of track.

 

G

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, steam-driven boy said:

Hi,

Dapol Collectors Club 50007 arrived this morning, another of my rather dodgy snaps - sorry:

DSC01767as.png.8e7ab36576d6a33d8ee06f9b24bfda6b.png

Comprehensive instruction booklet, roof panel access to control lights for us non-dcc-ers.

Regards, Gerry.

 

 

Shame roof is grey and below rib, otherwise nice.

 

Ruggers

Link to post
Share on other sites


 

4 hours ago, steam-driven boy said:

Hi,

Dapol Collectors Club 50007 arrived this morning, another of my rather dodgy snaps - sorry:

DSC01767as.png.8e7ab36576d6a33d8ee06f9b24bfda6b.png

Comprehensive instruction booklet, roof panel access to control lights for us non-dcc-ers.

Regards, Gerry.


I think I shall treat myself to one of these!

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, MGR Hooper! said:


Beautiful picture Grahame! Really want one now.

 

Thanks.

 

As an asside I have noticed that someone has copied the photo and posted it on another forum without asking permission or crediting me. And then they have commented about it/the model. Shame they couldn't post those comments here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, grahame said:

 

Thanks.

 

As an asside I have noticed that someone has copied the photo and posted it on another forum without asking permission or crediting me. And then they have commented about it/the model. Shame they couldn't post those comments here.


Happened to me on an aviation forum. I made an account and contacted an admin and notified them with proof that the image was mine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, MGR Hooper! said:


Happened to me on an aviation forum. I made an account and contacted an admin and notified them with proof that the image was mine.

 

It's the lack of courtesy in not bothering to ask that grates with me. After all they could have posted a hyperlink so that people on that forum had to view the photo here. The photo has been image stacked so I've taken some time and trouble to generate it. I

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, grahame said:

 

Thanks.

 

As an asside I have noticed that someone has copied the photo and posted it on another forum without asking permission or crediting me. And then they have commented about it/the model. Shame they couldn't post those comments here.

 

My apologies: that may have been me. I linked to rather than copied the image; I have now amended the post to include a credit. Please let me know if you would like me to remove it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, jamespetts said:

 

My apologies: that may have been me. I linked to rather than copied the image; I have now amended the post to include a credit. Please let me know if you would like me to remove it.

 

Thanks for being honest.

 

I have noticed on some forums, including RMweb, if you paste a copied hyperlink it will automatically insert the photo from that address/location unless you select the post hyperlink only option. And it's not always obvious that is an option.

 

With copyright an increasing issue and the current litigation environment it is worth being extra careful. However, I'm sure I've still run foul of posting pics without appropriate permission in the past but I try to be more aware and careful now.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, grahame said:

They're nice enough models with things that I particularly like about them and also some things that I'm less happy about. But I guess that the way it is with all models. 

 

I'd be interested to hear what you dislike about them @grahame ?

 

I'm far from being a class 50 enthusiast in general, but I had been considering getting 50037 in NSE livery, for no other reason than I love the livery. However it looks a little more garish than usual there (although that might make an interesting weathering project to tone down).

 

50040 in large logo blue with NSE flashes looks more pleasing to me. But looking closely at your image, the paint masking line between the body side colours and the roof looks quite blurred. Are both sides equal in that respect?

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, justin1985 said:

 

I'd be interested to hear what you dislike about them @grahame ?

 

 

It's probably just three issues that I not so much dislike but that I'm less that fully enamoured with. Sure, it is possible to be picky about a lot of things (as with most models) but for most you'd need to look closely and carefully compare with the real thing. I'll probably mention some of these other things in a review I'm writing for the DEMU UPDate magazine. Nonetheless, overall, the model looks like a class 50 and is a vast improvement over the old Farish model. And there are a whole host of niceties added (like pre-fitted buffer beam details and both refurbished and earlier options available).

 

For me the three eminently obvious issues are: (1) The lower body side tuck in/under - it looks far too insufficiently angled (like the class 142?) making the bodysides look very slab-like over their complete height. Look at the side of the NSE version in my photo above. (2) The multiple control jumper receptacle is not boxy enough - it looks like the wrong type has been fitted. (3) The lower bodyside (lifting?) eyelet lugs are very malnourished - these should obviously protrude. The pic below shows how the jumper receptacle should look, the extent of lower tumblehome tuck-under and how the lugs protrude:

 

100_1332_r1.JPG.68a695d8c2f977ad2219abc8a8018ad2.JPG

 

However, please don't let me put you off buying a model. They are very nice and it's a matter of individuals making up their own mind.

 

G

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.