Wickham Green too Posted March 31, 2023 Share Posted March 31, 2023 29 minutes ago, 4069 said: No, I'm looking at the 1930s GWR version with the white roof and shirtbutton monogram, which is numbered W2780. Don't forget it's only the ex Ambulance Train conversions that had roof vents - so definitely NOT 1930s ! 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparaxis Posted March 31, 2023 Share Posted March 31, 2023 (edited) Sigh... Another fail for the British Model Industry. A stunningly beautiful model without kinematic close coupling. Bogie mounted couplings are so 1980s. I realize that fitting a body mounted NEM 362 in kinematic mount might be a challenge, but that is why the NEM 363 exists. For example, Roco used the 363 in their Bavarian bogie coaches that also have the bogies very close to the end of the coach and where a NEM 362 wouldn't fit. Edited March 31, 2023 by sparaxis Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold gwrrob Posted March 31, 2023 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 31, 2023 It might be that classic model railway scenario, compromise. 2 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wickham Green too Posted March 31, 2023 Share Posted March 31, 2023 Difficult to tell with those great lumps of plastic in the way - but I think fitting proper screw couplings shouldn't be too much of a hassle. 😉 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators AY Mod Posted March 31, 2023 Moderators Share Posted March 31, 2023 50 minutes ago, sparaxis said: Sigh... Another fail for the British Model Industry. Melodramatic. It's not always possible. I've recently had something through my hands with body-mounted kinematic coupling that ended up with a useless, flappy, irritating, unfit for purpose knuckledragger - but you'd think it was better with that simplistic stance. 5 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Barry Ten Posted March 31, 2023 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 31, 2023 A kinematic coupling is one less thing to remove if you're fitting Spratt & Winkles, so a win for me. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold gwrrob Posted March 31, 2023 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 31, 2023 4 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said: but I think fitting proper screw couplings shouldn't be too much of a hassle. 😉 And the pipes in the poly bag. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Accurascale Fran Posted March 31, 2023 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted March 31, 2023 (edited) Hi everyone, As many of you will know we look to fit kinematic couplings with all bogie stock (and some 4 wheeled too!) and have done, but in the case of the Siphon it just was not feasible for us to do so. We did try, but did explain from the outset why we couldn't. Cheers! Fran Edited March 31, 2023 by Accurascale Fran 5 1 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparaxis Posted March 31, 2023 Share Posted March 31, 2023 A little melodramatic perhaps...but it's not going to stop me from getting the siphon I have on order. (I'll see if I can retrofit a Fleischmann 6574) Goods wagons get the NEM pockets removed and replaced with body mounted Kadees. It helps of course that loose coupled wagons had up to 9 inches between buffers! Fran, Accurascale does a MUCH better job at doing things right than some of the "established" players in the market. I have always marveled at the qualitative difference between the "British" and "Continental" models from a nameless manufacturer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthernBlue80s Posted March 31, 2023 Share Posted March 31, 2023 (edited) Given I model the early 80s. I looked into when they were last used in regular traffic, before I ordered one. (Excluding engineering trains and internal user.) Looking through Flickr the latest date I can find a Syphon G being used on an everyday service train, is July 1982 on a parcels passing through Acton. Also thought it might be of interest for some of you modelling parcels trains. Out of interest has anyone a record of a Syphon G being used in parcels traffic later than this? For the sake of accuracy. Stationmaster has clarified, their use was on newspaper trains not parcels trains in that area in 1982. Edited April 1, 2023 by SouthernBlue80s 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wickham Green too Posted March 31, 2023 Share Posted March 31, 2023 According to Slinn & Clarke, the last two condemnations were January 1983. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted March 31, 2023 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 31, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, Barry Ten said: A kinematic coupling is one less thing to remove if you're fitting Spratt & Winkles, so a win for me. I use Kadees myself but fit S&Ws to stock for my mate's layout. All the CCU's I'm familiar with look tricky for clearance without the pockets sticking out too far which, I suspect, is why the Siphons won't be made with them. I do have the outline of a "cunning plan" in mind but can't be sure it'll work until I can measure up the model. Where S&Ws are concerned, vehicles with bogies close to the ends are "interesting" to do. You can't have the paddle hanging down at rest as per the instructions, because it will (almost inevitably) foul the bogie. Instead, it has to start flat and go up through a hole cut in the chassis when uncoupling. Fortunately, I've worked out the MO with the Hornby SR Van B and GLV. It's fairly time-consuming, but not overly difficult so long as one doesn't have a chassis and a floor to cut through. John Edited March 31, 2023 by Dunsignalling 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted March 31, 2023 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 31, 2023 2 hours ago, 4069 said: OK, thanks. Perhaps you should supply it ready-weathered as the shiny white roof doesn't really work for a vehicle that must have been at least six years away from its last repaint 🙂 I which case,given the immediate post war era,you’d have to obliterate most traces of recognition in any case and possibly with it the intrinsic detailed qualities of this model. Ah well,good luck with that then….😩 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
durham light infantry Posted March 31, 2023 Share Posted March 31, 2023 6 4 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted March 31, 2023 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 31, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, Ian Hargrave said: I which case,given the immediate post war era,you’d have to obliterate most traces of recognition in any case and possibly with it the intrinsic detailed qualities of this model. Ah well,good luck with that then….😩 The presence of the monogram supports 4069's assertion that the van hadn't received new paint any later than 1942. Therefore, I'd not only expect the roof to have acquired an overall grey appearance, but for the brown bodywork to have become stained/faded/distressed to some degree. I'd suggest a touch of "personal modelling" input or the donning of official GWR rose-tinted specs in this particular case....😉 John Edited March 31, 2023 by Dunsignalling 1 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted March 31, 2023 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 31, 2023 48 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said: The presence of the monogram supports 4069's assertion that the van hadn't received new paint any later than 1942. Therefore, I'd not only expect the roof to have acquired an overall grey appearance, but for the brown bodywork to have become stained/faded/distressed to some degree. I'd suggest a touch of "personal modelling" input or the donning of official GWR rose-tinted specs in this particular case....😉 John Which is fair enough…and I ,as a young boy,lived through that period and have no rosy view of that era nor wish to relive it the 21st C. BUT…excuse block capitals…there is zero question of my weathering in any shape or form what is a representation of a familiar and well loved vehicle that I remember in so many locations. Call me old fashioned …and you probably will…..but I’m looking forward to the devil in the detail without masking it in weathering .Sorry if it offends members sensibilities 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wickham Green too Posted March 31, 2023 Share Posted March 31, 2023 There are three Ambulance Train conversions with 'shirt button' insignia in Slinn & Clarke ........ either they retained their existing paint ( with additions ) in 1939 or they regained 'shirt buttons' when they reverted to civvy street. There is also a shot of another van ( non ambulance ) complete with 'shirt button' and 'W' prefix. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted March 31, 2023 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 31, 2023 Palethorpes Cambridge ( but made in Tipton ) sausage wagon any takers ? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold gwrrob Posted March 31, 2023 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 31, 2023 8 minutes ago, Ian Hargrave said: Which is fair enough…and I ,as a young boy,lived through that period and have no rosy view of that era nor wish to relive it the 21st C. BUT…excuse block capitals…there is zero question of my weathering in any shape or form what is a representation of a familiar and well loved vehicle that I remember in so many locations. Call me old fashioned …and you probably will…..but I’m looking forward to the devil in the detail without masking it in weathering .Sorry if it offends members sensibilities I’ll be hoping @toboldlygocan come out of convalescence to work his magic on my three Ian. 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted March 31, 2023 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 31, 2023 8 minutes ago, gwrrob said: I’ll be hoping @toboldlygocan come out of convalescence to work his magic on my three Ian. Given his pedigree that will be interesting to see.Look forward to it. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted March 31, 2023 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 31, 2023 (edited) 49 minutes ago, Ian Hargrave said: Which is fair enough…and I ,as a young boy,lived through that period and have no rosy view of that era nor wish to relive it the 21st C. BUT…excuse block capitals…there is zero question of my weathering in any shape or form what is a representation of a familiar and well loved vehicle that I remember in so many locations. Call me old fashioned …and you probably will…..but I’m looking forward to the devil in the detail without masking it in weathering .Sorry if it offends members sensibilities Each to his own, but I prefer to finish models as I remember the prototypes, "warts and all", if you will. Even though I keep a few models in ex-works condition (just as would be encountered in reality), the vast majority of what comes out of the boxes will merely be the stepping-off point for the individual model I desire. I appreciate that some prefer all their models to match the prototypes the day before they turned a wheel in service and began to gain a patina of work-staining. Just not for me... John Edited March 31, 2023 by Dunsignalling 3 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted March 31, 2023 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 31, 2023 3 hours ago, Dunsignalling said: The presence of the monogram supports 4069's assertion that the van hadn't received new paint any later than 1942. Therefore, I'd not only expect the roof to have acquired an overall grey appearance, but for the brown bodywork to have become stained/faded/distressed to some degree. I'd suggest a touch of "personal modelling" input or the donning of official GWR rose-tinted specs in this particular case....😉 John However if teh roof needed repair - for whatever reason - then it would have acquired new canvas and new paint treatment while the rest of the vehicle was left alone because time or money wasn't available to deal with it. Don't forget we are looking at something in the post=war period when manpower was difficult to get hold of as was money. Add in to that that you're a GWR workshop recently under new ownership so you might well want to hang on toa bit of your histpry for a while longer. 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted March 31, 2023 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 31, 2023 6 hours ago, SouthernBlue80s said: Given I model the early 80s. I looked into when they were last used in regular traffic, before I ordered one. (Excluding engineering trains and internal user.) Looking through Flickr the latest date I can find a Syphon G being used on an everyday service train, is July 1982 on a parcels passing through Acton. Also thought it might be of interest for some of you modelling parcels trains. Out of interest has anyone a record of a Syphon G being used in parcels traffic later than this? I think their only booked work at that end of the WR in 1982 was in Newspaper trains. The train in that photo looks like return empties off a Newspaper train. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmrspaul Posted March 31, 2023 Share Posted March 31, 2023 9 hours ago, Islesy said: @4069That is the BR Transitional period livery. Still in GWR Brown, still with the logo, but prefixed with W in accordance with BR policy at the time (although, and I'm sure someone will be able to give greater detail, it should technically be W2780W, being Grouping origin stock?). Paul My understanding is that the suffix wasn't introduced for several years - 1951 rings a bell - as that is when BR standard stock began to be introduced. The suffix indicated where the vehicle would be maintained, so as some pre-nat designs began to be used by other regions they received the new prefix, but the old suffix to show where maintenance and spares would be available. Paul 4 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Popular Post Not Jeremy Posted April 1, 2023 RMweb Gold Popular Post Share Posted April 1, 2023 What a wonderful model this is. The attention to detail in both model itself and application of liveries is incredibly well done and based upon solid research, as Paul’s answers here illustrate so well. Happily, there appear to be quite large numbers of us who are fascinated by the minutiae and detail of this project. I say happily as Wild Swan are shortly to publish a very detailed book on the subject of GWR Siphons, it is a fully corrected, updated and expanded edition of Jack Slinn’s seminal book, written by John Lewis. It will be a large sized hardback to the usual WS format with dust jacket. Heavily illustrated, including scale drawings and running to over 260 pages, it will cost at least £54.95 to purchase(!) John is a hugely knowledgeable individual who also had an input into this wonderful suite of models from Accurascale. A real gentleman, it is a privilege and joy to work with him. Simon Castens 15 2 1 3 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now