ash39 Posted July 29, 2012 Author Share Posted July 29, 2012 Loving the finished ones, the 90036 is stunning! I'll send you a message about the 'scrap' now.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Harvey Posted July 29, 2012 Share Posted July 29, 2012 Very nice indeed. Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted July 29, 2012 Share Posted July 29, 2012 Hi- funnily enough im doing couple of Lima 156s ... one I detailed when I was 16, using Hurst Models' parts, so am in a similar situation where I am comparing my detailnig then compared to now, must say its come a long way since then and much more finer and tidier also which goes to show you can improve over time NL Any pics or thread running? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickL2008 Posted July 29, 2012 Share Posted July 29, 2012 Hi- heres a picture here in another thread of my Provincial 156 im doing, been busy withwork as of late so havnt had the time to do a proper write up or article but hopefully will do at some point this week of this one and my Northern Spirit 156 as previously mentioned: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/59163-innaccuraces-of-the-Hornby-scotrail-156-anyone-tried-to-fix-them/ NL Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ash39 Posted July 30, 2012 Author Share Posted July 30, 2012 Well my shawplan order arrived today, great products, quite a slow service, but I'll definitely give them another go as they are very affordable and good quality. So after 12 years, my 90022 gets its nameplates! I also gave it a wash in a mixture of Railmatch frame dirt and dark rust, mainly to bed in the new parts which stood out like a sore thumb, but also to blend in with the old black which didn't really look convincing (see my post above for that story!) The end result surprised me, very happy with it. Saved something from the scrap bin which now will be one of my favourites, although it still does look ready for scrap!! Also treated the roof garden and pantograph to a heavyish wash in the browny mix... The pictures don't really do it justice, very pleased with it. It's dulled down the overall look giving it a faded stained look which I was going for. One of the numbers must have come off during the wash, I'm tempted to leave it though as it fits in with the look. What do you think? Just need to buffer beam detail this one and it's pretty much done. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ash39 Posted July 30, 2012 Author Share Posted July 30, 2012 Forgot to say, some of the wash was still wet on these pictures hence the 'clean' looking bits. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ash39 Posted July 30, 2012 Author Share Posted July 30, 2012 I got the 'big camera' out to get a better shot. Underframe was weathered using paint to pick out the details and three shades of weathering powder for the rest. I will eventually airbrush it, but I'm getting married next month and have no time at the moment to research airbrush purchases and learn how to use one. Save that for winter I think. For a first weathering attempt, on something which was essentially scrap to begin with (wish I'd taken a photo), I'm very pleased. I will probably redo the front valence as well when I airbrush. It's not bad at all, you can only really tell on the second photo because it's taken on an illuminated shelf, but I want it to be 100% because my next layout is going to have lighting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DerekEm8 Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 One variation tha t hasn't been mentioned. the 'vertically clipped buffer ' In the 'nineties' 90011 Crewe 'as new' 900XX Man Picc 90037 Man Picc Still appeared in the 'noughties' 90015 Warrington BQ 25 August 2004 But a month earlier 90015 Warrington BQ 16 July 2004 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Have a feeling it depends whether the heads are extended or retracted (for use when push-pulling coaching stock) - I think vertical is retracted and horizontal is extended? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
meld Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Have a feeling it depends whether the heads are extended or retracted (for use when push-pulling coaching stock) - I think vertical is retracted and horizontal is extended? Yup! Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold big jim Posted July 31, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 31, 2012 the buckeye is up on all the locos with the buffers clipped, down on 015 when unclipped. what was the thinking behind moving the TDM cable receptors from the nose to the bufferbeam? i never realised until recently that a class 90 cab layout is indenical to a MK3 DVT, wonder if a Hornby DVT cab interior/ight module/ bufferbeam gubbins be used to detail a 90 (admittedly a very expensie way of going about it!) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
meld Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 the buckeye is up on all the locos with the buffers clipped, down on 015 when unclipped. what was the thinking behind moving the TDM cable receptors from the nose to the bufferbeam? i never realised until recently that a class 90 cab layout is indenical to a MK3 DVT, wonder if a Hornby DVT cab interior/ight module/ bufferbeam gubbins be used to detail a 90 (admittedly a very expensie way of going about it!) Hi BJ. Easier for the ground/Platform/shunting staff to reach if they hadn't allready unclipped them IIRC. If you look at some of the pic's above .. some have just had the jumpers left thrown over the buffing plate rams or even just hanging down in amongst the air pipes. Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ash39 Posted July 31, 2012 Author Share Posted July 31, 2012 Cheers for the pictures guys, I did wonder about the buffer rotation so that puts that one to bed. I'll model my virgin and intercity ones with one end rotated and one end not. On the buffer front, I found quite a few photos on Flickr of 90018 in Ews livery with round buffers, like the class 89. Thinking of modelling it for that reason, looks very unusual! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
298 Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 I'm sure there are more restrictions as to where the loco's buckeye can or can't be used, but the only one I can think of insists Mk4 stock propelled from the Up Fast or Down Platform road onto Carstairs South Curve must be done with buckeyes, not that anything hired in by GNER would have got that far. It was also rare for failed HSTs to be rescued by a 90, this usually being done by a loco with a conventional coupling and shorter buffers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
298 Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Here's another variation, 90002 probably around 1990/1991, and lacking it's skirts (sorry for the poor photo): Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ash39 Posted July 31, 2012 Author Share Posted July 31, 2012 Here's 90018 with the round buffers. Anyone knows why it differs from the rest which seem to have the clipped type or the freighty type? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
298 Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 On the buffer front, I found quite a few photos on Flickr of 90018 in Ews livery with round buffers, like the class 89. Thinking of modelling it for that reason, looks very unusual! One of mine would have been 90018 during it's time as a spares donor at CE, it later recieved overhauled bogies but still carried Res livery and lacked a pan and other bits. I thought it might have recieved round buffers if it's own had been robbed for another loco, but I've since found photos of it in traffic prior to this in the late 1990's with those round buffers, so can only conclude that they were fitted either as a trial (since most of it's work would have been pulling Mk1 parcels stock), or that's all Railpart had in stock. The only other locos to carry large round retractable buffers are the 73's, and 91's on their blunt end, and It's unlikely CE would have carried spares for those. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ash39 Posted August 3, 2012 Author Share Posted August 3, 2012 It's just come to me. Are the round buffers same as on the 325 units? As it was a parcels 90, could be something to do with that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
298 Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 It's just come to me. Are the round buffers same as on the 325 units? As it was a parcels 90, could be something to do with that. I'd forgotten about those, and yes, they might be the same type (although 325's usually only couple to other units). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
virginhst539 Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 i know the 325s what dragged by GBRF with class 86 and 87s a few years back as well as 92s haveing there turn on these workings but i cant find any pics of a class 90 on these also the class 90 electric loco groups pages is a good read for any other info wanted http://www.class90electriclocogroup.co.uk/class90_fleet_history.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
298 Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 i know the 325s what dragged by GBRF with class 86 and 87s a few years back as well as 92s haveing there turn on these workings but i cant find any pics of a class 90 on these Unless a set failed, I doubt you'd find any photos- the regular dragging only occured when they were used as hauled stock when Mail returned to the rails, or as a precaution through severe winter weather. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Horn Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 325011 TJH01 Heamies 20th June 2001 Copyright Tim Horn by Tim Horn, on Flickr Res 90017 on the front with a few vans in between, not sure what the working was though? Cheers, Tim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
298 Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 Oh, the power of RMweb...!! I've not seen a photo of a 325 in such a consist before.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
298 Posted August 4, 2012 Share Posted August 4, 2012 As requested, here are a couple of photos of 90019 and 90136. I'd admit they're both a bit rough by my own and today's accepted standards (they must be 15 years old), and are definitely "over weathered". The excuse for this is because we decided to improve the scenery on the layout by sprinkling snow over it, which means having to have very dirty stock to match. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ash39 Posted August 4, 2012 Author Share Posted August 4, 2012 Looking good, don't think they look bad at all. Did 90036 only have the railfreight distribution lettering on one side? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.