Kernow GWR steam rail motor

[Dragonfly]

Well, mine was due to arrive yesterday, but Royal Mail sent it to the wrong delivery office. So maybe tomorrow, maybe later... I wouldn't mind, but the other delivery office is only four miles away from the correct one!

 

And so the anticipation grows!

[Edwardian]

I was out today, so was pleased to come back just now to a very welcome email sent earlier in the day by those tireless folks at Kernow saying "Your order has been shipped". 🙂

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 30 by Edwardian
spelling

[JSpencer]

18 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

I was out today, so was pleased to come back just now to a very welcome email sent earlier in the day by those tireless folks at Kernow saying "Your order has been shipped". 🙂

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ah you see, you were not last. I am still waiting but then mine is DCC sound, abroad, ordered around xmas 2022, surname begins high in the alphabet etc etc....

[rprodgers]

50 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

I was out today, so was pleased to come back just now to a very welcome email sent earlier in the day by those tireless folks at Kernow saying "Your order has been shipped". 🙂

 

 

 

 

Which version have you ordered?
Hope it arrives safely !
 

R

Edited January 30 by rprodgers

[Coppercap]

2 hours ago, mikesndbs said:

00:00 Introduction

00:28 Arrival and unpacking

00:53 packing and accessories

01:06 Instructions

01:42 first close up look

02:22 Initial prototype history.

03:05 First test run

04:45 Detail close ups

06:35 Underframe details

07:25 Lighting inside and out

07:57 Initial lubrication

08:15 how to open the body and problems encountered.

09:36 LED wire concern and how to avoid breaking.

09:58 Internal details.

11:49 Destination boards

12:52 Running section and extra history.

15:22 Trailer coach operation.

16:20 what’s that pesky clicking sound? Last tip

 

 

I notice that you said the LED at one end (the 'leading' end) has failed completely - the LED on mine has failed at the other ('trailing') end. It was certainly working for a few minutes. After seeing you showing the getting inside, and the complex and fragile wiring, I'm reluctant to even have a look inside mine. If I did, I don't think I'd be able to find what's at fault and fix it anyway...

Mine was a bit hesitant initially at slow speeds, but after running-in it was better, but when attempting to start realistically it is still not as smooth as it ought to be. I think might be going back for replacement...

I'm not too disappointed, as faults do happen, but it did cost £180...

[Dan Hamblin]

Similar to what others have reported - my model of No. 93 is very hesitant to move off when running cab first but smooth as silk in the other direction. That's on straight and curved track. I'll give it a further 30 minutes running in each direction at the weekend and see if it improves. Not so bad that I would send it back though.

 

Other than that the detail is excellent and I like the realistic subdued interior lights. Well done to Kernow for seeing this through.

 

Regards,

 

Dan

[JSpencer]

49 minutes ago, rprodgers said:

Which version have you ordered?
Hope it arrives safely !
 

R

Thanks. Preserved version. 

[Edwardian]

1 hour ago, rprodgers said:

Which version have you ordered?

 

Why an Edwardian one of course!

 

The lined chocolate and cream with the prize monogram

[mikesndbs]

Well I never expected this, absolutely excellent well done Kernow Model Rail Center.

 

 

[rprodgers]

5 hours ago, Edwardian said:

 

Why an Edwardian one of course!

 

The lined chocolate and cream with the prize monogram

Good choice I am pleased with mine.

A first time in r-t-r in this particular livery.
I’d just wondered if you might have been tempted by the other “Edwardian” the 1908 all over brown.

 

[Edwardian]

4 hours ago, rprodgers said:

Good choice I am pleased with mine.

A first time in r-t-r in this particular livery.
I’d just wondered if you might have been tempted by the other “Edwardian” the 1908 all over brown.

 

 

The brown lined version does look very good. I do ponder if this livery is not best applied to the version with the narrower window and side tank filler? Perhaps there is a picture of No.63 in this livery with the original window arrangement. I would hope so. But, with only Lewis to go on, the examples pictured in brown livery suggest the retrofitting of narrow windows and filler cap may have already taken place. 

[Miss Prism]

SRM 63 in what is thought to be brown livery.  (There was an RMweb discussion about this somewhere, iirc.) It retains its below-waist panelling. The Kernow has below-waist panelling, because that is what the preserved 93 has. It's engine compartment windows have been updated. (Again, like the preserved 93, although the prototype 93 never had the early-style windows.) It has an original low bunker.

 

Here is 63, later, in crimson lake. Date unknown. All its below-waist panelling has gone. Bunker state unknown. Front sandboxes are not yet in front of the bogie frame. My guess is c 1920.

 

 

[Mikkel]

The 

5 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

It's engine compartment windows have been updated

 

For details and photo, see this page and scroll down to "Water Fillers" near the bottom:

 

https://didcotrailwaycentre.org.uk/zrailmotor93/features/features.html

 

[melmerby]

Replacement 97 on it's way, hopefully here by Friday.

 

Nice quick service from Kernow - well done.

[didcot]

My 97 will have to go back to. Something wrong with the l/h motion that's pulling  the motion bracket back and forth and straining the pins. Also the top part of the motion is catching the underside of the body on corners.  I've sent a quick video. But it's a lovely model.

[David Bigcheeseplant]

I have noticed on all the fully lined chocolate and cream versions that the entrance doors are below waist level are painted black when they should be lined chocolate!

 

David

[Edwardian]

"Your parcel from Kernow Model Rail Centre Ltd is due to be delivered:

Today, Thursday, 1 February 2024
Between

09:49am and 11:49am"

 

I will, naturally, be out during that slot, so.......

 

9 minutes ago, David Bigcheeseplant said:

I have noticed on all the fully lined chocolate and cream versions that the entrance doors are below waist level are painted black when they should be lined chocolate!

 

David

 

I'm not sure about the lining, because it does not look as if there is any beading on the lower part of the door, but, yes, I cannot see why it should not be painted chocolate.

 

Of course, the photograph record in B&W, but to my mind chocolate would have seemed the default assumption and, to my eyes, it does look odd in black.

 

It's always hard to judge such things, but on the official view below, I see no change in tone between the waist panel on the passenger doors and the lower part, whereas the black of the solebar (albeit no doubt to  different finish) is obviously a different tone.

 

[David Bigcheeseplant]

The black door really bugs me, but I notice its on the RAL code for the decoration supplied by Kernow so why nobody picked this up is a shame as I was tempted with this variation. 

[Edwardian]

😊 Runs like a dream straight out of the box.

 

 

At last, some more GWR branch fodder! 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 1 by Edwardian
spelling

[Gwiwer]

22 minutes ago, David Bigcheeseplant said:

The black door really bugs me, but I notice its on the RAL code for the decoration supplied by Kernow so why nobody picked this up is a shame as I was tempted with this variation. 

Until it was mentioned here I hadn't even noticed.  It doesn't bother me at all.  Accurate representations of things this old are very hard to achieve given the almost complete absence of colour images from the time.  In any case a light weathering can add a bit of brown to the door panels and a little track dirt along the tumblehome the combined effects of which might cancel each other out and give a more or less homogenous colour to the layout-viewer's eyes.  

[AY Mod]

1 hour ago, David Bigcheeseplant said:

The black door really bugs me, but I notice its on the RAL code for the decoration supplied by Kernow so why nobody picked this up is a shame as I was tempted with this variation. 

 

Have you looked at it in the flesh to see how much an issue it is to you personally?

 

You may be hasty to apportion blame too as it's not as obvious as Edwardian's higher contrast images above plus I'd question whether it should be chocolate. Framing of all other parts outside of the gold lining is black and panelling inside the gold lining is chocolate. The bottom of the centre doors is outside the gold lining without another section of lining to contain the chocolate. The sepia-toned pic above proves little one way or the other.

[David Bigcheeseplant]

1 minute ago, AY Mod said:

 

Have you looked at it in the flesh to see how much an issue it is to you personally?

 

You may be hasty to apportion blame too as it's not as obvious as Edwardian's higher contrast images above plus I'd question whether it should be chocolate. Framing of all other parts outside of the gold lining is black and panelling inside the gold lining is chocolate. The bottom of the centre doors is outside the gold lining without another section of lining to contain the chocolate. The sepia-toned pic above proves little one way or the other.

I haven't seen one in the flesh only in videos and photos but it did draw my eye and first I thought it might be some kind of protective tape that hadn't been removed or just a one off on the  railmotor in the video so then checked other images and they were all the same, hence why I raised the issue.

 

Although I am way too young to remember the livery first hand, photographic evidence and painting specification is pretty conclusive it should be brown and match the rest of the coach.

[mikesndbs]

OH NO, I was just making a feature video of my railmotor when I noticed the tail lights are now super bright, madly so. And the front lights are now both dead Grrrrrr Just when I was well in love lol.

Clearly some kind of diode or switching transistor failure and I bet the tail/reds will fail soon.

 

Why do there always have to be these ruddy problems :(

Edited February 1 by mikesndbs
add picture

[The Stationmaster]

18 minutes ago, mikesndbs said:

OH NO, I was just making a feature video of my railmotor when I noticed the tail lights are now super bright, madly so. And the front lights are now both dead Grrrrrr Just when I was well in love lol.

Clearly some kind of diode or switching transistor failure and I bet the tail/reds will fail soon.

 

Why do there always have to be these ruddy problems :(

Simple answer - lamp cases were often grubby and GWR red painted lam cases were often criticised for being difficult to see (by Signalmen)/. Lamps weren't normally lit during daylight hours unless there was a listed tunnel through which thetrain would be running.  And, apart from the very small side light on some lamps (invisible at any sort of distance unless the lamp was burning with too big a flame) you had to be pretty near square to see the light in a properly trimmed lamp during darkness,

 

So get out the dirtying box and get to work dealing with any ridiculously bright LED head and tail lamps and making the lamps cases look more like the real things were in evertday traffic.  And obscure the LED glow at the same time.   Regrttably for thsoe unfamiliar with the light coming from oil lit head and tail lamps the LEDs used on many models give a very misleading impression

[Edwardian]

Before we get into the whole territory of 'if-it-bothers-you-that-the-14XX-doesn't-have-an-ashpan-it's-your-fault-for-looking-at-it-from-the-wrong-angle', it is black, it's obviously black, in the flesh it looks black. Whether that is (a) inaccurate or (b) subjectively that noticeable for you or (c) bothers you, are three distinct issues!

 

 

I have said in the post above what appears to be the case to me, and what colour I'd expect it to be, while noting that one should not place too much reliance on how B&W pictures of the period appear to show colour differences.

 

The further point in favour of black lower doors seems not so easy to overcome. On the model the lower portion of the door is flush with the black edged gold beading. In such circumstances, there would indeed be no division between the black border and the lower panel. In painting the lower doors, Kernow has actually treated the subject consistently with the physical tooling. Logically, the lower doors would be black on this basis.

 

The problem is, of course, that the tooling here is wrong. There should be, and was on the prototype, the same step down from the beading line to the doors as there is on the lower body. The fact that the passenger doors are recessed does not change this, they are still treated as other doors and the sides in this regard. This can be seen on the drawings reproduced in Lewis and in numerous photographs, of Os and Rs and, indeed, all panelled standard diagrams of railmotor.  

 

The picture below is actually a Q, but I use it simply because it is a very clear view of the feature; the lower part of the double doors is not flush with the bottom of the waist beading. If one thinks of it in constructional terms, it is only to be expected that the lower doors would be flush with the waist panels above, not with the beading laid over it. On GWR panelled coaches, it's generally only in the case of oversheeting on ageing carriages where an area would become flush with the beading. As I say, a careful eye will reveal the passengers doors of the Os and Rs appear the same way, as do the official drawings. 

 

 

This tooling error is common to the double passenger doors on both the lined chocolate and cream No.61 and the all brown No. 63, and, I suspect, to the single passenger door on the lake No.85. The only difference is that the error does not create the same livery problem with all over brown and lake versions where the lining on the beading is not black.

 

It is only by having the model in my hands that I have spotted the tooling error that is the explanation for what is almost certainly a livery error in the case of No.61. 

 

The choice would seem to be between leaving it or trying to fix it. Either is a valid response, but "don't look upism" in saying it isn't actually wrong is not a response I have much sympathy with. 

 

If fixing it, the most accurate fix would be to drill out the black lower doors, paint them chocolate and recess them. The less traumatic visual fix is to add a gold line to mark the bottom of the waist beading line and paint chocolate beneath it. 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 1 by Edwardian
Spelling!