robertcwp Posted July 29, 2013 Share Posted July 29, 2013 Some photos: SLSTP in blue/grey with correct roof at the bottom, SLF in blue/grey with incorrect roof in the middle and SLF in maroon with correct roof at the top. Note shorter duct on the roof. P1060896am by Robert Carroll, on Flickr Two more views of the SLFs: P1060897am by Robert Carroll, on Flickr P1060898am by Robert Carroll, on Flickr End views - note the maroon one has been modelled with the original vent above the gangway and no duct down the side of the gangway: P1060899am by Robert Carroll, on Flickr P1060900am by Robert Carroll, on Flickr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted July 29, 2013 Share Posted July 29, 2013 Great photos, they show the problem/error immediately. Good to see that they have modelled the smaller single end intake vent on the maroon offerings. If the maroon SLSTP does turn up with the wrong roof duct, it would provide an easy method of doing a SLC (Sleeper Composite) with or without a yellow stripe. Bachmann are bound to release a SLC themselves eventually, but then they might put the wrong roof on that one too! ;-)) To be fair to Bachmann, apart from the roof error on two vehicles, they have made us a lovely model of a sleeping car. Cheers, Brian. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertcwp Posted July 29, 2013 Share Posted July 29, 2013 That would be most kind - many thanks 1971 if you have it but anything slightly before and thereafter would be a great help Phil Stirling-Newton Abbot in 1971 from WR Coach Working Programme: Stirling-NewtonAbbot_1971 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertcwp Posted July 29, 2013 Share Posted July 29, 2013 Closer view of the end of the maroon SLF showing the original style of vent above the gangway: P1060899a2 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Phil Bullock Posted July 29, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 29, 2013 Thank you Robert Not used to these diagrams - TCVs - is that the Newton Chambers double deckers or recoded GUVs? Looks like BSK & RU & 2 x FK & 2 x SLSTP & 3 X TCV is the best representation we will manage with current RTR stock - at least we can avoid the roof duct issues with the SLFs OK I know we should build some - but if I start a BSO then Bacchy will announce one for sure. Cheers Phil Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flood Posted July 29, 2013 Share Posted July 29, 2013 Looks like Robert beat me to it, I thought he might. Yes Phill, a TCV is a Newton Chambers Two Tier Car Van. As the Working Programme states there were Carflats on Tuesdays and Fridays and TCVs on Mondays and Thursdays. So you have the choice of 1) making some Carflats, 2) making some Southern Pride TCVs (I've tried one already and to be correct needs some major body height adjustments) or 3) use GUVs in place of the TCVs. With the time and inclination either the Carflats or TCVs would look impressive but for sanity the GUV option is probably best. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Phil Bullock Posted July 30, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 30, 2013 Thanks once again! GUVs it is for the moment - looks like TCVs will be getting a vote in next years wish list along with the car flats. Phil Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyman7 Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 It does seem ironic that for years, the accepted approach for RTR was to make a single body type and decorate it to cover as many variations as possible, regardless of the accuracy of the specific tooling. 'Getting it right' was the preserve of modellers. Now, we have the major manufacturers tool up for all the detail variations - witness the proliferation of loco/tender combinations used to create accurate models of specific members of classes of steam locos. The problem now is that the combination of tooling sets coupled with contract manufacturing seems to have created a whole new class of error, consisting of models assembled using the incorrect tooling combination - e.g. the recent Bachmann Hall. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrB Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 Thanks once again! GUVs it is for the moment - looks like TCVs will be getting a vote in next years wish list along with the car flats. Phil Phil, You could always try http://www.southernpridemodels.co.uk/? as they do the TCVs in a kit form. Roy ***edit: Grammer Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidw Posted July 30, 2013 Author Share Posted July 30, 2013 Phil, You could always try http://www.southernpridemodels.co.uk/? as they do the TCVs in a kit form. Roy ***edit: Grammer I thought these were Eastern region only... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
37114 Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 I thought these were Eastern region only... Predominantly but they were also seen in Newton Abbot, an old issue of Traction had a picture of a Maroon warship hauling blue grey sleepers and 4 TCV's Having built both TCV's and Motorail carflat's I can firmly say if you build the TCV out of the box it is easier than kitbashing the car flats, but the TCV is too tall so needs modifying (I think Flood described the process?). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertcwp Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 I thought these were Eastern region only... TCVs appeared on the WR too. There are several published photos of them on the region in the 1970s. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 It now transpires, that the two slightly incorrect roofs (blue-grey SLF and forthcoming maroon SLSTP) are not as a result of a factory error, but based on information received from "a reliable source" (i'm not saying who, but think of a brand of peanut ;-) ), taken in good faith. To many, this is a borderline issue, to a few of us who are bothered, it's not the end of the world, and we've already worked out (above), how to get around this minor hitch. They are still lovely carriages, and i'll be buying plenty to replace my Southern Pride equivalents. Cheers, Brian. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted July 30, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 30, 2013 My sentiments also Brian. Ideally i'd have a few composites in the collection but they might come some time later. For now I'm happy with what's on offer and the majority of idle gazers won't know any difference! Those who are sufficiently "in the know" might also spot the detail inaccuracies on just about everything else I run. Boo ya!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flood Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 Predominantly but they were also seen in Newton Abbot, an old issue of Traction had a picture of a Maroon warship hauling blue grey sleepers and 4 TCV's Having built both TCV's and Motorail carflat's I can firmly say if you build the TCV out of the box it is easier than kitbashing the car flats, but the TCV is too tall so needs modifying (I think Flood described the process?). I've briefly described the process on this post in the Kirkhill thread: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/1271-aberdeen-kirkhill-trsd/?p=950683 . I won't go in to any more detail here as this thread is for Sleepers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orange Alco Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 Looks like Robert beat me to it, I thought he might. Yes Phill, a TCV is a Newton Chambers Two Tier Car Van. As the Working Programme states there were Carflats on Tuesdays and Fridays and TCVs on Mondays and Thursdays. So you have the choice of 1) making some Carflats, 2) making some Southern Pride TCVs (I've tried one already and to be correct needs some major body height adjustments) or 3) use GUVs in place of the TCVs. With the time and inclination either the Carflats or TCVs would look impressive but for sanity the GUV option is probably best. I moved to Teignmouth in late 1974 and only remember seeing Carflats for the Newton Abbot - Crewe - Stirling so the TCVs must have finished by then Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 For those who are bothered by it all, the easy way out of the maroon SLSTP error, will be to just amend the running numbers and stick some '1's on the doors. This gives us the commonallgarden SLC (Sleeper Composite) version and the roof becomes correct, just like magic. It's actually a very useful vehicle, greatly favoured by Western and Scottish Regions, you can also add a yellow stripe depending on modelling period. Plus, you'd be at least a year ahead of the Bachmann SLC. BK Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertcwp Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 It now transpires, that the two slightly incorrect roofs (blue-grey SLF and forthcoming maroon SLSTP) are not as a result of a factory error, but based on information received from "a reliable source" (i'm not saying who, but think of a brand of peanut ;-) ), taken in good faith. To many, this is a borderline issue, to a few of us who are bothered, it's not the end of the world, and we've already worked out (above), how to get around this minor hitch. They are still lovely carriages, and i'll be buying plenty to replace my Southern Pride equivalents. Cheers, Brian. I don't think it's a borderline issue, as it's pretty obvious when you look at the models. It's very unfortunate and shows what a minefield coaching stock can be. Also not a good idea to rely on one source. Auditors try to look for evidence from more than one source to corroborate things. When renumbering a maroon SLSTP (assuming it comes with short duct) to an SLC, best to take care to avoid a Met-Cam built one due to the curved rainstrips. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertcwp Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 I found two photos of TCVs on the WR but neither shows a formation including sleepers. One is of the 12.40 Newton Abbot-Sheffield on 23/7/71 at Dawlish (BR Diesels in Action 3 - Bradford Barton) and the other is of the Newton Abbot-Kensington Motorail passing Fairwood Junction in 1969 (BR Diesels in Action 2 - Bradford Barton). Getting back to Mark I sleepers, Railway Observer August 1970 p 281 noted the branding being changed to 'Inter-City Sleeper' on many of the series 2064-2120 SLF as they underwent modifications and refitting. Prior to that, the branding on blue/grey ones had been Sleeping Car, and in early repaints had been all in capitals. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Taz Posted July 31, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 31, 2013 Can I pick your collective brains please? If I understand correctly the WR was one of the first regions to receive Mk1 Sleepers. I've had a search around but I can't find any details on the web (or I'm looking in the wrong place). Could anyone tell me what formations the Paddington - Plymouth and Paddington - Penzance sleepers would have been circa 1960? I believe there were two distinct sleepers at the time? Were they both formed of MK1 stock. Did the formations ever run with a mixture of MK1 and ex GW sleeper stock? Also what bogies would the western MK1 sleepers have been running on in 1960? If I have understood what has been said above they would have started on commonwealth and later upgraded to B5 but the Wikipedia page on MK1 sleepers says they originally has BR1 bogies. Thanks in advance Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted July 31, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 31, 2013 Timetables varied a bit over the years but as I recall there were two Paddington - Penzance overnight trains. One was "sleeping car passengers only", made fewer stops and was formed of almost all sleeping cars with a few vans while the other made more stops, had both seats and sleepers and a rather longer journey time. I don't recall there being an additional and separate Paddington - Plymouth sleeper (though there might well have been) or whether the "slow" Penzance train dropped a few coaches at Plymouth on the way down in the same way as it did a Mk3 car until recently. Would the Plymouth train have been a Motorail? I'll leave the formations for those with access to the official records to post. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Reid Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 If you take the original Western Region Allocation as built and prior to 1960.... SLF - W2104 (BR Bogies) and W2105-6 (CW Bogies)SLC - W2400-2403, 2418-2423 & 2427 (BR Bogies) W2438 (CW Bogies) SLSTP - W2572-2578 (BR Bogies) W2605-2606 (CW Bogies) All would in 1960, still be running with the bogies as built. It wan't until five years later (anyway) that those with BR bogies had them replaced with B5's - There are details further back in the thread courtesy of Mark (Mark54)..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
'CHARD Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 TCVs appeared on the WR too. There are several published photos of them on the region in the 1970s. Up on the ScR, they reached Perth certainly. I have an incredible photo of some scaling Glenfarg bank behind a Class 47. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 Hi Taz,Here's an example from Summer 1961. The 12.30am (Saturdays Only) Padd. to Penzance was made up BCK/SLF/SLS/SLF/SLS/SLC/SLS/SLC/SLC/SLC/BCK. All the sleepers were Mk1, as probably were the two BCK as well, these may have been provided for sleeper passengers, when not occupying their cabins. Quite a long rake of sleepers, during the week 1 x SLF and 1 x SLS seemed to suffice on this service, with an extra SLC added on Fridays.South Wales services are generally lighter with just 1 x SLF and 1 x SLC being provided amongst ordinary coaches on the Saturday Only 9-30pm Padd. to Carmarthen. These examples are probably either too long or too short for requirements, maybe we can find a set with four or five sleepers? BK (Info from BR Coaching Stock yahoo group) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Taz Posted July 31, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 31, 2013 Many thanks all for the quick responses. Brian, I can cope with up to 9 coach rakes so I may use that formation and drop 1 SLS and 1SLC. Thanks again Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.