dibber25

Obviously, I can't comment on Stationmaster's estimates and calculations. I'm not actually privy to that information anyway. I will simply make a couple of general points. Firstly, choice of prototype for any model requires an up-front 'guesstimate' of how many you might sell. None of the 'main stream' manufacturers had shown any interest in the 16XX. In Bachmann's case they already have two pannier tanks in their range (57XX and 64XX) plus a third (94XX) in preparation. At a guess, if Hornby does a pannier tank, they'll take the opportunity to re-do the half-cab, as it offers some wonderful opportunities for cab detail, which is a Hornby speciality. Secondly, fluctuations in the exchange rate can play havoc with costs and, already tight margins, to the extent that I think it unlikely that - post Covid-19 - any locomotive other than the most basic train-set 0-4-0 will come in at £100 retail, especially when post, packing, handling and VAT have to be taken into account. (CJL)

There's a story - probably apocryphal - that Quebec Province produced a mainstream movie specifically aimed at screenings in France to promote the production of French-language movies in Canada. When it was screened in France, the French had added subtitles! (CJL)

It's UK-based with Rapido's UK operation. The Canadian HQ of Rapido is in Markham, Ontario, a new town suburb of English-speaking Toronto. There is unlikely to be any need to know a word of French (but your English better be impeccable!). I've been several times and never had to use a word of French. The only time it would have been useful was on the Halifax to Montreal train where the Train Manager deliberately spoke French as soon as he recognised that I was English! (CJL)

I've got the basic parts of this kit - the cast sides and ends. They aren't too bad, considering their origin. I've never built it, mainly because the pressed aluminium roof that came with it was typical MTK. It didn't look like an ECW roof and it didn't fit the rest of the parts, either! I had planned to layer-up a solid Plastikard roof, sand it to shape and see if I could fit the thing on a Heljan chassis. I'm never likely to bother now, so I'll see if I can find the bits, if you want them? My next railbus project is Sc79979, the only AC railbus to get small yellow panels on its original light green paintwork. Plus of course, it needs horns on the roof and one or two other tweaks. Not sure about the folding steps on that one. The other four had theirs fitted at Swindon Works but I've a feeling the Scottish one didn't. (CJL)

The Bachmann model is not in the early light green. It's in this dark green shade and its pretty accurate to my eye. It's just rather shiny - like a brand-new unit rather than the dull, flat dark green of the unit in my photo. As far as units on the WR were concerned, all the London area suburban units (so all the Pressed Steels) dating from 1960 and after were dark green. The only light green units were 1958-built Gloucester CC units used on the fast Oxfords, and the Gloucester-built singles (Class 122) which left the area as soon as the Class 121s arrived. Further out from London, the Derby units (Class 116) could be found in both dark and light green, often mixed in the same 3-car unit. (CJL)

It was intended to be light-hearted. (CJL)

I apologise unreservedly to Paul for the suggestion that his material had appeared in books in the past. This is clearly not the case and I withdraw that comment wholeheartedly. As I said, its a section of the magazine that I'm not usually involved in, and I had gained a completely false impression. (CJL)

I pray to never hear the words Ruscombe or Waltham St flipping Lawrence ever again. At least not in a thread that's supposed to be about the Bachmann 117!! (CJL)

I've had a Lima conversion half-done for about 15 years. It only needs the paintwork completing and a possible swap of the old Lima chassis for a modern Hornby one. Still trying to decide whether to complete it now or simply try to sell it as it is. (CJL)

Well, that picture certainly shows that they were red when they left the factory, so full marks to Bachmann. However, it is worth noting that Swindon had its set specification for certain things and under frames were a case in point. Here's a little story to illustrate. I was, for a while, owner of AC Cars railbus W79976. AC Cars painted the under frames like all bus chassis were painted at the time - aluminium (silver). Before the rail buses ventured out onto their first branch line duties, Swindon fitted the folding steps and the cab interior partitions - and painted the under frames black. After all those years it was still easy to find the aluminium paint if you crawled far enough under W79976. So I'm betting that the factory spec was red buffer beams and that's what Bachmann copied, but that the Western Region painted them black before they went in to traffic. I'll be painting mine black in due course. (CJL)

My all-time favourite DMU picture, taken on a Kodak Brownie when I was 17. Derby (reduced to 2-car) unit at Savernake Low Level on a Newbury-Westbury working in the summer of 1964. Though the West signal box survived for a long time after the station closed, there is now nothing left at this site and it is heavily overgrown. (CJL)

Ah, we're back to talking about the Bachmann Pressed Steel 3-car (mine's not a 117 - it's a green one from the days when trains had proper names). I'm still no nearer to finding out if the intermediate red buffer beams are correct. It's difficult to believe it's a mistake as Bachmann are usually very hot on this stuff, the legacy of Merl Evans, I suspect, but I just can't remember them as anything but black. (CJL)

Stumbled across this , probably taken by my late brother. 121 and DTS on the Windsor branch. Taken from the Windsor relief road. Sorry its not exactly appropriate for the time of year. (CJL)

No, John, I don't have any market research regarding any of these obscure locomotives but I have sat in on meetings for the past 15 years looking at what might be viable subjects for ready-to-run models. For one thing, unless your selling price is very high (and modellers don't generally like very high prices) you need a lot more than a 1,000 run to make a project viable, never mind profitable, at an affordable price. That means a loco that is likely to have broad appeal. I tried for many years to get someone, anyone, to produce 18000 in ready-to-run, and others have finally succeeded. But I know that when I proposed it there were always grave doubts about getting the numbers to make it viable. And this was a loco that did a fair bit of running and was something of a 1950s WR icon. It also had three liveries, so a production run could be sliced up to suit individual tastes. But just because I liked it and I thought it was great and I wanted a model of it, didn't make it stack up as a surefire viable project. I hope DHP1 stacks up for KRM, but I am allowed to have my doubts, and to express them. (CJL)

Did I say "I told you so?" I can't see where I said that. Are you putting words in my mouth? Expressions of Interest don't make anything viable. (CJL)

I can't speak for the Paul Lunn articles because I have to confess I don't study them that closely and the proofs usually appear on days that I'm not working. I believe that most of it has appeared in his books in the past. However, I can state that I'm not aware of any other recycling of material. Everything the rest of us produce is new. The Jones Goods belongs to me, was painted by George several years ago, and the pictures were used to illustrate a technique. It is necessary, from-time-to-time, to revisit techniques as there are only so many of them and there are always new readers who want to learn them. In your original post it was your last remark that offended. It was a cheap shot at a team that has really been up against it in recent weeks and actually felt quite proud of what they had achieved. If you need spares for your 303 let me know. I have one that I never completed because some parts got lost at some stage. (CJL)

You're very welcome, Peter. I've always enjoyed what I've done. We're still scheduled to have that contest over whose method of doing plaster sheet is best! (CJL)

But there cannot possibly be enough of you to make it commercially viable, never mind commercially successful, which is very different from liking it and wanting a model of it. (CJL)

Thank you for those kind comments. The lockdown hasn't been kind to my health and the recent weather here in the east has stopped me getting enough exercise. One of the things which is happening because of lock-down (I'm 73 and vulnerable so I'm on my 16th week now) is that stuff happens in fits and starts. We had nothing to review, then I receive Bachmann's DMU (direct to my home from Bachmann) and since T4U opened again, I've been able to get hold of a Hornby Prairie and a Dapol 29 to review, and support our local retailer, too. I know other members of the team have locos to review, too. I read recently that 1.5million people have listed model-making as one of the things that has got them through lock-down. At least some of those will be railway modellers, no doubt, so it should be seen as encouraging news for all our magazines. We are rivals but we'll all have been facing similar problems. (CJL)

More time on our hands? Yes. But you can't do a lot with time if you can't pop out and buy the stuff you need, if you don't know whether review samples are stuck somewhere in the system because your post room is closed etc, if everything takes several times longer to do because you're working under unprecedented conditions. I find that comment deeply insulting, actually - a case of someone who has nothing to do with his time except snipe. This was the first - and only - issue produced totally under lockdown conditions. In all that spare time that I had I built a Scottish castle from scratch (had to wait a week for materials because even Amazon couldn't cope any quicker) and produced about 10 pages of content and my colleagues did similarly, from lock-down locations spread between Newcastle and Guildford. I also produced a 4pp review but due to having to post the model off for photography I couldn't turn that around in time. If you didn't enjoy the issue, fair enough, say so by all means but don't make smart remarks about people who did a difficult job under very exceptional circumstances. (CJL)

A picture of the engineering prototype of this model appears in MR276 page 9.

It always fascinated me that - purely for collectors' value purposes - a Kitmaster kit was worth more if it was still sealed in the original cellophane. It struck me as absurd. If you haven't opened the kit, you don't know if it's complete or even if the box contains kit parts and not just something else that rattles. I recall my Mum once bought a box of Cadbury's chocolates only to find that inside, was a block of wood. It was a box intended for a window display, which had been sold by mistake. So, by the same token, a Hornby loco should have been taken out of its box and run - at least occasionally - otherwise it could simply deteriorate through lack of use. (CJL)

That's what we're aiming for. Moving the coupler mount would have involved major redesign of the cast chassis block and the cost would have scuppered the project. My personal view - and I stress that it is just my view - is that anyone with major concerns about the front end appearance of any loco will be using a scale screw coupling anyway. I've sent one of the two samples I had (and had given a thorough running-in) to the photographer and he has prepared a new video clip which will hopefully be on the Model Rail FB page before too long. (CJL)

That was an assumption made by someone posting on RMweb. The livery samples are not EPs, they are pre-production models and the minor issues relate to livery. (CJL)

I'm not the Editor of a magazine. I haven't been since 2008 when Model Rail was still under the EMAP banner. I'm not privy to decision-making at Bauer but I assume that when any large publisher deals with an outfit such as Pressreader it is on a mass deal, not a title by title basis. I'm not suggesting that I object to my work being available on Pressreader, as I'm paid for it by my employer, so it is Bauer's not mine anyway. Copyright infringement is a different matter altogether and certainly does damage to both businesses and individuals. (CJL)