markw

If you compare the the 4mm product code with the 7mm product code it is not difficult to guess what liveries a second run will be in. https://www.hattons.co.uk/315657/dapol_7f_058_009_14_ton_type_a_tank_wagon_air_ministry_/stockdetail

I can't see that it makes any difference if Air Ministry or oil company owned as they were all under the control of the Petroleum Board in a single pool. There were some built to the Air Ministry design in 1940 for The Oakbank Oil Co. Presumably for crude oil.

The handwheel on the top of a class B tank that operates the bottom valve is usually easier to spot in photos than the actual discharge pipe.

Like this one. https://www.roadtransportimages.com/shop/complete-kits/product/british-rail-maintenance-vehicle-with-commer-dodge-commando-cab-complete-with-transfers

Yes, but while a kadee is better in many ways than a hook and bar, as others have said it is not a rigid coupling so would not help with your problem.

The kinetic cam was never designed to work with the hook and bar coupler, the spring is to centre it when not coupled, when coupled it is centered by rigidity of the coupling. So it is the hook and bar coupling that is non standard when used with a cam. The hook and bar was designed to be rigidly mounted to a wagon or bogie frame. Using a hook and bar that does not provide the rigidity needed to centre the cam is not within the design parameters. Using a hook and bar that is mounted so it can move from side to side is not within its design parameters. As you are coupling two vehicles that have cams the best option is to use a rigid coupling as they are designed to be used, another option that might work would be to place another vehicle with couplings that can't move sideways between them. A track cleaning car will have extra friction which will have a similar affect to more weight.

You are trying to couple the worst possible combination of coupling arrangements, the Bachmann VAA has the single axle 'bogie' which has no centering spring with the nem pocket attached to the 'bogie'. They should work perfectly with a rigid coupling but may need a longer version. The real solution to this problem would be an nem pocket that could be unclipped from the cam, inverted and clipped to the bogie frame.

This is an inherent problem with hook and bar couplings, as the hooks have to be offset the pull is also offset on anything but dead straight track. You seem to be using couplings with different lengths of hook which will make it worse as only one of the notches will be engaged under the bar the other will easily push over the side of the coupling. To improve reliability you need change a coupling to have a matched pair, reduce the weight of the train or increase the radius. The only way to get totally reliable operation of a kinematic cam is to couple it to another one using a rigid coupling such as the roco close coupler.

The highlighted slidebar looks bent forcing the crosshead out of position and probably jamming it solid,and the highlighted pickup is not touching the wheel.

Classix did a fordson e83w which you should be able to find second hand.

There is a photo of the rear here- https://archive.commercialmotor.com/page/9th-april-1937/44

And when the electrics were fitted for use with mk3 DVTs it was an updated system that was not compatible with the DBSOs.

No the control system was changed to work with electric locos

The DBSO could not control a 47 so they had a 47 on each end and ran to Lowestoft for the air show.

Anglia had a set in Intercity livery through the entire franchise. An Anglia DBSO can be run with debranded Virgin mk3s and class 90, this one is ONE livery but there were several in debranded virgin and some hired in from EWS in various liveries.

Let's hope they can correct the positioning of the handrails on the DMBS

Yes it is definitely D1832A, all 10' wb vans had different body styles.

Here is a vac braked one; https://thetransportlibrary.co.uk/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=187960&search=Goods&page=7

Any painted between early 1949 and 1956 would be BR crimson.

The containers were originally 20' flats using freightliner attachments, probably about 7'6" wide to fit between the selfstack crane rails, yellow panels were used to protect the bricks from the straps. Later they were modified to use the ISO twistlock fittings and had angle iron and mesh sides added (similar to the lorries)

Halfords grey plastic primer.

This photo shows a BRCW on the left in TS9 compared with a Bachmann Metro Cammell.

It looks like they do. https://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/brmotorail/h252ae2a9#h252ae2a9

The Arnold refrigerator van appears to be a genuine ferry van. https://uk.arnoldmodel.com/products/arnold-tt-1120-db-2-unit-set-2-axle-ferryboat-refrigerated-wagons-gfhks-transthermos-kuhlverkehr-livery-period-iv-hn9724 Gfhks/Gfkhs Built from 1935. Retired by 1969. https://modellbahnfrokler.de/archiv/zeichnung-t.html

Like this.