craigwelsh

The Bradwell wb is correct (Dave notes Romfords bind) and the prototype notes with the kit talk about the Crosti. Having a quick skim through the large wad of paper forming the rest of the instructions I didn't see any references to mods needed for the Crosti though or anything on the pages of diagrams. I don't know if this means you don't need to modify it or if Dave didn't intend to cover them or that im too tired to spot them at this time of night!

Great thanks, although the pictures so far look really good it would be nice to see how a coat of grey primer gets rid of the refractions in the translucent material and hides any remaining banding.

In what way? They look alright but are they rigid instead of flexible (or vice versa) or just not strong enough for anything? The instanter has gone into the short position nicely.

I can check the Bradwell chassis tonight if I can find where I put it (nice bring and buy bargain last year..)! I'll check if he says about any issues with the frames and a Crosti boiler. I can't imagine he'll have compromised the wb on something designed for P4. The DJH wheelbase was extended for 00 flanges, not sure about the Comet one.

I think it needs a coat of grey primer to really show up in photos but I think its a great step forward in the previous generation. If you can prime the not quite N cab and post that would be great . Prior to doing any sanding too if possible so we can see it as is so to speak.

Could you do what Robin has done on Barrow Road with the pencils, that looks right while giving tonal variations.

Brassmasters left it off their replacement scale rods in 4mm as well although its on both RTR models. The models seem to replicate the one on the example you were driving but this one on the example recently painted black at the NRM is slightly different:

Needed more Murray Walker Good work chaps, now all you need is a scenic bit

Now I understand the pm! Top bit of step by step writing there Pix, probably worth getting a copy in that there Showcase thing.

Did you possibly mean uncomfortable there? I think the Mink D and G (which possibly would have been the better bet for BR) are quite old kits now by Parkside standards so do have a couple of odd features compared to the more modern stuff. I've got a Masokits chassis for the Mink and blimey he really didn't make that easy!

Putting the brass between two metal rulers with elastic bands around the end can be useful. Clamp the assembly with pliers before doing the fold. Its how I did my solebars rather than putting them in a vice as I didn't have one setup at the time. There is 2mm demoing at Railex by the way for people interesting in watching live..

We need a coin compare, it might be a 4mm one . It does look superb, especially the quality of finish on the weathering.

Just to confirm you are talking about the old Airfix kit of the 35GLW 'Esso' branded tanks? 25' 2 1/2" is the dimension you want for the longer class A tank, both that and the class B drawing are in 'Oil on the Rails' published by the HMRS and a great book to buy - I got mine direct from the HMRS at S4 North for £10. There was also a much smaller tank fitted on the same sort of chassis.

The masters for the roof and that buffer appear to have been made via rapid prototyping from the banding displayed in the material. Looks like a nice kit though. Very impressed with the coach and 128 on the previous page too now i've caught up .

The 20T Stanier brake at least is a direct shootdown of the Connoisseur models Pocket Money Kits etch in 4mm and probably 7mm too. The instructions for the 4mm version were a bit better than the 2mm ones!

He hasn't finished the chassis yet nevermind the body. I do have the RCH drawings for a steel 16T mineral though... Send me my 21t and 16t 2mm ones and i'll think about it .

Maskol or indeed masking tape cut to size can be used for that but as Mick says its easier just to leave the roof off until the body is painted. Its easier to add detail than remove it for the reason Mick said and i'd agree to preferring dimples for handles on modern kits otherwise the things dont stand up against modern RTR.

It would indeed be impressive if they used 05002 as its been scrapped and they'd have to build a new one! I think that site is a rather well thought through argument to be honest, the Germans engines certainly ran at higher speeds as a atter of course and not a one off. I'd think Mallard's extra tail load would have been quite useful considering it was going down hill with a bit of helpful gravity.. Lets hope the Germans don't go putting the gradient profiles next to them eh .

Possibly worth doing a gallery sometime of the best shots in large format?

That looks like educational material for the introduction of the new class, its certainly not a GA or anything. There are many North British drawings in the NRM Swindon works loco collection but they aren't properly catalogued yet. The ones I came across were windscreen glass and the cardan shaft arrangements from those drawn at Swindon.

Erm you do realise it will be made in China in exactly the same way that Hornby (also a British company) do it? Yes Dapol don't have a 4mm track record yet and im skeptical until I see them in the shops but your argument is just factually incorrect there. The gloss finish i've seen applied to Heljan stuff seems to be far too thick and much too shiny, its also on bits that aren't normally that shiny and due to the thickness of application it can't really be fixed with the weathering.

I'd have suggested making two L shapes from the ends and vertical sections of side before gluing these together then fit the sloped sections and then the floor. The reason for this is that a lot of kits can have overlength/width floors that you really want to fix after the sides and ends are formed into a square. You are a bit scuppered if you discover the floor was too long after you stick it to the ends.

Not sure if you got that idea from my post but I certainly don't think that would be guaranteed. Obviously they wont commit to further models until these ones sell out well and they make their money back. Further batches would be profit after production costs indeed but they'd need to be pretty sure they could sell x thousand of them. If the initial ones don't sell then there probably wouldn't be a rerun from anyone. For Heljan any sales using the existing tooling would be profit and people still seem to buy the things so I can't imagine them shelling out to help the new tooling. That is why I think Rail Exclusives would own it.

The twin packs might be unfortunate for the modeller but they would save some overheads for Rail Exclusives. Think of the saving in postage, packaging and credit card fees as well as the time for processing - you only need half as much. It clearly worked in the past anyway with the 37 packs etc so it makes sense for them to halve the amount of 'units' needed to be shifted to pay off the tooling again. I would assume in this case Rail Exclusives will own the tooling as Heljan wouldn't benefit from taking it on afterwards as they already had a 33/0 that could sell. The 37 variants from Bachmann were different in that it was something completely new. The interesting bit about this for someone not interested in 33's is whether Heljan will now make any similar improvements to their own future models with etched parts added bringing them more in line with recent Bachmann/ Hornby releases. Now imagine the Western had got the 'fixed' body treatment, possibly would have been an accurate model cheaper than Dapol are proposing based off something already 95% there.