csiedmo

Regarding the insulated vans with recessed doors in the OP, is it the case the the ones with external framework are dia 800/801 and those without external framework are dia 134? Or were there other types?

Thanks,

Ed

The company named Railway Plants Co situated in Leeds made some coaches for Finnish State Railways in the end of 1800 century. I have tried to find information of this company but with no success. Please let me know if you have any information of Railway Plants Co, Leeds.

 

Petri Sallinen

Helsinki, Finland

Hello Petri,

I assume you've already seen this:

https://www.gracesguide.co.uk/Leeds_Railway_Plant_Co

Not much, I know!

Best wishes

Ed

Bit of a wild shot here, but has anyone got any photos of the old Goods Sheds at either, Denholme, Ingrow East or Cullingworth, or failing that, does anyone live anywhere near Cullingworth that may have, or may go take a picture of the Great Northern Trail info board that shows a pre-demolition photo of the Cullingworth Shed?

 

 

Many thanks in advance

Hello,

I don't personally have photos of any of these sheds, but there are definately photos of Cullingworth shed in Great Northern Outpost Vol 2. (IMHO a "must read" for anyone interested in the Queensbury lines). Link below.

http://kwvr.co.uk/shop/great-northe-outpost-vol2/

Cheers,

Ed

Hello everyone,

Does anyone know of any books available that show clear photographs and/or a track plan of the good yard at Taunton pre-1970s?

(I see that there is a track plan on the tauntontrains website, but it makes my eyes bleed, so I could do with the clearer/larger one)

Thanks!

Ed

České Dráhy (Czech Railways) do a good line in bus shelter stations ...

 

CIMG2654.JPG

Incidentally, if you do ever venture out to this place, don't forget to visit the nearby ossuary (bone chapel)

 

CIMG2677.JPG

Yes - this really is a station. The platforms are those slightly less weedy bits between the rails.

 

Great fun actually, riding around on these sorts of trains/lines, if that sort of thing floats your boat.

I was there in 2007 but I don't recall it being particularly green back then.

Bradford Forster Square in the late 80s, was perhaps more spooky than despressing. And access to the Manchester bound platform at Mytholmroyd in the late 80s was genuinely frightening!

Hello,

I can confirm that D6315 ran with warning panel and no headcode boxes. There is a commercially available slide of it with D6311 at St Blazey dated August 1964.

Cheers,

Ed

Hello Phil,

If you look closely at the second photo that you posted in your reply showing 6331 from "the other end" you can see that the line of the bottom of the bodywork continues round across the nose at the same level until it reaches the nose end doors. This was the source of my conjecture about riveting the body to the chassis.

However, scrap that idea! I hadn't noticed in my photos (as is clear on your third photo) the rivets going up the side. That makes it look more like they are actual patches of new bodywork. I can't think where that might be necessary in symmetry? Could she have been fitted with a pair of ultra low head code boxes at some point? Or somebody made a mistake and cut the head code appertures in the wrong place during the conversion?

For your info, all the photos I have of 6331 in GSYP show that end of the loco and the rivets are there in all of them. We may never know!

I look forward to seeing your model riveted 6331

Cheers

Ed

Glad this topic has resurfaced ... was about to resurrect it myself!

 

We have had a Dapol 22 as D6331 for a few years but Jimbo not entirely happy with it - see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06TPwf8px1k&t=474s 10 mins on, our weathering probably corresponds to how she looked after working down to Exeter in May 71 and catching fire en route - and never working again

 

The acquisition of another model has prompted us to redo it - but a few questions emerge.

 

See https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=sJ%2fP2ukw&id=228D935FF4C8081E8AB486B30D8643411626E733&thid=OIP.sJ_P2ukwZ6kth-0P6VCHpAEsC6&q=D6331&simid=608034802123606281&selectedIndex=9&ajaxhist=0

 

So - what are those riveted patches about? Seem to be on this end of the loco only. We'll be looking at replicating those with Archer rivet transfers over a transfer patch. And what are the fittings at the bottom outer corners of the nose end - outboard of the lamp brackets?? They are absent from the Dapol model....

 

Cheers

 

Phil

Hello Phil,

I've been having a look through my photos and think I can have a reasonable stab at answering your questions, although I don't know for sure.

The riveted patches: If you compare the position of the horizontal line of rivets with any other member of the class, it is where there a seam all the way around the loco where presumably the bodywork joins the chassis.

So my assumption is that someone decided to attach the bodywork to the chassis and to the end doors with rivets on this occasion.

The corner fittings: These are in the same position where the headcode discs used to be. If you can find the colour photo of D6319 inside Swindon post 1971 overhaul it shows the shape very clearly. There is a vertical element which seems to be where the hinge for the disc was (maybe it is that same hinge?) and a oval element to the inside of that, which covers the hole where the disc market light used to be.

Hope that makes sense!

Best wishes,

Ed

I see that the announced...

377-625B 12 Ton BR Plywood Fruit Van in BR Bauxite early livery

...has gone missing from the Farish product list on the last couple of updates.

I wonder if that's a clerical error, or if its been axed?

Looks more like you are cracking your knuckles for a fist fight.

 

I'll introduce myself tomorrow, I'll be helping on Lydgate.

Oh, I thought he was going to bowl a few off-breaks. 

I am trying to remove the bogie frame on my Dapol Class 2 so I can inspect and lubricate the gears. According to Dapol it should just unclip but I can't budge it and am scared of using too much force in case I break something. Does anyone have any tips?

You don't state the gauge of your loco but I assume they're all built the same way. Mine are N gauge and are attached with clips at the top of the sides of the bogie frame. The frames aren't flexible as such so it's not really a question of squeezing the frame sides, but holding the frame by its sides parallel with the chassis and pulling gently but firmly seems to do the trick for mine.

Not a lot to report Rich, just plodding on with constructing the P&C work for the new/replacement junctions on the curve. I have also been doing some more research into the train workings and formations, perhaps I will post some of the results in due course but not sure anyone is that interested.

 

Regards John E.

As a Leeds resident, I'd be very interested to see your findings

Hello all,

I've been looking at photos of facilities for handling milk tanks in the 1960s and many (e.g. Torrington, Hemyok) have tanks both in the loading/unloading area and some others stored in a siding.

Do we know of a prototype with a single road to handle its tanks? i.e. only one train of tanks can be accommodated at any one time, no siding available, or would a siding always be required for operational reasons?

It appears that Moreton-in-Marsh might be such an example, but it's not obvious from the photos that I have seen.

Thanks,

Ed

Absolutely superb! Top shelf, brown paper bag train porn that mate.

 

Given the perilous nature of british weather maybe you should invest in one of these?

http://www.greenfingers.com/product.asp?dept_id=500609&pf_id=LT2903D&co=fr&gclid=CLPBxaSLpsYCFSWWtAodPm8F0w

Ideal only if you want your rain sieving into finer rain

The blue and grey Mk1 Corridor Composites are now arriving.  Anyone able to tell me the number and bogies on it please?  Trying to justify one in the West Highlands.....

It has been advertised as M16153

Ive had a very poor experience with Dapol and will not buy another item from them again. (15 class 73s all with bad running, paint blemishes and added fire!)

I also model OO and planned on  buying someof these, if them get relaunched with another maker then I still will.

If the 21s turned out to have added fire, at least it would be prototypical

If only there was a D6xx in N, us WR modellers could order a 21 have D6122 at Barry 

Further to my post above, I have now tested the Dapol couplers with the Dapol magnets under peco code-55 track that has been sand ballasted. The effect seems to be slightly dulled, insofaras if I am only shunting one wagon the uncoupling with not work. If I add another three wagons then the uncoupling works perfectly every time and the loco will shunt the the wagons without recoupling (it is a straight track, maybe a curve would affect this). The problem remains as before that I cannot then get the loco and wagon to couple up again without the hand the god - sometimes this is because the knuckes stay open and sometimes because because they remain closed.

 

Personally I'm finding it a bit too hit and miss, so I'm going to try out the gaugemaster/seep electromagnetic uncouplers and see if they're a bit more reliable.

Hi there,

 

I'm surprised you've found the Dapol couplers to be unreliable. On our exhibition layout, operating them pretty intensively, we have found them to combine robustness and reliability better than any other type we have used.

 

We tried DG/MBM types and they work well when they are set up right, but seemed to require a lot of fettling for different vehicles, and seemed to easily get knocked out of alignment, though if you are not transporting your stock this probably won't be an issue.

 

Cheers

 

Ben A.

To qualify my previous post, the issue I have with failing to get the Dapol couplers to couple up involved the loco traveling at the slowest possible speed. At this speed I get the same problem when using rapido couplers. If I give the loco bit more juice then the coupling works fine with both the dapols and the rapidos. I'm not sure if this is down to the couplers being new or my inexperience at train driving?!

On reflection, I think that I can get the dapols to work well enough for me to use them on the passenger and NPCS side of the layout where I won't have to shunt individual vehicles. By the time I get around to building the goods yard I will have had enough experience with them to determine whether they're a goer on that side of the layout or if the Seep EMs will be a bit easier to use.

Cheers,

Ed

Apologies if I am wrong but as far as I can understand the Dapol magnets have their poles across the magnet side to side to pull the coupling apart across the track so the seep electroagnets despite being myuch stringer will not work with them.

 

I do use these electromagnets with the MBD etched couplings and are very reliable and work well but these couplings require a downwards pulling magnetic force to pull the dropper wire and thus lift the coupling loop, very different movement to the Dapol ones.

 

best wishes

Simon

Hello Simon,

I meant that I would try the seep electromatic system as a complete alternative to the Dapol system, not combining the two in any way. I believe you are correct that they are incompatable.

Cheers,

Ed

Thanks for pointing that out. I've had another go with a piece of peco code-55 flexitrack and the uncoupling now seems to work fairly reliably. (In fact the shunting is working well for me too - the difficulty is recoupling, which requires a fairly violent clash of couplers). The question now is whether the magnet will still do its job if I ballast over it? I see that you ballasted with chinchilla dust. Did you ballast over your (working) magnets?

Cheers,

Ed

Further to my post above, I have now tested the Dapol couplers with the Dapol magnets under peco code-55 track that has been sand ballasted. The effect seems to be slightly dulled, insofaras if I am only shunting one wagon the uncoupling with not work. If I add another three wagons then the uncoupling works perfectly every time and the loco will shunt the the wagons without recoupling (it is a straight track, maybe a curve would affect this). The problem remains as before that I cannot then get the loco and wagon to couple up again without the hand the god - sometimes this is because the knuckes stay open and sometimes because because they remain closed.

Personally I'm finding it a bit too hit and miss, so I'm going to try out the gaugemaster/seep electromagnetic uncouplers and see if they're a bit more reliable.

On the Farish website they have now linked in photos of the models of their Southern PLVs and Bogie Bs.

Looking at the era-5 versions, the PLV (374-417) and the Bogie B (374-631) appear to be very different shades of green.

Should that be the case? I expected them to be the same.

Cheers,

Ed

Although they MAY work under PCB (hand built) or fiNescale sleepers, as the sleepers are thinner and the rail section smaller so the magnet & the coupling are closer together. I have some beneath the sleepers that work, but some that were less reliable when it came to the delayed-action uncoupling, so my layout has a mix of "under" & "between".

Thanks for pointing that out. I've had another go with a piece of peco code-55 flexitrack and the uncoupling now seems to work fairly reliably. (In fact the shunting is working well for me too - the difficulty is recoupling, which requires a fairly violent clash of couplers). The question now is whether the magnet will still do its job if I ballast over it? I see that you ballasted with chinchilla dust. Did you ballast over your (working) magnets?

Cheers,

Ed

I had been wondering if the Dapol supplied magnets would work under the sleepers. As the magnets are a similar thickness to the woodland scenes underlay, it would be fairly simple to cut a slot in the underlay, fit the magnet, and place the track on top.

I conducted some experiments to that effect yesterday, and am sad to say that the couplers do not move when the magnet is underneath the (peco set-track) sleepers.

So if anyone else was thinking along those lines, hopefully I've saved you a job.

Cheers,

Ed

Hello Nige,

The double arrows on those 22s painted in blue with the small yellow panels were positioned centrally rather than on the cab sides, so it was unnecessary to move the works plates.

Thusly D6300/D6303/D6314/D6327 can be removed from your list, and FYE D6339/D6343 can be added.

Cheers,

Ed