Brian Kirby

Hi Scott, The gangways between cars are the classic folded paper type, they've been around since the 1950s or 60s, i'm sure someone still stocks ready-made ones, failing that you can always fold up your own. The lining is paint applied with a bow pen, which takes a bit of practice, getting the width of line and consistency of the paint right. BK

It's certainly prototypical, especially if you're modelling the Class 127 units. BK

My two pictures above need some explanation, the blue-grey coach is fitted here with hand cut 1mm clear acrylic, using a small guillotine to chop out the correct height in strips, then chopped lengthwise for each aperture. A small pair of scissors can snip off the corners, and these are shaped with a sharp coarse file, it might take a bit longer, but it either costs pennies or nothing at all if you re-cycle clear packaging (remember my chocolate cake wrappers?)! This particular coach will now have the window vanes drawn on with a bow pen. The point is, this technique can be used for the single pane windows on a High-Density DMU (Classes 115 to 118, 125 and 127), at very low cost. The second photo showing the Bachmann maroon FKs is a bit more bonkers, these blank windows are the originals with the incorrectly-positioned detail ground off, and then with the finish restored as a plain blank window, which again can have the new detail drawn on, to give a nice flush effect. I did a blue-grey one the same way, a few years ago. On reflection, this method takes ages, it would probably have been easier to replace them with the same 1mm acrylic, but they do plug-in nicely. Meanwhile, back to the DMUs, this DC Kits Class 120 has been sitting around, waiting to be finished off. I've already painted and lettered the bodies, before i'd even finished the three chassis, which is definitely putting the "cart before the horse". These cars will use Replica Mk1 windows, with 1mm removed from the bottom of each, like on my Inter-City 126s. One test window can be seen fitted to the rearmost car. Incidentally, the green 126 car in the background, has suffered bad collision damage, paint work was badly chipped and windows fell out, so is back in works (with two more cars) for a re-fit. On test the other day, the power car started smoking badly, and nearly burst into flames, I suspect oil on the commutator, it stunk the room out! BK

Thanks Keefer and Rich, by coincidence I was just about to re-activate this thread, after messing around with all that kinky EMU stuff in the Modified RTR section! I'm pleased you spotted the silver tops to the door windows, some pics just suggest it's reflected light, it looks more convincing in the flesh. The old SE Finecast Flushglaze are a bit old hat now, and suffer from the vacuum formed bubble shape, but still give a fairly decent look for a 'layout' model without top window vents, i've still got a few packs to use up. The modern Shawplan glazing is very good, better for a 'showcase' model under close scrutiny, but four times the cost per vehicle, plus with the HD Suburban type the packs are tailored primarily for Class 117, Brian of Shawplan had to sell me FIVE packs to cover all aspects of a Derby 116 unit.. Both types sometimes require a certain amount of filing around the window surround, so both techniques require great care, but there is another way of doing things, which costs pennies . . . . . Plus here's another way of correcting the dodgy windows in a Bachmann Mk2 (1964) FK. BK

Now I know Bill Bedford has done etches for a LNER Shenfield unit, but I have some old Bachmann Thompson bodies to use up. The sides aren't much use, the corridor stock windows are too long at about 4'6", I estimate the Shenfield windows are a mixture of 4'0" and 2'6" long, which means I could use Replica plug-in windows on new sides, with the bottoms of the windows sliced off (like my Swindon DMUs), which would give an even more flush look than the etched kit. Here are two 58ft Compo bodies and one 63ft type, allowing for the flat inner ends the 58ft are just long enough for the trailer roofs, the 63ft donor would be needed for the longer motor coach. The roofs are gonna need a jolly good scrape! BK

It's funny you should say that Clive, I was starting to think that unit 28s needed a little friend, to keep it company? Perhaps a toss up between a Shenfield unit or an AM7? BK

Thanks Everyone, We're just about there now, but no doubt i'll carry on applying a few tweaks to the model. Here are two more pics, showing the now finished cab fronts, and the four cars in their correct formation. I could have used Replica's plug-in cab windows, but I forgot to buy some. They would have saved time, but instead I cut them out from 1mm perspex, which takes longer, but might give a superior finish, not suffering from the "fish tank" effect? One other late addition, I noticed that the jumper cable socket had an underslung cap hanging down, when the cable was berthed out of use, but this cap would be closed when units are coupled, in an effort to keep the electrical circuits dry. It's a black disc with a white or yellow (rubber?) ring, seen here behind the cable. Cheers, Brian.

Here's the MBS with no-smoking transfers removed (gnashes teeth! ). Maybe the solution is put the transfers back on just one side, to depict both periods? Another job has been modifying the Replica BR bogies to the single bolster variety on the three trailer cars, this involves chopping out the central spring and suspension detail (compare with pics above). This would have been more easily achieved before the bogies were assembled, they need a splash of black paint now to hide the scars, i've added steps to the bogies under each cab. The leading bogies also need guard irons on the front, these were made up from my old favourite office staples, the speedometer drives are two Peco track pins linked by cotton thread for flexibility. These close-up pics are truly "warts and all", that guttering is looking a bit rough at three or four times actual size, a quick filing should sort it. BK

Many thanks Dubscottie, those Barrowmore plans were very kindly donated by our very own Clive M of this parish, so many thanks to Clive as well. Drawing BR 404 shows the 1956 Motor Brake Second (scroll down, it's just below the Class 310 units, along with the other cars, plus the 1962 rebuilds to AM7), but ello, ello, ello, the MBS is shown with two no-smoking compartments (after i've just removed them!)? Perhaps Bernie has an original 1956 drawing, and these Barrowmore drawings here, depict the units a few years later with additional no-smoking? BK http://www.barrowmoremrg.co.uk/BRBDocuments/BREMUDiagramsIssue.pdf

Thanks for checking the seats Bernie, I based my version on pics of the 1956 end cars, pics of the middle cars close up, are of course more difficult to find. There are a few floorplans for the AC/DC EMU family in Fleet Survey 11 (IA 1990), but not for a MBS, I shall remove the four stickers from my MBS immediately. It just goes to show how much it was the "norm" to smoke back then, non-smokers were regarded as rather puritan, how times change? So my 1956 Motor Brake Second will now have 96 seats for everyone to puff away, I wonder how many of the 96 passengers in just that one coach (car), outlived the Class 307s? As many will know, by the late 70s/early 80s, the smoking/ non-smoking ratio was reversed, smokers then being regarded as the unhealthy minority. BTW, the ABC author was Geoffrey M. Kichenside, not Kitchenside with a 't', which sounds like kitchen sink. (Oh yes, it is, when you go back to check the book, then double-check by Googling!) Cheers, Brian.

Here's my interpretation of the no-smoking allocation, two compartments in the middle of the MBS, two compartments in the DTS, three open bays in the DTSL, and just one first-class compartment in the TC. I've used Replica suburban plug-in windows throughout, but they don't make a correct size window for the toilets on these units, you could cut down one of their corridor Mk1 loo windows, but the clear plastic is rather brittle, and chips easily, you'd have to use very fine files, which would take ages. Instead, I cut out sections of 1mm perspex, fitting them as plain windows, then I added thin strips of black electrical tape, to represent the centre framework, which was then painted body colour. I've added air-brake cylinders to all vehicles, but I think I still need to add a compressor to the TC chassis? I read somewhere, that this was located under the first-class end, which led to many complaints of noise, from "Disgusted of Billericay". BK

Hi Bernie, would that be the Kichenside ABC first edition, rather than the electric loco and emu ABCs? Cheers, Brian

Apologies everyone, I haven't been on here for a few days, and you've all come up with new information, many thanks! I agree, preservation liveries should be taken with a pinch of salt, in certain cases, the interpretation of old liveries is just as difficult for the restorers, as it is for us modellers. The Class 306 unit was preserved over thirty years ago now, back then it was repainted from Rail Blue into a convincing shade of early BR multiple unit green from the DC era, the present day video seems to show a bluey-green shade, like on BR/SR coaches, or is it the 1980s shade after three decades of weathering? I believe it was SR Eastleigh works that started off the body colour ends phase c.1963, the other regions adopted the practice the following year. This tells us that pre-1963 SR inner ends were generally black, the Southend units were built at Eastleigh in 1956, in a very SR style, so I would assume they were painted the same. Strictly speaking, i'd say the preserved Class 306 with yellow panels, should be in a darker green representing mid-60s AC condition, but i'm not sure of their shade immediately after rebuilding in 1960/61, or did the earlier lighter shade live on for a few more years? Another problem with sussing out inner end colours, are the various examples where the side body colour is carried-on around the corners, for a few inches, with black between. Quite a few DMU classes had this variation for a few years. The next puzzle to ponder on my original 1956 unit, was how and where were the no-smoking sections allocated. I decided to copy the similar 302/305/308 car arrangement, with sections in both compartment and open cars, whereas of course the 1956 bodies were re-arranged, when becoming AC Class AM7. Pics to follow soon. Cheers, Brian.

Hi Mike, For the unpowered trailer wheels on this or similar units you need 14mm wheels, which is near enough to the original of 3'7", which of course would have worn down, or be re-turned down to 3'6" anyway, so the Hornby 14.1mm disc wheels will be spot on. However motor bogies often seem to have 3'3" wheels (13mm), and luckily before Hornby produced their 14.1mm, they produced a 12.7mm disc, which is near enough right for 3'3". I believe both are still available? BK P.S. Forgot to mention to Roy, that i've already added the inner and outer end air-pipes, we discovered that in DC condition they were tucked in low, below the buffer beams, whereas the AC versions had them above the buffer beam, in the middle of the cab front. I modelled truncated versions, as if connected below the upturned buckeye.

Hi Roy and Cheesysmith, Nope,nobody suggested traction power was jumped from car-to-car on these Southend units in original DC condition, there would be no point, all traction current was contained within the motor coach. However, on rebuilding to AC in 1960/1, on these units the arrangement was split between two adjacent cars, either because of space limitation or overall weight? The rebuilds had a new pantograph and transformer-rectifier added to a re-marshalled driving trailer and the reduced voltage DC would have to be cabled across to the motor coach next-door. I don't know whether this reduced voltage was 630v, 750v, or more likely the 1500v DC that the motor coach was already designed to receive? The later Class 302 units had already been designed and built with a self-contained panto-trans-rec AC motor coach, these paved the way for Classes 304, 305 and 308, the Southend units became AM7 and then Class 307, and were always the odd ones out. It's quite interesting if you look up the individual vehicle weights and compare between classes. On my models above, i've only modelled cables one side, the other side just with sockets, but of course in reality the cables would normally reach across to these corresponding sockets, but that's too complicated for me! The LNER Class 306 units were converted in a similar way, also gaining a new panto in a new position. The history books tell us that many were half-converted then sent back into DC operation until the changeover date. I always assumed that they would then be running with their new AC pantos, but no, a new image on Robert Carroll's Flickr site (Robertcwp) shows one rebuilt, but with the old DC panto re-positioned. Maybe an AC panto would get badly pitted by the heavy DC current? https://www.flickr.com/photos/robertcwp/38432126476/ Cheers, Brian.

Moving on, a part of the Peco Streamline range that are often over-looked, are the catch/trap points. Always slow sellers, many people just didn't bother using them, or cobbled up their own from plain track. Strictly speaking, they are an important part of a pointwork complex, some companies fitted more than others, post-60s BR did away with many for a variety of reasons. In simple terms, catch and trap points are the same thing, they just work in opposite directions, plus there were/are other varieties. Correct me if i'm wrong, i've always regarded a "catch point" as one that faces backwards on inclines, normally sprung in the open position, "to catch" wagons that have broken away from the back of a moving unfitted goods train. On the other hand, to me a "trap" point faces against the direction of travel and is interlocked with other points, to deliberately de-rail ("trap") a train at slow speed, that has passed a signal at red. BR generally removed trailing catch points with the demise of unfitted freights in the 1980s, facing trap points have become rarer since the 60s with modern ladder crossings, however they would have helped to avoid some nasty collisions, BR preferring to rely on signal and automatic stopping with greater over-run length beyond a signal. The two terms, "catch" or "trap" are confusing, and basically interchangeable, maybe we need a new description?! So where do we place catch/trap points in the top ten priorities that we need in bullhead? BK

Thanks SRman, we're nearly there now. Photos of these units in original 1956 condition, are few and far between, and so far all black-and-white images, so the inner end colour has been hard to define. This same confusion also occurs with the various DMU classes, although thankfully colour pics can be found for most of them. Black is a traditional inner end colour, so it was a conservative bet, to be the more likely here. Cheers, Brian.

There appears to be a self-appointed amateur moderator, with an axe to grind amongst us, trying to score cheap points in a rather obnoxious manner. Here at the friendly Peco points discussion tea party, we are just exchanging views and opinions on what might be best for both us and Peco. Instead in this age of electronic communication, we are being advised to travel the length of the land, and tell the manufacturer face-to-face. To try and censure friendly chat and banter smacks of Stalinism, we'll be being told what to buy and build next. It's all getting a bit self-righteous, like those blogs I warned people about. Cheers, Brian.

That's the issue, you've seen ONE near you, but you'll find they are no longer as common, as they used to be. Regarding double slips at Buxton, again this is a slow-speed area. Let's not say main lines, let's say you only normally find double slips in slow-speed areas. Of course someone will be busy now, trying to find a photo of the odd exception, but that's the whole point (no pun), they wouldn't be typical in such locations. BK

Another change, we've now got black inner ends, I can't really prove it either way, it's more of a gut feeling, and at least a safer bet. Having lettered, and then varnished the bodies, i've now added the Replica plug-in compartment windows, which are very nice. Need to do all the other size windows next. BK

Like other important stations, the station throat at Fenchurch Street was a slow-speed area (as I stated above), so yes double slips can be used, but double slips on fast running sections of main lines were very few and far between, on grounds of safety, whereas single-slips only with trailing connections, would be a common sight on Britain's main lines. BK

These new large radius bullhead points are exactly the same length and angle, as their flat-bottom older cousins in the Peco range, they can be regarded as interchangeable. In which case Peco are likely to stick with their existing geometry, at least for the foreseeable future, they will probably duplicate the existing range with bullhead equivalents. Cost wise, these new points are more than twice the price of flat-bottom versions, but they are well worth the money. Existing Peco Double Slips are nearly three times the price of f/b large points, so a new bullhead double slip could cost £75 or more (at today's prices), but again they should be worth it, don't start moaning about the price after they've been produced. Double slips and single slips are just as useful as each other, albeit in different circumstances. As has been said already, single slips were a common sight on running lines requiring reversal into goods yards, double slips were never much seen on fast main lines, due to the facing turnout, but there were rare exceptions, they were normally found in slow-speed areas. So both versions were common sights in steam/early diesel days, single slips are rarer now, and double-slips are avoided where possible, due to cost of manufacture and added maintenance. Within the Peco range, the long diamond crossings are cheaper than the large points, so a bullhead version would be affordable, and presumably easier to produce? The staggered 3-Way would be another good one to update, a common sight years ago, a rarer sight nowadays, but again could be costly per unit? Be careful what you wish for. BK

Judging by the warm reception these new bullhead points have had, Messrs Peco will be no doubt be planning additions to the range. We mustn't expect a complete range all at once, development and production costs have to be covered, maybe two or three types (L&R) will appear every so often? So what type would be the absolute top priority and would sell well? I think a long diamond crossing next, so people can construct double junctions and more complicated arrangements. Would a single slip be the next most useful and popular item, albeit more costly? Off the top of my head, I seem to remember that a lot of BR Modernization era diesels, were designed to negotiate a minimum curve of four and a half chains, in old money. One chain in distance was 22yards, so 4.5 chains equals 99 yards, which equals 297 feet. If you divide 297 by 76 (4mm scale), it comes our near enough to 4ft radius track. The previous Peco flat-bottom large radius points were nominally 5ft radius, the medium radius were 3ft, the small were 2ft. So in other words, if modelling finescale, the large radius at 5ft should be a starting point, leading to even larger radii types. However, I acknowledge that we have to compromize to fit a given space, and an element of condensing is tolerable, making a bullhead near 3ft useful. As for a bullhead 2ft radius, I can't see that selling well, and wouldn't look too good, being strictly only of use in industrial environments, with very small locos. For the record, Peco Streamline curved points were 6ft outside/2.5ft inside, 2.5ft is the absolute minimum i'd build large loco kits to run on, even this requires serious surgery on locos like Britannias, other people often build to run on 3ft minimum radius. As Larry mentioned a day or two ago, the Peco double-slips are quite tight, equivalent to somewhere between 2.5ft and 3ft, any new bullhead design might require a longer unit to relieve it to a larger radius. I hope my maths are right, perhaps someone can double check the figures?! Cheers, Brian.

Clive M has come up trumps, and found a photo of the pantograph end of the Motor Brake Second in original DC condition. Clive has very kindly shared this with me, but sadly we can't show the image here, due to copyright. It shows a cable arrangement similar to a Class 501, plus a strange roof level conduit, which i'm not sure what's for, plus the panto well end is not flat-topped ( AC units are flat-ended ), instead it is elliptical, but only half the height of the main roof. Here's my latest (3rd) interpretation with long curved handrails either side, I had done all the inner ends in body green, but now i'm wondering if they should be black, like on a conventional coach, it's not that clear on the latest image? Cheers, Brian.

Regarding the thorny subject of sleeper/crossing timber colour, when brand-spanking new and freshly creosoted, my impression was that the wood was very very dark brown, almost black. BR used to have a large sleeper and creosoting depot at Lowestoft, no doubt the timber was imported through the docks there, perhaps from Scandinavia? If the fish didn't stink the town out, the creosote did. Obviously, as the sleepers age and dry out over the years, they lighten down through brown, and then mud shades, until the old and by now rotten ones would appear grey (a bit like my hair, but i've never used creosote). I think PECO are right to colour their sleepers in fairly new condition, although these days with weathered loco and coach options available, maybe pre-weathered track will be the next progression? Now of course anyone modelling Britain's railways from the 1950s to the present day, will probably want a mixture of bullhead and flat-bottom track, but if you're removing Peco Code 75 f/bs that are well stuck down, the plastic webbing can easily break. If you end up with a broken one, do not despair, just keep all the metal rails and point blades. Using PECO individulay pandrol clips and new 4mm scale sleeper strip, you can rebuild them into new points, although you'll have to add new metal check rails in two places, and a new tie-bar if changing gauge. Here's an old previously broken L/H curved point rebuilt to 18.83mm gauge (notice I haven't said P4 or S4, cos I use slightly coarser frog clearances, to save a lot of wheel-changing). I'll be getting a lot of incoming flack now, where's my tin hat? Cheers, Brian.