Pteremy

But for Little Muddle? The Scotstown gardens must reflect the geographical constraints of the site, and the occupations of the inhabitants. Would they be realistic for agricultural west country?

The specification includes 'Valentine's Bar'

In the video the context is clearly 'Hawksworth', so perhaps the relevant phrase is '..to a 21st Century standard...'. In which case it could just be a cheeky wind up.

Someone else (Stephen Duffell) wrote an article about this technique in MRJ 180 - p35 to p37

I hope that it is (a range of) Milk Tankers, to go with the Siphon and Manor, and so 'building' the people of Britain.

Reverting to the rebuilding of the signal box another Casserley photo from 25th September 1956 has just appeared on eBay. A narrow section of the front of the signal box is visible between the engine and coach of an Exe Valley train. As the coach is a toplight I assume that it is the same train as in the photo 49 of the Middleton Book.

There is a building designated 'Ground frame' in this position in the 'pre island platform' map shown in Clark's Great Western Stations Vol 1. That is said to be based on an 1890 survey, and before the Signal Box was moved on to the platform next to the Good's Shed. But a detailed GWR Engineer's Dept map date stamped October 1926, concerned with the lighting at the station, has the hand written annotation 'Porters' next to the building.

Not Sheffield over this route - by the late 1950s/60's interregional Summer Saturday train destinations were Wolverhampton and Manchester. The make up of the coach sets is specified in the summer 'Working of Coaches and Vans in Through Trains'. Some were sourced from the WR, some from LMR, a continuation of earlier LMS/GWR practice. One possibility is that there was a regional boundary change to the LMR in around 1963 which resulted in the use of sets not previously used for these services.

The cover image of the road bridge at Dulverton is a familiar one. But interestingly the 2 and 4th coaches appear to be Gresleys - rain strip on roof and high waist line. From the photos I have seen Gresley coaches were very exceptionally rare visitors to the Taunton-Barnstaple line, only appearing at the end steam on the line, i.e. 1963/64. I have always understood this to be because they were not suitable for negotiating the Taw Bridge at Barnstaple (between Barnstaple Jct and Barnstaple Town) - I am sure I read this somewhere but cannot remember where. The different coupling mechanism would also have been an issue. But by 1963 withdrawals of older coaches meant that Mk1 coaches had started to appear more regularly, and therefore a summer Saturday inter regional combination of Mk1s and Gresleys is less surprising. But did the restriction on the Taw Bridge get lifted (if it ever existed)?? Or was it simply that by 1963 the stock forming summer Saturday inter regional trains made use of whatever was available?

I think that is why the overall effect is so good - on a model it allows the contrast in texture to show through more than a possibly more accurate darker colour would do.

Out of interest are the 'finished' stones all freelance, or is there a set of shapes/sizes that you aim to replicate, albeit not as precisely as you would do if, say, using a set of molds?

There is a post in the GER 10T Van thread that say the following - though of course there may be a difference between the two. The GE van has headstocks as part of the body. The chassis is held in place by small projections inside the body engaging in recesses in the edge of the floor. These can just be seen above the axleguard. A knife blade or thin screwdriver blade worked in between the chassis and the inside edge of the side can be used to lever the side away and ease the chassis out. The buffers don't need removing, they appear to be glued in.

Personally I think that the jury is still out on 'Western Times' - I was disappointed that the milk train article in the 2nd edition was just a reprint of a 50 year old magazine article - it cried out for something by way of an update with new historical understanding, some of which can be found in threads here on RMweb. I agree that it is more likely to have been a timber box originally. I am just wondering whether the removal of the cladding is necessarily contemporaneous with the replacement brick base, given that it appears from the photographic evidence that the new base sat inside the cladding (as you might expect if it merely replaced an original timber frame). Why might you retain the cladding? Aesthetics, that is continuity with the upper box? Weather protection, in the same way that the main station buildings are slate hung? There must be a record somewhere that records the actual date of rebuilding.

Interesting, not least because Accurascale say that they considered corridor Toplights to go with their Manor but concluded that they would be a nightmare to get right (see the Manor thread). Given the slightly specialist nature of these announced carriages do they give us any clue as to the type of corridor Toplights Dapol might be most likely to go for?

There is a photo of SECR 2 plank ES62461 (originally SECR 547) in 'Railways in Profile Series, No 7: Engineer's Stock - 1', p13. It is at Meldon in 1959, between 2 Grampus wagons.

Fran - I have 'skin in the game' - as I have 2 on pre order. So a slightly different way of approaching the EM/P4 issue - is it feasible to contemplate, in effect, versions of your chassis being built to different tolerances, rather than the more traditional total etched chassis replacement or replacement 'drop in' wheel sets? In effect a 'plug and play' replacement? Not suggesting that would be for you to do, but might be something you could help facilitate? Or do the design compromises you have to make for 00 make even that difficult?

Reverting to the fronts I find D6323 interesting. There are photographs of it with 'backing'/'blanking plates' where head code boxes should be. For example, p59 Modern Locomotives Illustrated 197 - Callington, 7/9/64. The caption suggests that these plates are base plates for the interim 'bolt on' style of head code box. But the other features (other than the 2 part doors) look to me to be a revised front end, as used D6334 onwards, rather than the original style that D6323 was built with. Is it possible that a 'revised front end' could have been used to repair e.g. accident damage? Apparently the other end was still in original condition.

Thanks for reminding us of this thread. All the original Dapol releases appear to have a large boiler exhaust 'grill', like the one illustrated for D6311 in the old thread, but with the caveat that a cover plate could be missing. (At least the ones I have do!) Roof detail does not get much attention in the reference books I have, so I don't know if this was in any sense the 'original style': Dapol must have had a reason for modelling it like that? The 'caption' to the illustrations rather suggests that the later 'revised front' engines (D6334 onwards) would have had a cover plate in the style of the third illustration? So in theory Dapol could do that as part of their retool? Equally though I suspect that Phil is right, and it should be relatively straightforward to fashion a cover plate from plasticard.

I hope the rumour of a retool is correct - I did wonder if it might finally happen following the Class 21/29 retool announcement. I bought a spare body last autumn in contemplation of a Phil like modification but that can wait now! Presumably there is still the interim 'bolt on head box' variety to have a go at instead.

Phil - you were right the first time. D6336 took the Beatles to South Molton on Thursday 5th March 1964. Headcode 1Z48, train of 5 MK1s (inc W1919 & W13185 - I have searched in vain for a full list). Film train also at Minehead 2nd/3rd/4th, Taunton 5th, Newton Abbot 6th/7th. Most recent mention in a book is probably Huxtable v3 p604/5 with good photo of train passing through Wiveliscombe on the way to South Molton. (Western Before Beeching (p77) has a nice photo of the train returning to Taunton through Bishops Nympton and Molland but the caption incorrectly refers to the Magical Mystery Tour - filmed after the line had closed! Possibly the source of the confusion. A smaller version of this photo is also in Huxtable). Both photos clearly show a 'revised' front end - which D6336 had from new (D6333 was built in the original style). Yes D7047 was involved when the train was at Minehead.

Yes - but nothing so far (that I can see) to suggest that D6352 & D6356 will have the correct revised front end.

There is a law of unintended consequences. I wasn't going to buy any of the Rapido product, much though I love the film. I mainly buy to match the actual operational history on a particular line, during a particular period in time. Yes I have a few Rule 1 items, but not many. And I don't have a display cabinet. But this afternoon I have preordered a Rapido Deluxe Set. Cheered me up no end.

I logged on to RMweb this morning expecting to find something interesting and positive at this gloomy time of year, even if there wasn't anything in the announcements that I might want myself. But to be honest, and rather to my surprise, it has just made me feel really sad.

I have not seen the poll but wonder how well it was put together - 'value for money' must encompass the other features. For example, unless you only buy a model to put it in a show case 'performance' will always be a significant component of the overall value you place on it?

I agree - all models need some sort of compromise - the skill is in choosing which ones to make.