Pteremy

Nice picture of no smoking triangle here. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Interior_of_GWR_Collett_60_"Sunshine"_Excursion_Third_No.1289_(6887463535).jpg

I agree re Coopercraft. I am not in favour of hounding suppliers etc, because their failings can have a variety of causes, and those moaning may not be objective. But I think that there is enough in the public domain to suggest that in this case active promotion is not appropriate. You would have thought that the MR editorial team would be sufficiently savvy about this. But as some one who has only been aware of MR comparatively recently I think that it is excellent value for money.

Yes! And there also appear to be red triangles in the windows in the pictures posted at the beginning of this thread, so they are intentional. Sometimes it better not to know, and even better not to care! I don't think this should put anyone off.

Can't help with a photo of this one. There is a short para on MoS in Tourret mentioning vehicles built in 1940, similar in design to the Air Ministry ones, but the illustrating plate (393) is prior to livery. However, liquid ammonia is not a petroleum product, so the Class A & B livery rules are irrelevant. The livery could be correct for WWII. The model is the generic Bachmann cradle mount but without a photo it is anyone's guess whether the 'fittings' are correct, whether for liquid ammonia traffic or period.

This looks about the right size and shape - though no longer with us.

Page 246 - of the 'revised and enlarged edition' - will send you a scan.

In my experience these tank liveries (like other PO liveries) are usually based on a photograph - and sure enough 5049 appears in this livery in plate 544 of Tourret's Petroleum Rail Tank Wagons of Britain, described as 'possibly ex Air Ministry'. Whilst the livery on the model is not freelance the wording is much too large and the BP badges are not in quite the right position. The model is a hybrid - or generic if you prefer (as are Bachmann's) - used as the basis for both Class A and Class B vehicles. 5049 was saddle mounted whereas the model has a cradle; I also doubt that the tank diameter is correct (which may contribute to the lettering/badge issues). None of this will stop you making a decent 'representation' of a tank wagon. I am hoping that Accurascale might turn their attention 'Air Ministry' tank wagons at some point, as it is a major gap in the RTR market.

The Accurascale announcements today are no use to me - as a modeller interested in the Western region, 1958-66. But they do suggest that maybe a new business model is emerging in which knowledgeable 'enthusiasts' drive the products produced, to a high degree of accuracy. So I wish that a similar enterprise focused on GWR/WR would emerge. One that would systematically address the interests (and 'wishlists') of GWR/WR modellers. And of course the same business model could apply to any field of interest - LMS/NE/Scotland - the only limitation being the likely market.

My starting point would be eBay - but there are also retailers with stocks of the more recent numbers - Titfield Thunderbolt bookshop for example (from a quick google)

Worth noting that the scalefour link contains a helpful reminder that there are articles on post and wire fencing in #13 and 56 of GWJ.

I think that the theory behind the base layer is that it corresponds to the main growing (often clump) part of the grass as opposed to the taller flower/seed spikes. The colour contrast will vary throughout the year. So in June/July as the the taller seed spikes develop, they will change from unripe green, often developing a purple tinge as they ripen, through to golden when fully ripe. By Autumn (which I think is what you want) the contrast is 'living green' and the yellow/straw of the taller by now dead seed heads.

Just noticed - by chance - that there is a job lot of Lego on eBay at £18,000.......... Certainly looks like a method worth trying.

I thought it was a good read as well - useful scenic tips which could be used on any size layout.

A slight tangent, but could the 57ft underframe be used for the 57ft Flat Ended coaches that followed not long after?

Removeable loads - is that magnetic?

What in 1978 will surprise us? Go on, tell us! BTW have you given any further thought as to where the research you have done will reside - I think you posed that question near the beginning of this thread? It definitely deserves something, sweeping up other folks contributions. A publication 'special' of some sort or other. Otherwise it may just get lost in the fog of online material.

What a lot of steam! There is a fortune to be made if someone could successfully scale that!

Yes - and for taking on complicated prototypes at a reasonable price. Which makes you wonder why they can do it but Bachmann can't?

According to 'Harris' Diags D98 and E131 were 58ft 2ins long - does that equate to '57ft' without the Bow end being taken into account?

Looks good - have you seen the article on rusting mineral wagons in MRJ 267?

I don't know if anything can be done about this but my bookmark for the David Geen website now takes me to a site selling shoes. It still purports to be 'David Geen', so I suspect that it is a scam.

I don't think that WTTs were always 100% accurate? Some of the verbal information (i.e. not the timings) clearly remained 'in print' long after it was relevant - maybe it was just 'left' because in practice no one thought it worthy of a formal change/correction? Back to Toads the list I was thinking of was probably the one in MRJ 18 (p288), which has numbers as well as home locations. But it dates from 1940 and is based on observations (at three specific localities). These are clearly included in the gwr.org list (the '1940' entries), which is far more comprehensive. There is a list of the restricted wartime allocation in 'GWR Goods Train Working' Vol 1, p122, but this just shows how the 129 vans which retained a branding were allocated, that is the number of branded vans for a location, without specifying the actual vehicles allocated themselves. But what we don't seem to have is an accurate list for post war allocations. The relatively recent 'Acquired Wagons of British Rail (Vol 1)' provides a record of the wagons that were still in use in BR days, but unfortunately no allocations. (Some nice pictures of branded vehicles though.)

I am sure that I have seen a list somewhere. But this is a slippery slope. Photographers tended to focus on locos, so there is good contemporaneous evidence to back up 'paper' records of loco allocations. With coaches you can often see enough to identify the specific Diagram, but far less often the actual vehicles concerned. Similarly for freight stock. You have to draw a line somewhere, and if the number is wrong, who, frankly is going to know?

There is a clear difference in the greys (on screen anyway). So which grey is more accurate? Or are they both correct, for different periods?

Yes. And I noted that the Model Rail obituary article for Allan Downes identified one of his 7 rules for success as 'ensure consistency across the entire layout' (or words to that effect).