Wolseley

Those other items are much more interesting than the Duchess. I am rather tempted by the "Dublo Diecast" and the goods wagons.

Just a minute - "1940s period Hornby Dublo 'candy stripe' packaging"? I thought the 1940s ones had plain blue boxes and the 'candy stripe' ones didn't arrive until the early to mid 1950s.

It's got too much lining to be a Hornby Dublo Duchess.....

It attracted 15 bids and sold for £28

Here are some Cortinas I've spotted around town in the last few years: In Botany: In Redfern: In Broadway: In Glebe: And in the Sydney CBD:

Yes, I can see where you're coming from. In my parallel universe, things could have been different, and the 1924 overhaul could have occurred in 1922 or the first half of 1923. I'm not an absolute stickler for accuracy (for one thing, the bulk of my collection is 3 rail Hornby Dublo and anything else I have must be capable of running on Dublo 3 rail track, which means compromises in relation to wheel standards and couplings) but, if I paint a locomotive in Caledonian livery, I would prefer that it exhibit the characteristics the real thing had when it bore that livery. Although I originally wanted to run both a 49 and a 903 class, I now find myself wanting to do something a bit different with my extra Cardean, in order to get more use out of it. I am now seriously thinking of turning it into a model of either McIntosh's proposed Atlantic of 1906 or, perhaps a bit more adventurous, his proposed Pacific of 1913. If I do that, though, it will be the subject of another thread, not this one. Jim

Thanks everyone for your replies. It does make sense that such a change would have occurred at the time of an overhaul, as Jim Snowdon says. This ties in with pH's post about Locomotives Illustrated saying that "These two engines...... lost their smokebox wingplates after new cylinders were fitted in 1924." Given that the Caledonian became part of the LMS (or perhaps I should say LM&S if we're talking about the early 1920s) on 1 July 1923, that would mean that 49 and 50 would not have appeared without their wingplates while in Caledonian livery. I was hoping to have two models, both in Caledonian livery, one of a 903 class and one of either 49 or 50, and intended having 49 or 50 without wingplates, otherwise the only obvious difference between the two models would be the safety valve casing. It seems now that I can only do this if I paint them in LMS livery.......

I was wondering if anyone has any idea when the smokebox wingplates were removed from the Caledonian Railway 4-6-0s numbers 49 and 50, LMS Nos. 14750 and 14751. The Caledonian began removing wingplates from some engines after World War I, and there are quite a few photographs of various classes in Caledonian livery but minus wingplates. Unlike the very similar 903 ("Cardean") class, which retained them to the end, 49 and 50 lost their wingplates presumably some time in the early 1920s. The only photographs I can find of these two engines in Caledonian livery were taken early in their careers, when the wingplates were still fitted, but all photographs from the LMS period (including the first red livery with coat of arms on the cabside and number on the tender) show the engines without them. What I would be interested in knowing is, were the wingplates removed by the Caledonian before the Grouping, or by the LMS atthe time the engines were repainted in red? I am intending to construct a model of either 49 or 50 as running in 1922, but I don't know if I should model it with or without wingplates.

Try this: https://www.jwmodelrailways.com/Hornby-dublo

Yes, that's the one I used for successfully three railing a Tri-ang Caledonian Single and I'll be using it again.

If I could find anyone who stocks their products here I would, but they don't seem to be available in Australia. And after reading through what can and can't be imported into Australia by mail, I have my doubts about whether paint strippers, flammable liquids and paints would make it through Customs. It's a shame, as there's quite a few of their paints I wouldn't mind getting my hands on.....

I agree with Ray. The tab on the inner line might serve to allow you to hold a train at the the through station while you send another train out from a siding, through the crossover and onto the outer track but, unless you want to do that, it's not needed. The tab on the outer line would presumably be there to prevent a train on the outer line colliding with one coming out of the long siding, but I can't see why anyone would want to bring a train out of the siding while another one is going around - perhaps it was just put in there so that an inexperienced or younger individual could not, accidentally or deliberately cause a collision (as my grandson did a few days ago - I didn't see him playing with the levers and there was a head on collision between my Canadian Pacific Duchess and an N2). I would leave both tabs at the through station out. I would also move the short rails from under the footbridge next to the curves and relocate them between the two full straights, for the same reason that David gave for the ones next to the points. Regards. Jim

Which is also the one I thought we were talking about. It seems that your book is an earlier edition than the one Il Grifone and I have (mine is a slightly earlier printing than his, but I think it will be the same inside) so we'll have to wait and see what you have. Just for interest's sake, here's the modified version of the Dublo plan from the back page that I ended up building. I had to remove the loop at the foot of the diagram because my board is 8'x4' and not 8'x4'6". Regards. Jim

MikeCW has done a great job on his GEM kits. This is more or less the standard that I am hoping to get on the Cardeans (and a DJH CR Class 34 that is currently under construction). Time will tell. Both kits have been glued rather than soldered but the standard of construction (as opposed to the standard of painting) is quite good, so I'm hoping they won't fall apart when I strip the paint from them, as it will save me a bit of work if they stay intact. I would prefer the pickup to be on the loco rather than the tender, but I'll end up doing whatever is the easiest option. I've also got a near mint Tri-ang B12 sitting in the cupboard, so that gives me three B12 chassis to convert (plus a Tri-ang Albert Hall, which has pretty much the same chassis block). I'll be using Marklin skates, but I'll have to get hold of some first.....

GEM's kit of the Caledonian Railway Cardean 4-6-0 was introduced in, if I recall correctly, the mid 1960s. It was a body and tender kit only, and was designed to fit the Tri-ang B12 chassis. Crude by today's standards, it was a pretty basic kit even in its day, lacking the finer detail of some of GEM's competitors' kits but, at least, it filled a gaping hole in the market. I used to have one, although I have to admit that I more or less destroyed it almost 50 years ago, after a botched attempt to turn it into a Caledonian 60 Class 4-6-0. I recently got hold of two GEM Cardeans for a reasonable price (quite an achievement where obsolete kits of Scottish pre-grouping locomotives are concerned). Neither is particularly well finished, although the actual construction of the kits has been done to a reasonable standard. One of them is a non-runner but, at worst, it can be put right by replacing the motor which, being an X04, shouldn't be hard to find a replacement for (I have a sneaking suspicion that I may even have a spare one somewhere). I will also have to convert them to three rail, otherwise I won't be able to run them on my layout, but the chassis and wiring are so simple that this shouldn't present any problems. Both locomotives are, however, crying out to be dunked in a container filled with paint stripper..... Two Cardeans? Well, I only planned to have one, but when the second one (the non-runner) turned up, hardly anyone seemed interested in it, and I got it for about a quarter of what I have seen them change hands for on eBay. Maybe I'll turn it into a 60 Class. After all, I'm pretty sure that my modelling skills are considerably better than they were in 1970..... I'm not sure when I'll get around to doing anything with them, but here's what they look like:

One more question. Did you substitute a manually operated point for an electrically operated one as shown on the plan? Dublo electric points are non-isolating, as were the original manual points, but the later manually operated points were isolating (I think the change was around 1954, but I might be a year or two out). A substitution of a manual isolating point for a non-isolating electric point could, depending on the layout design, result in a dead spot when the point is switched to a platform road or siding. You can easily tell the difference by turning the point over - the non isolating manual points have two wires on the underside of the base, one a bit longer than the other, whereas isolating manual points have two long wires. If that's the cause, there are three easy fixes. One is to replace the isolating point with a non-isolating point. Another is to solder a short length of wire to join the two long wires which would convert an isolating point to a non-isolating one. Alternatively, add a supplementary feed.

I think you should have said "By the way, welcome to the addictive and wonderful world of Dublo trains."

I have a 1957 track plan book - is that the one we're talking about? And, if so, are we talking about plan number 26 and have you modified the plan in any way? My layout is more or less based on plan number 26, with a few additions, and I don't have any dead spots in mine.

That kit looks very familiar. I'm sure I had one - about 50 or more years ago.....

There was a (long since gone) shop in Pitt Street, Sydney called J Searle & Sons, that pretty much fitted the same description. As well as model railways, they also sold models of planes, ships and so on. I remember it as being the first shop where I saw, in the window, the then brand new Matchbox Toy of the red E Type Jaguar, complete with imitation wire wheels with cast spokes, which was something not seen before in small toys back then. In spite of the appearance of the shop, the man who ran it was always impeccably dressed. I invariably visited the place with my father (until I was old enough to venture into the city by myself, that is) as my mother refused to go into the shop, saying that it was too dusty. Oh, and this post does have something to do with Tri-ang/Seuthe smoke units. It was at Searle's that Dad bought me a Lord of the Isles complete with smoke unit and two clerestory coaches.....

I have now finished wiring my layout, although the wires still have to be tidied up and signals fixed down. There is much work still to do, but at least I can now run trains. Here's where it's up to now:

I think they were. Wasn't the "Canadian" Pacific a way of using up a large stock of old Atholl bodies that were still on hand after production switched to the Duchess of Montrose, with its smoke deflectors?

Unfortunately no. I bought a conversion kit (headlamp, cowcatcher and transfers) in 2016 from a vendor on eBay. He was located in North America (I can't remember if it was the USA or Canada, but I think it was Canada). His listing when I bought it said that there were only a few left and I seem to recall it also saying that another production run was unlikely. The last time I saw them listed was either late 2016 or early 2017, so I suspect they have disappeared from the market. I had a look on eBay to see if I could find a record of my purchase, to see who the vendor was, but the records available for viewing only go back as far as the beginning of 2017, so no luck there. Jim

I had a couple of Dublo signals that would only work in one direction and not the other. It turned out to be the same sort of problem. There was a burr on one end of the metal bar that slides in the solenoid. As with your switches, removal of the burr solved the problem.

Which was what I did too to get mine: