Harlequin

I am in the process of "improving" my 488 and I don't want to clog up this thread with the details so if you're interested I started a new thread here: (Don't look if you are of a nervous disposition - I am about to apply the Dremel to it!)

Diversion into the sound side of the project for a moment: Sound tests: The sound is much clearer and there's less distortion when the bodyshell is off. Therefore I am going to carve a huge hole in the top of the tank and replace the supplied plastic coal load with a coal-load-come-speaker-grille.

Taking the body off the loco was... interesting. The "Driving wheel replacement" sheet shows that one of the screws under the cab is longer than the other, holding the keeper plate in place and fixing the chassis to the body. A diagram shows it in Red. Unfortunately, it shows the wrong screw! Since bodies are often a bit sticky to get off I did a lot of "gentle persuading" before I realised that there must still be something holding it and tried the other screw. It's OK, though, I think there is no permanent damage other than a few scratches that will not be seen. Just as @Nile said, a bunch of wires on top: Here are the wires under the footplate. The white wire might be affecting the fit but it's very thin. More to follow...

Please be wary of colours that you see on the screen. There are so many factors that can make them look different than how they appear to the naked eye. The best way to judge is to see a loco in the flesh in good lighting conditions, if you can.

The drawing in Atkins has the very clear label, "Wire Rope". There's no sign of any winding or lever mechanism.

Yes, good point, I will check. If that is the problem then judging from owner's photo it seems to be a very common one...

I'm going to document the process of making some simple tweaks on my beautiful new Rails/Dapol Wainwright D Class here. I'm not going to do anything very clever compared to most of the projects in this forum but this seems the best place to post about it. The plan is to get the running plates of tender and loco to line up, install sound and replace the coal load. Those last two are related and will involve taking a Dremel to my brand new expensive loco... First step: Set the tender running plate height. I measured the difference as about 1.25mm and this discrepancy can be easily adjusted by adding some spacers between the tender body and the chassis. The running plate is part of the body assembly in the Dapol model and the valances (valences?) overhang the chassis so raising it up a fraction will align the running plates without exposing any gaps. I made some spacers by laminating 10 thou and 40 thou white Plastikard to give exactly 1.25mm: Result: The running plate is now too high! Confusing but, OK, I'll have to this by trial and error.

A rowdy gang of young cyclists are in, upsetting the locals, drinking way too much ginger beer and imposing on the landlady to make pemmican sandwiches that they can take on their ripping adventures this afternoon.

Unusual nameplate - black lettering on white ground.

Have you looked at Atkins "GWR Goods Train Working" Vol 2? On page 280 there's a drawing and on 281 a photo. Unfortunately it's still not clear how the wire ropes that control the "arms" are shackled to the post but my best guess is a ring connected to the rope engages in hooks bolted to the post in two positions. I think I also see a wooden hand grip in the photo but maybe I'm imagining it.

Sorry to hear what you're going through - you paint a very sobering picture. Hang in there! I don't know if you can think about the trivialities of railway modelling at the moment but, if it helps take your mind off things, Dapol have just posted images of their Manor and are asking for "constructive comments"... That's right up your street!

Same with the 63XX Mogul before it. It seems to be Dapol's new standard fitting that buffers are push-fit items, not glued in, so it's not great worry that they are loose on arrival. Just push them back in and secure with a bit of glue if you like.

Notice that the manual says the parts are "supplied with all models" but for fitting to "vacuum fitted models" - so not all models, not the early versions of the loco.

Suggestion: No turnouts need to be lifted but some groundworks are needed to extend the yard area forward a bit - and you can say that's exactly what happened in the real world!

Here's my interpretation: You can see the curve of the wall and how the large building tucks in close to it on the 1973 map Martin posted above. The curve is visible on Clark's 1913 map but the building isn't.

There are various ways to get decent length sidings in a model where space is more restricted than the prototype - but the compromises are that the model is not then a faithful copy of the real thing. (And that has to include somewhere for trains to come from and go to, of course!) You could run the goods yard behind the platforms but then you'd need to re-arrange passenger access - possibly even moving it to the other side of the mainline. Another possibility is to curve the mainline to maximise the length of the whole station complex. And when the mainline curves it opens the possibility for the yard to be angled behind the passenger platforms so that a triangle opens up between them to fit in the station building and passenger access. Something like this (a modified version of Wiveliscombe but you can see the similarity to Lampeter):

The multiple conical(?) supports suggest that whatever those bodies were , they are being used as provender stores at the time of the photograph.

Maybe go for a 4 or 5 road shed with the remaining 1 or 2 lines external. That might give you the flexibility to shorten the external roads, move the shed back and thus reduce the angles. Lots of variables in play here!

Covered fiddle yards, hidden gradients, powerbase… In my book those are all things to avoid if you possibly can! Would you like to share your track plan with us? We might be able to offer some helpful suggestions.

For me, they were in with the spare wheels set. Have you checked that bag?

Oh thank you, I'm honoured! But I'm not in the same league as those guys. I'm a Rice fan too so I will have to add this book to my ever-increasing reading stack!

I think the GWR would say, "Sorry, our yard at Warren is very small and there isn't enough room for you to operate out of it, Mr. Coal Merchant." Mr. Coal Merchant would set up his yard somewhere off the public road, nearby.

You need to be able to reach across to do two-handed work without damaging any scenery and without your clothes (e.g. thick jumpers in the winter) from catching on things. 762mm is about right but it varies from person to person. A 610mm wide operating well would be physically workable for most people but could rapidly become annoying because it's more difficult to rise up into after you've ducked under, you feel hemmed in while you're in there and you have to be very careful when you turn around not to knock anything. A standard British doorway is 762mm wide (2ft 6in) and that's a reasonable comfortable width for most people. Design the layout first then think about the best arrangement of baseboards to support it.

Yes, it has the same sized speaker well as the mogul, approx. 20mm by 40mm. I have just squashed a Zimo Dumbo into mine. I had to file it down a bit to get it in.