JJC

Can I ask about the red buffer beams on the BR blue version of 20001 please? The excellent issue of 'Southern Way' states it was out shopped in May '67 with BR Blue buffer beams, photos from this time look to reflect this (https://esngblog.com/2023/09/04/more-southern-co-cos/#jp-carousel-23085). They were certainly blue in '68 (as shown in Robert Carroll's wonderful image below) and at the end of it's life when in the centre road at Brighton (https://esngblog.com/2023/09/04/more-southern-co-cos/#jp-carousel-23084). The blog states the model represent the prototype between '68 and withdrawal but they look to be blue throughout this time, when did the red buffer beam feature please? https://www.flickr.com/photos/robertcwp/21175898800/in/photolist-2jwQ2i5-ygf1Xs-VqjJx4-3JuGt2-aNHsvD-CCVgP-i9dt6i-ayhZdA-ayi24U-ayi1bA-i9dvmR-i9d4oF-ghbjL

It's NSE. The branding is well documented, extremely well-publicised and a very well known "brand". The "t" is wrong and shouldn't be. Simple as that.

OK, I've got the callipers out. Looking at the official BR weight diagram (available freely via the Barrowmore MRG site) the overall rail to roof top measurement should be 3734mm and the rail to vent-top should be 3831mm. This scaled by 1:76.2 should be 49.00mm rail to roof top and 50.28mm rail to vent-top. see attached: I've measured both with the shim and without the shim fitted again, as attached: Rail to roof-top (with shim) Rail to roof-top (without shim) Rail to vent-top (with shim) Rail to vent-top (without shim) If my calculations/workings are correct, this gives a difference of: Rail to roof: 1.95mm with shim / 1.60mm without shim Multiplied by 76.2 gives a scale difference of 148.59mm with shim / 121.92 without shim or in imperial; 5.85" with shim and 4.8" with the shim removed. Conclusion: The model is approximately 5 inches too tall overall by the official BR documentation, which confirms several of our suspicions of it looking taller than many other items of rolling stock. The next question is where? As stated previously this should/could be a lot easier to rectify if it's a bogie ride-height issue rather than a body issue. Overall, I'm feeling more and more disappointed with what is firstly the most expensive non-powered piece of rolling stock I've ever bought, but moreover one that I've waited patiently for the last 3 years to receive. The NSE lettering is a small, yet very important mistake which shouldn't have been made on such a high quality model, the packaging/shipping issues are annoying, and it's easy to lay blame on the shipment company (trust me, I'm well aware trains get damaged in the post), however the horns seem to be put under particular strain as mine arrived with 3 of the 4 horns detached and all were bent. This is something which I remedied easily, but it does appear the packaging doesn't protect them satisfactorily . As for the height issue, 1.6mm too tall doesn't sound much, but 5" in real life terms is really quite a lot taller than it should be. Personally I'm in a quandary as to what to do. It doesn't look right, and I'm now debating whether I want to keep it or not. John

Also I'd say the letter spacing should be tighter too.

Sorry, bit of a delayed reply here. I'd say that was pretty much bang on 66'8", so to rewind from my initial comments yesterday, I think it's just a height issue. I've removed the plastic shims which improves the height, but it does still look tall. Admittedly it's nowhere near as bad as the PDH drawing made me believe (that's now been consigned to the bin!) However it appears tall next to everything I put it next to. If it's a ride-height issue, that should be easily fixed with some trimming in the bogie pivot area, but if it's overall, or with the roof profile that may be trickier! John

I've attached a few more files to demonstrate the height issue. I think I'm going to discount the Dapol 73 as it does appear to be low/wrong. However I've placed it against a Bachmann/Kernow TC and a Heljan 33/1 to compare. (Also the 33 against the 73 showing why the 73 can't be trusted)

The more I look, stare, measure, it just looks too tall. I was wondering if it was ride height, but again, that doesn't appear wrong. I'm just confused why it looks so tall

I'm fine with the PDH drawing being wrong (not exactly unheard of), I'm just trying to work out why it looks massive compared to everything else

My concerns. According to the scale rule, it's just over 67' long, and it towers over the Dapol 73 I was planning on running it with

Received mine this morning. Small amount of shipping damage to the horns, but that was quickly sorted. just one thing though.. Is it me, or is it MASSIVELY overscale?

Those were the colours I was thinking of using. Did you do the pan well a different colour? I was thinking Exec dark grey.

I think it's a re-draw, as the original sheet didn't include the /0 alternative numbers. On the subject, of 90130, What colours did you use to paint 130? I was wondering if they used original SNCF shades or the closest UK colours (or if the 2 are the same!)

https://www.fox-transfers.co.uk/freightconnection-1992-european-class-90-loco-liiveries