ed 66 plant

Thanks gents for your thoughts. I think the Eastleigh works visit is very plausible,especially in the period 1955-59, prior to redistribution . The reason behind my original question was -- I model Bom West/Central in that time period I have orig. form 35029,35030--rebuilt form 35018,35016,35014 and recently acquired 35023.The latter bedding down at 72A up to 1960 . Your kind responses have persuaded me to run the latter is ok. thanks again, Ed

pH Thank you-not much evidence to support the idea that M.N,s from 72A visited Bournemouth

A very simple question--Did such locos ever work down the Soton/Bournemouth line in the 1950,s?--maybe as a result of loco failure at Waterloo/Nine Elms. I know that 72B engines worked at such time on the Sunday Bom Belle. Thank you for any responses, regards, Ed

An interesting topic--the speed of model trains. Personally I think that you need to take account of the model track layout with its much sharper curves and relatively short straight sections--if not it lurches all over the place and passes by at seemingly unrealistic pace,Sorry for adding to the digression.

I think Hornby have modelled 35029 to reflect removal of valence ahead of cyls.(post July 1952), resiting of safety valves (Dec 1954), 5100 G tender (July 1952), shed 70A (June 1955), and before plain c. rods fitted ((Aug 1956)--the latter being barely noticeable? Also reflects BR Green livery (June 1952) and first emblem (to rebuild Sept 1959). Having trawled thro, more books have found 35029 as per colour photo at Victoria in 1956 with a black background nameplate--Maybe unusual at Victoria given it was moved to 70A IN 1955?? It also maybe reflects the stacked tender cyls but not certain because the pic is focused on the loco.(R J Harvey M.N. Class p.81). Also in Bulleid Pacifics at Work, Col . Rogers ,p41 there is a pic . of 35029 at Brighton shed,31-10-1955 awaiting a Works visit, Again this seems to show a black backed nameplate from the black/white pic.and it seems to tie in with the previous comment ref the pic at Victoria? Were 70A locos sometimes borrowed by 73A? Interesting certainly for me --no substitute for the reality but you may then compromise as you think fit . Have fitted a TCS DP2X-UK decoder to my purchase as this was the only spare available---it runs very well indeed.

Lo and behold--One day later-knock on the door and there it is. What a superb looking model---well done Mr Hornby and Kernow for a very rapid final delivery.

Have had notification from Kernow that my pre ordered 35029 has been despatched. I have read thro, all my info. on tenders but cannot find dates for the stacking of the 3 vacuum cylinders on Series 2 , 5100 G tenders. I note they were stacked on seies 1 tenders as well. Does anybody know? regards,Ed

According to my records cowlings were removed between June 1952 and November 1953. Blue livery was evident from 1949 to 1951 except for 35011/14/23 --never painted such. 35024 had its cowlings removed October 1952 and was in B.R. blue livery between March 1949 and June 1951. Hope this helps, best regards, Ed

I too am willing to entertain a little era /other detail flexibility--especially for what is a fantastic model. I am lucky in the sense that my era 1954-58/9 allows me to concurrently run original and rebuilt forms. Hence my interest in 35029,one of the later ones to be rebuilt. Prior to that I purchased 35028 in original form and changed the i.d. to 35030--rebuilt somewhat earlier but still sitting ok alongside my early rebuilt models of 35018 (no/name change) and 35014. The four also show detail variety--tender capacity/tender H.S or cut down/rebuilt/original form,safety valve position,black and red backed nameplates.--variety is the spice of ----. Anticipating the arrival of my purchase --is it worth considering the Hornby sound chip or am I better looking elsewhere--wheel slip being important to me? Mr Hornby---what a fantastic model--to design and build such a detailed and refined model for what I believe is a reasonable price--keep the good work up. Ed

There is a very good colour pic of 35024 leaving Waterloo 21-6-49 pulling a special train conveying members of the Royal Family--page 48/49 of R J Harvey,s locos in detail series--in blue with what appears to be twin yellow lining.Richard Derry,s book decribes the use of two black lines edged with white. Maybe the colour reproduction isn,t quite what it should be. Also with continuous black skirt covering loco and tender and red backed nameplate. There is also a good pic on page 46 showing 35024 in unlined malachite +light pacific tender. I have just ordered 35029 having used a number of books to check if the details are correct for my era. It may be of interest for others contemplating the same purchase to have a look at the following-- Era4--BR green from 7-52.Early emblem from new ?,2-49 to rebuild 9-59.Modified cab also from new. High sided 5100 gallon tender from 7-52.Casing in front of cyls. removed at same time. The red backed nameplate may have changed in the early/mid 50,s--there is a pic of 35029 leaving Victoria 1n 1956 with what appears to be a black backed plate Fluted rods to 8-56. Safety valves resited 12-54.Shedded at 70A from 6-55>>>64. I conclude that the Hornby model reflects 35029 correctly from 12-54 to 9-59 except for plain rods from 8-56 and possibly nameplate backing colour. However my era is flexible enough to accomodate. regards, Ed

I trawled thro, this section and got a lead from a gentleman who had a similar problem with his T9---Remedy --he epoxy glued the motor to the cradle and so got meshing between motor worm and gear drive.I have just tried little strips of black tack on the edges of the cradle for the motor and can see that it is much improved but not permanently so when under load. I also noticed that there were marks on either side of the cradle seemingly indicating the use of glue to help secure the motor and worm .This seems to tie in with the cause of the failure--prolonged driving wheel rotation on the track when it has nowhere to go--the motor and worm are displaced when the securing glue fix fails? My next approach will be the use of glue to secure the motor and worm output as a means of reliably transmitting power from the motor and worm thro, the gear train. Hope this is not a boring monologue----I will update later --but remember the lead from elsewhere in this section of RMWEB

I inadvertently left my Q1 lapping and it met another stationary loco at a junction (no collision damage as on slow running) and I returned to see it stationary with drivers turning but making an irregular clicking noise. Have dismantled and see that there is no damage to the worm or gear train but on reassembly I cannot get the motor worm to sit securely on the gear train--hence poor power transmission and noise.The prolonged running whilst stationary obviously upset the power train--has anybody else come across this and any ideas please? ps I cannot get the rear motor bracket screw to hold the motor and worm securely--even when screwed right down.

Gentlemen----I am just now ready to install the large platform station ID signs--I know where to put 2 of them--up platform just before the covered entrance--and as you enter the station on the down platform near to the start of the platform.These were both supported on 3 legs. I assume there were 2 more so as to cover both ends of the platforms but if there were I do not know where to put them as I can find no pics.Also I assume these would have 3 support legs? thanks Ed Plant sorry forgot to say I,m talking of the 1950,s

Jack---have enlisted help from my youngest son so hopefully I can now attach them and forward. The progression of B4 pics illustrates how I developed things on-finally raiding my wife,s jewellery box for the chain.Incidentally one side view of the B4 and wagon shows the best I can get out of the DMU coupling--taking the wire hoop off and paring back to make it less obtrusive but quite functional--I find this helps both with coupling and uncoupling.However the NEM boxes need to be at the same height. Have also attached pics of my Lord Nelson similarly treated. Have just discovered that I can only send 10mb so in abbreviated form Am now looking for fine loco lamps to put on my W.R. and Sand D locos--should the W.R be red body coloured? Have enjoyed doing this simple bit of enhancement-to me it looks good and is within my capability. Thanks to 247 for the smokebox no. and S.R loco disc and,my late wife for the chain, regards, Ed ps -I repeat I really rate this Dapol B4 model --my first and quite probably not my last.

Jack ---will send pics as soon as I have mastered transferring them from ipad to email!!

Now put on the B4 smokebox no plate ex 247 Dev along with a SR route disc--looks really enhanced. Incidentally the discs are the best I have come across--really detailed and fine --and ready painted white if that is your wish. I have also set a top scale speed of 18mph and that appears quite realistic --and at that and slower speeds it runs thro, electrofrog points very well. Am now busy putting discs on my other locos. Question ref. loco lamps--are the Modelu fine and able to be handled? regards,Ed

Gentlemen----Eureka--with the use of mole grips and a persistent steady pull the couplings came away quite easily in the end.Have now fitted my preferred coupling for freight activity--Dmu type--often minus the bar on the loco to facilitate operations. Next job 247 for white painted SR discs and the smokebox no. plate. Thanks again all for your support---extremely helpful to a plodder like me! Ed

Graham---thank you for your very helpful reply.I,ll try again to pull the couplings out and I,ll definitely be following your ideas with 247 developments and identity change method.kind regards, Ed

Thanks all for your 2 pennoths. Have since run the model and it is as impressive as its looks--most impressed and well done Dapol. In the absence of decoder programming instructions in the owner,s manual have accessed the Dapol Imperium support cv list V1.0 on the internet and have rendered it ok for slow shed movement, Have tried to get the couplings off by pulling strongly but no luck--I suppose I am frightened of breaking something.There appears no way of compressing the lugs on the coupling in the nem pocket to facilitate removal? regards, Ed

Thanks to all for the comprehensive inputs on the B4--most interesting. I have Just received 30096 dcc fitted and it looks an excellent model. I want to change the couplings --can this be done minus keeper plate removal---and is the coupling fitted to a nem pocket.I want to fit dmu type couplings. Also although there are lots of B4 reviews I have yet to find one that covers the running assessment of the ready dcc fitted model. I would be grateful to hear of any assessments. I will be using my loco for the 71B coal wagon operation,possibly permanently fixed to a wagon especially if extra wagon pick ups are needed? I also need to change the identity to 30093. Is this easily done? Thank you, Ed Plant

jonny777, Many thanks for your reply and it has been of some help . Kind regards, Ed

Hello all, I am modelling Bournemouth W and Central 1955-59.Have recently purchased a Dapol B4 to work the 71B yard. I think the B4 would propel a single wagon at a time to the coaling area? I have bought dcc fitted version of 30096 with a view to renumbering to 30093--or could 30096 have temporarily transferred there from 71A? I had also thought of permanently coupling a wagon complete with additional pick ups to help point negotiation--is this necessary? Has anyone got experience of the running quality of the ready fitted versions? Back to the coaling----I have seen the odd pic of the daily loaded and empty coal trains seemingly coming in from / departing to Bournemouth East coal yard?? What loco types were generally used for this op and how many wagons could be accommodated at 71B yard?? Finally if the above is so how did the coal get to Bournemouth East ?---source and loco haulage? Thank you, Ed Plant

I haven't figured out a way of reconnecting the dropped rod between the rear and centre driver. The retaining pin is in place with a flat head to the front but minus anything to stop it pulling through on the other side. I need to find a way of putting something on the chassis side of the pin to stop it pulling through, any ideas of either the method or a skilled person who can?

The Roco (part 40271) are shorter and give an even closer coupling. You can couple them with the Hornby longer version if needed . I like both because they not only give a closer coupling ,they do not look and sound like a rake of loose coupled steam era wagons when moving off. They behave more like a coach rake. Regards, Ed