G-BOAF

The Dapol boiler is just wrong. If nothing else than the top of the safety valves look to be higher than the cab roof (because the rear of the boiler is too high), which is not right. I really don't see how they could have let it get that far with that error in shape, nor (assuming they were laser scanning) how such errors could creep in? The Accurascale wheels are also much better. Its a shame as if it were not for the boiler, it would be a much closer run thing

If they don't get a second operator in the UK, I feel sorry for Accurascale who will have ended up putting a significant investment into a short lived prototype. I appreciate that some of the development (and tooling?) costs would be shared with the Sleeper Mk5s.

Given Birmingham City Council's bankruptcy (or public sector equivalent thereof), is there a risk to Coronation Pacific 46235? Could she be sold to balance the books? I say risk as clearly no one would scrap it, but there would be a 'risk' to her 1960s cosmetic originality, but also an opportunity for restoration to steam.

Your highlighted flaw with the Dapol manor around boiler shape is crucial, yet ST does not mention this AT ALL. Surely a much bigger disparity in terms of detail and accuracy than the prominence of rivets? The (two) things that infuriate me about that channel are the lack of prototype knowledge and judgement (shown up by shape of boiler) and going on about price. He needs to get off his high horse about this - models are increasingly expensive, and also needs to be much more prototype savvy and do some basic research and visual comparisons

Are you forgetting that the Hornby King was retooled less than 8 years ago to a similar quality as the Castle? What exactly is wrong with it? Its nowhere near the Bachmann Manor which has its origins in the 1980s.

WCRC have a 1955 built Mk1 operating http://www.cs.rhrp.org.uk/se/CarriageInfo.asp?Ref=1206

O/T, but interested in that tarpaulin covered loco. What was so special about it, that a stored loco would be lavished such care in 1967?

The problem with these is that any 'weathered' examples will need to be 'weathered and a bit battered/bent out of shape', which would need a new set of body toolings. See for example picture above with bowed out sides! But really great announcement. Will there be any 'preserved' runs i.e. Vac fitted with grey bodies (as per much of the GCR fleet)?

A thought (on prototype/history). Was P2 2001 the first instance of use of the V-front cab in the UK? This design was obviously later used on the A4, V2, and in a modified form on the Peppercorn Pacific's, as well as slightly less dramatic versions on the Duchesses, Bulleid Pacifics, and BR Standard 4mt and larger.

I'm not a metallurgist, nor is this a particularly clear photo, but the break appears to be rather granular. Does this give any clues as to the cause of the failure? Fatigue crack that ran, flaws in original casting, flaws in metal. Another observation, Britannia was never stripped in a scrapyard, so I would guess that most of the motion is 1951-1965 era. This is in contrast ex-scrapyard restorations where different degrees of motion are made new (although going by many pictures from Barry, Crossheads and slide bars are some of the last bits to stay on the locos)

But does it move from one side to the other when changing direction? With noticable change in body/bogie gap durinf the process? That is the problem I face

No, the slope down from the running plate starts in the same place on all the 'A4 front end' P2s, from a quick google search. I can imagine other elements of curving around the cylinders might have been different (as noted above), but this fundamental dimension is, sadly, incorrect. An no SK to email about it anymore!

actually, having watched (through gritted teeth) the ST review again it may be that the coupling is catching on the bar and the 'tongue' (EDIT AWS Bang plate???) on the bottom of the bufferbeam at both ends. I will have to check again tomorrow or over the weekend. I wonder what the fix is for this... and why they are not all impacted. EDIT - further, I now see Sams sample also rocked when he touched it. I sense that the NEM pocket might need to be thinned down top and bottom to stop this happening

I was hoping my 37 would be immaculate, and decoration and running wise it is (and it really is a fantastic model. I just don't like the APT impression it keeps doing whenever it changes direction. I don't understand why I am constantly hit by poor quality. It is very rare for me that a loco purchased 'remotely' does not have to be exchanged at least once, be it decoration, sloppy assembly, or poor running

I don't think so as it impacts both ends, and the couplers move freely. Its almost like the chassis is not resting on the appropriate surfaces of the bogie. I'm just disappointed that this is the third (of three) Accurascale models I've had that have had/will have to be exchanged/go for rectification work (that is not to say its just Accurascale, but with most other manufacturers there is the option of exchange with retailer) #PoorlyMadeinChina

Weird Class 37 behaviour/question When I change direction, the loco leans from one side to the other (just by a few degrees). Basically the torque of the motor appears to be dragging the body and chassis over on the bogie pivots. the loco does 'quiver' a bit when I knock the bench that it is on. So I would sense that all is not properly aligned with the bogie towers, but I have no idea how everything is assembled. I'm hoping my retailer can obtain a spare from the warranty stock held back by Accurascale... Unless its just how these models are. Anyone else had this problem?

Is there a 'hole' or 'slot' on the underside of the cab roof for the handrail to be located? From the EP pics here it appears to just abut against the edge of the cab roof... which means a longer handrail could be fitted assuming the existing one comes cleanly out of the diecast running plate. And that Accurascale can provide paint-matched lengths of handrail (as otherwise it will stick out on an unweathered model) https://www.accurascale.com/blogs/news/minding-our-manors-fully-tooled-first-sample-revealed

Are the latest 156 models still made by Rapido? There logo is absent from the box images online. Just curious.

You appear to be right there. The 'slope' should start above the valve guides, whereas on the model it appears to start in front of the steam pipes. What a strange error. Hopefully given that this is a separate part, corrections can be made in future batches. the 'depth' perception will also further not be helped by the reduced lower radius, required (as with the A4 and W1) for pony wheel clearances round second radius track.

Is the box supposed to come without the outer plastic sleeve? Mine arrived sleeveless and with a large knock on one edge of the lid. Not had a chance to inspect the contents yet...

Better to start again on that one i think

How hard can it be to order an addon to the next batch equal to number oversold this time? It is basically just a set of numberplates and maybe a tender body different to a standard model that might be released (depending on which other models are included in the run). This is a bit inexcusable from Key. As someone with no skin in that particular game.

Mine has now arrived from my retailer. Just a shame that I'm not in the country right now to unbox/play!

Now I don't know if I should post on here or just email AS privately about the matter. I didn't mean to cause upset.

I appreciate this, and I intend to email Gareth at some point. I also fully appreciate that he and others have many decades more experience than me in researching models (infinitely more in professional terms). I'm also more than happy to be proven wrong based on other evidence. And indeed suspect that there is variation between batches, builders and modifiers of the real thing. But if there is scope to tweak, that would be great, and I know AS would be open to doing so (just look what is happening on Deltic Batch 2!)