brossard

Thanks for the link Mike. To my eye the printed sides are no better than the Hornby ones. At least Hornby gave us the hinge detail, even if it's in the wrong place for the GWR van. The van body could be scratchbuilt I think. The thing that makes that a non-starter is the lettering. It did cross my mind to make transfers but that's as far as I got. John

The only coaches I can think of that were done correctly were the LMS period 1s from Rivarossi to go with their Scots. Lovely things they were too but unfortunately they were neither chalk nor cheese being, I think, 3.7mm to the foot. John

Yes, I'm on tenterhooks to see the next installment of Horst von Arschenbam's adventures. John

Over the past few days I've been working on these on and off. I've just about finished so here's the results: LMS underframe: GWR underframe: The big challenge here was to make the GWR pattern J hangers. I used scrap brass and cobbled up jig. There were false starts and do overs but I got there. I expect someone will now tell me who makes them. A few things left to do such as battery boxes and van end brackets. The reinforcing bar needs adding the GWR u/f. This is a lot of work but I don't see any getting around the need to replace the Hornby underframe. In hindsight, a better approach might have been to use the Comet Stove R underframe, bearing in mind that the Hornby van is 4mm short. John

I've been busy detailing the underframes and thought I'd provide a report. A fair bit of work left to do. This is the LMS underframe. I installed the Comet axleboxes but didn't like the springs. I have a "loaf" of springs made earlier from plastic strip and these can be sliced off using my NWSL Chopper. I'll add these towards the end. The brake gear is rigged. This is a bit more involved due to there being brakes on all 6 wheels. I used the arrangement from a works drawing in LMS Journal 31. I've only represented the brake rods to the center and RH axles brakes. In reality they were linked at the yokes. For the LH brakes, there's a reversing gubbins that lets the single crank operate the brakes. The position of the dynamo is inferred from the pictures I have. The GWR underframe is very different. I got axleboxes that resemble those on the van in my picture from a Bachmann wagon. Thanks again to Mike for his picture of the kit underframe. This was very helpful in getting a sense of where things went. The brake rigging is relatively straightforward being a double acting crank acting on the outer axle brakes. Handbrake is on GWR fashion on the end of the van. I noticed a Vee hanger has gone ahoo. John

Thanks for the pictures Mike. They will be helpful. I wasn't aware of the kit and must keep a weather eye open. I don't have Russell, Bishop, but my friend might so I'll see if I can chase down that reference. John

Thanks Merf, must see if I can get that. John

Righto Arthur, I will attempt all and sundry entertained. Seems to me that these vans are quite popular and a kit would not come amiss. I wish someone would do the transfer set. John

This topic has come up several times and I did review several of them. I thought I'd share my efforts which are to upgrade the LMS and GWR vans in 00. This is for a friend. My starting point was a pair that had been severely knocked about. I started off trying to salvage the underframes but it quickly became apparent that they were useless. My reference is Historic Carriage Drawings, Vol 3, NPCs by Peter Tatlow, LMS Coaches by Essery & Jenkinson and LMS Journal 31. I was annoyed to find that these vans, typical of Hornby in the bad ol' Margate era, are 4mm too short. I had planned ahead and obtained some Comet W-irons and castings. I had to scratch build the underframes from plastic sheet and strip including 3.5mm channel. After assembling the W-irons and underframes I had this: The center axle is a sliding arrangement using 2mm brass tube and 1mm steel rod. I used Bachmann wheels but thinned the wheels on the center axle to 2.3mm (was 2.7mm) to ensure easy passage through points. The underframe does negotiate a small Peco point. Continuing with the build, I made steps and completed the W-irons: Now the question I have is about the GWR van. Being principally interested in LMS, my library is a bit thin when it comes to other railways. There is one photo in Tatlow and from that I sussed that there are no brakes on the center wheels. I'm also aware that buffers, J hangers and axleboxes are different. I think I can cobble up something to get a reasonable representation of these. So, I'm wondering if there are any pictures of the GWR van. In previous threads on this topic, there were no pictures but perhaps I'll get lucky. John

I agree with your observations Legend. Probably, from Bachmann's point of view, as we approach the Christmas season, the set (and others) is aimed at those who have little knowledge of model railways and who will buy this for nephews and grandchildren - it is pretty. They have to watch their bottom line after all and a profitable Bachmann is good for all of us. John

Again referring to the link above, this time for 1958, the codes are now letters and "officer's specials" aren't mentioned. Code J (lamp on LHS) is for Mineral or Empty Wagon Train. Perhaps your theory about the need for a lamp, but in no particular position, is valid. Perhaps someone interpreted the saloon as an "empty wagon". This is all great fun. I haven't seen the picture in question. Was the article in a magazine? Do you recall which one? John

It might depend on when the picture was taken. In the link above, for 1970/1972, that lamp position denotes code 5 for "Empty coaching stock". "Empty" in this context might have been interpreted to mean "not carrying paying passengers". Code 9 is still listed. Then again I could be over analyzing and the lamp could be either side. I did notice footsteps on some blue/grey coaches, but they're not on the LMS examples. Added by BR to ease access to the water fillers? I'm now wondering if those small bits are perhaps brackets to secure the vacuum hose when not in use. Using a torch, I can see a hole next to the coupling hook. Post #193 provides some clues and tells me I put the vacuum hose in the wrong 'ole. There's an L shaped pipe that looks like it should probably connect to the hose (emergency brake?). John

Yes, I agree about the guard irons. There are two pieces supplied with the coach and what look like locating holes under the LH buffer. I thought perhaps they were guard irons. The photo in Essery & Jenkinson shows something under the LH buffer. Wonder what they could be. Looking at the reporting codes for LMS, I would go for code 9: "...officer's special requiring to stop in section or at intermediate siding in section." The lamp is on the lower right bracket when the viewer is facing the coach. Code 8, which has the lamp on the on the lower left bracket is for "through mineral or empty wagon train." John BTW, I find this site to be useful for reporting codes etc.: http://www.solihullmrc.org/head_and_headlampcodes.html#lms1937

I completed my EM conversion today: Now riding on Comet bogies. Bufferbeam detail was added. I'm thinking there should be guard irons at both ends for propelling. The interior has been painted although I don't know how correct it is. I also added a couple of chaps. The table clutter is some scanned and drastically reduced track plans and some teacups from plastic rod. John

That's a good point Bill. So, if it was a slow seller it wasn't because it is a poor model. My suspicion is that, representing the preserved version as it does and therefore not being a "proper" Midland loco, it found limited appeal among modellers. It doesn't appeal to me although I would buy the red LMS version in a heartbeat. John

Heartbreaking. I've been trying to do a Dapol Stove R and had much the same issue. I finally gave up on it and did a Comet body for it. I always get anxious at the painting stage because it doesn't take much to ruin weeks of work. John

When I first saw the box picture some weeks ago, the coaches shown were in the Midland style. The released set has the box showing them with the naff lining. John

"Gutted" is the right word. I've been playing around with making transfers Nelson. Not an easy thing but doable I think. I know I'm useless with a bowpen. John

Hatton's have photographed the Thames Clyde set: http://www.ehattons.com/71906/Bachmann_Branchline_30_170_Thames_Clyde_Express_with_Midland_Compound_1000_2_x_corridor_composite_3rd_brak/StockDetail.aspx Needless to say I am disappointed. John

A very nice lady replied to say she would see if pictures of the set could be posted - great service. The picture of the box is quite useless. John

I sent off a question to Hatton's about the actual livery of the coaches and suggested they post a picture. John

I saw the newsletter Gareth. There are pictures of coaches, but these are of the old incorrect livery. I checked Bachmann's site, there are "new" coaches listed, 34-227 and 34-255 but the pictures of these show the same old lame livery. So, I think we are to be disappointed yet again. John

I'd like(hope) to see the coaches released separately too. I tend to think that PI and PII coaches probably didn't get converted to simplified lining in any great numbers, if at all. I'm still waiting for someone to provide photographic evidence to prove me wrong. John

Agree Gareth, the coaches look to have the correct MR style panelled lining that was perpetuated until 1934 (even a few period III coaches had this). I have yet to see a decent picture so I reserve judgement. John

As I understand it 1000 is modelled as preserved (although I don't know the differences) and doesn't represent the original loco. The loco livery is Midland Railway, not LMS. After 1923, locos retained the tender number for a few years with the LMS crest on the cab. This didn't last and for most of its' existence, LMS locos had LMS on the tender and the number on the cab. Therefore, while 1000 is a fine model, I am waiting for the LMS red version. (The LMS black model is a wartime livery I think). John