Pennine MC

Those look nice Dave, I'm pleased to see you're doing the 2ft Dowtys as well I succumbed to my second one at the weekend, at £10.50 it'd have been rude not to. The same trader also had some olive vans, which did have the correct combo of Oleos with roller bearings, not plate boxes as in the pic linked earlier.

Nope, there was renewed talk of it a year or three ago, then it went quiet

Probably because you're focusing more on the anger (at people flouting the rules and nothing being done about it) than you are on the actual nuisance. Not being judgmental saying this, I do it all the time

I loved that 'Relax' song. Wife didnt, IIRC You'd hope so, wouldnt you. TBH and to return to the point I made earlier in response to David's post, it often isnt so much the ads that annoy me, as the undercurrent that we're all weak minded saps who are impressionable enough to buy something just because it's flashed in front of us on a TV screen. That would be this one: http://www.rmweb.co....post__p__475899 See, it wasnt that memorable if you couldnt remember who it is

'Bout time you got off that bike

There's obviously something wrong with me then. I can often remember odd bits from the few ads I do like, but not what they're for, and any firm whose ads irritate the crap out of me (like those utterly appalling Safestyle glazing ones), I can assure you will be right at the bottom of my list when it comes to actually buying anything

I appreciate it's not intended to be technically excellent Gilbert, but that shed shot with the Brit and the big tanks is very moody

I doubt it will ever be proven definitively but to me, this together with examples such as B951410 in Eric Gent's work, suggests a certain circumstantial evidence that not all unfitted vans were originally turned out in grey.

Cracking shot as ever David, and a very rare example of a non-Inverness 24 with ploughs - 5077 I think?

I think that must be one of the earliest ones It's a close thing whether the Sc 26s or the LM 27s were the first with that mod.

It is difficult to be definitive - as you say, you have to piece it together. In the early days of RMweb I did a summary of the various build changes collated from the base references and cross checked with Mr Bartlett's pics - I think it must be on my hard drive. But having checked there again, you may well be right that it's just the one Lot that had rollers with spindles.

Some lasted into the early '80s Markus, Paul Bartlett's site will no doubt have a few late examples It depends what you mean by 'explosives' and 'normal' - in the BR period, MOD munitions traffic has variously used Vanwides, Shocvans, Palvans and possibly ordinary Vanfits, and in the air braked era, just about the full range of railway owned AB vans seems to have been used. Judging by events such as the Soham blast, it would seem that sheeted opens were also used in the war years.

http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/roysrailpage/railif.html Wasnt really sure where to put this, other than somewhere it'd be appreciated - and thanks to Mike Hollick for the original heads up. Hotlinking doesnt seem to work, the images have to be accessed via the dropdown. One that particularly intrigues me is 'D61xx', which shows a trio of 21s lined up at Ferryhill - they're not the pukka GNoS ones as they have no tablet recesses, so must be Eastfield machines. I wonder if they're perhaps en route to Inverurie for breaking?

Maybe so Steve, I'll keep looking for a second one. Not automatically so though, as the change to roller boxes came in some time before the 'big buffer' phase, and one of mine will represent this halfway house stage. It's not something I'd have gone out of my way to do (the buffers are of course more noticeable, so it's more worthwhile doing both changes if you're going to bother at all), but as it's come like that, I see no problem in taking advantage of Hornby's error It's a theory as yet unproven by thorough study of pics, but I also suspect that the later build vans had the sheeting over the ducket from new, rather than as a repair. I'd agree with that summation, most Hornby/Bachmann comparisons tend towards the Margate models being a tad on the 'pretty' side. I'll probably make a better comparison tomorrow (brakevans being something I kinda need to do a wee stocktake of), but I have just noticed that it has the cutouts in the back of the stepboards level with the axleboxes, which is nice The question (and I'd like more opinion on this, if anyone wants to venture one), is whether the various advantages of this new van make it worth the not inconsiderable extra wonga I continue to be puzzled by this, young Chardie; are we talking about rolling resistance and keeping couplings taut perchance?

I picked one up at lunchtime, not had chance to look at it properly yet but my main comment is that the handrails are a bit of a disappointment. I would probably have had two, if I'd been able to find another one that had them sufficiently straight and tidy. Can anyone confirm if it was ever said that they'd be metal, or have we all just assumed they would be, because of the Shark? - 'cos they're plastic, and the horizontal rail on the first one I picked up ran at three different angles. They're admittedly a bit finer than the Bachy, especially now the mouldings of the latter are starting to show their age, but I really wouldnt say they justify another fiver.

I would imagine two SWB wagons* would be sufficient, as with any other hazardous traffic. * Or one LWB if it was the equivalent in SLUs, ISTR this coming up in one of the many other barrier threads.

Was he before or after Richard Marsh?

We've had a letter at work recently asking us to 'exorcise our discretion'

This is it, isnt it Mike. The petition is predicated on the shallow, black and white assumption that 'nationalised = good, privatised = bad', without considering the myriad shades of grey within the issue. Much as I was against privatisation at the time (along with most of the country, I think), there's no guarantee that a renationalised system would right what we generally see as wrongs. And it probably wouldnt sit very easily in the changed and much more overtly commercial world that we have even since the mid 90s I'm reminded of the change back from Humberside here - again I wasnt particularly in favour of its being set up, but changing things back was in some ways chucking good money after bad. Though again it's a complex issue. Do you think even that (Sectors and Subsectors) was possibly a prelude to privatisation Mike? It's probably forgotten now after so many years of EWS dominance, but the idea behind the setting up of Loadhaul, Transrail and Mainline Freight was as 'pseudo-companies' which each might find separate buyers.

French forums eh? S'pose it's OK if you've got an in-house interpreter

Thanks Porcy, I pretty much thought that would be how things happened I think this is the important point, from a modeller's POV. Admittedly it's unfortunate that Hornby seem to have developed a habit of numbering things wrongly, but neither of the chassis combos is incorrect as such - both variations existed, you just need to renumber it accordingly.

Think you need new references then B213828, part of the Cambrian WW lot 2699 (admittedly it was allocated to dia 1/109, so unlikely to be the wagon in the pic) Not 'rare' as such Mike, but certainly much less common than the fabricated type.

I seem to remember doing it once, maybe twice, on a Railrover. I also seem to remember sleeping

Developing thread here Chris - no answers yet, but you might want to watch it. Horseboxes are not something I know much about; from perusal of period pics I dont recall noticing many running in freight formations but if they did, what you suggest makes sense.

Is maroon not an option then?