buffalo

Indeed,I have quite a few of these old Cambrian kits and am always on the lookout for more. I believe there was also a Timsbury Collieries kit made in rather limited numbers, though I've never seen one appear on ebay or elsewhere. Nick

Thanks, Jerry. How on earth did I miss that I do hope the proof-reading and editing is up to scratch, though. The first picture on the Lightmoor page is captioned "New Pit from the east...", it looks like from the west to me! Yes, I'm sure there's enough of us interested in the area for a new thread welcoming these books. Nick

Me too! Jerry, I'm confused. I can think of several books on the coalfield with some coverage of the Camerton pits, and then there's the Maggs & Beale volume on the Camerton branch, but a book specifically on the pits? What am I missing? Nick

You're quite right, Rob, I'd forgotten about the 1914 split There's a detailed table in Bixley et al. "An Illustrated History of Southern Wagons, Vol 1" which gives a breakdown of what was retained and what was transferred in both 1914 and 1930. In 1914, 568 wagons went to the LSWR and 568 to the MR, with only 221 being retained. Apart from those you mention, 24 ballast wagons and 14 'miscellaneous' wagons were retained. A little confusingly, they list 101 service vehicles, presumably engineering dept etc., in the 1913 BoT return, though these are not shown as either retained or transferred. However, there were 106 in this category in the 1919 return and the same number were divided in 1930. In terms of Alex' question, all covered vans and cattle wagons were transferred. Bixley et al. suggest, and I don't know of any contrary evidence, that the retained stock stayed in S&D livery until 1930. Nick

The changes at the grouping were mostly legal and had little effect on the appearance of stock. Previously, the line had been leased by the LSWR and MR. They, of course, ceased to exist. The Somerset & Dorset Railway Co was wound up and it became the joint property of the LMS and SR from July 1923. Outwardly pretty much everything remained the same until 1930 when the LMS took over responsibility for running and the SR for maintenance and civil engineering. At this point, locos were transferred to LMS stock and, over the next few years, were repainted in LMS black. Carriage stock was painted in SR green. Other rolling stock was split between the two companies. So, prior to 1930, and possibly for a few years after, wagons and vans in SDJR livery would have been seen alongside LMS, SR and stock from the rest of the big four as well as PO wagons and, as Jon suggests, a declining number of vehicles still in pre-grouping liveries. Nick

A similar approach that works well in 4mm is to use a 1mm pin point axle running in normal bearings, but with the wheels mounted on 1mm i/d tube (usually 2mm o/d). The tube is cut off level with the outside of the wheels. It is convenient in 4mm because many wheels normally have 2mm axles and Exactoscale supply the 1mm axles for their wheels. Maybe something similar might work in 2mm scale? Nick

89667 would have been a fitted V12 built as part of lot 731 in 1913. Lewis (GWRJ 66) shows photos of 89662 in 1920s livery and 89713 in BR days, both of which were from this lot. Roof details are unclear for the former, though there is no sign of any strapping at the edge. The latter does, however, appear to have straps visible under a canvas covering. Lewis makes no mention of iron roofs on these V12s. Lot 731 had sprung rod buffers and twin bonnet ventilators from new and may have been one of the first lots to have the diagonal bracing rather than the earlier X bracing. As you say, the straps are very thin and much less prominent than those seen on most models. Nick

Check No 63 first, Rich, as it should cover diagrams V4-V9. You never know, there might be som iron roofs there as well. Do let us know if you find anything, I've ordered copies of the missing ones but it will be a few days before I see them. Nick

A little more info on the iron roof question from John Lewis' six-part series of articles on 16' vans in GWRJ 62/63/66/67/68/70. In Part 1 (62) he mentions that "Some vans were fitted with iron roofs, and these were given what appeared to be an additional, small central bonnet ventialtor at each end." Unfortunately, no dates or diagrams are mentioned here. In Part 4 (67) the above becomes clearer as he lists 26 of those built on lot 873 and 48 on lot 882 as having iron roofs and these additional ventilators. These were all V16 and built between 1920 and 1923, so perhaps just in your period. There is a picture of No 100390 (lot 822) in 1951 on p171. The roof is not particularly clear, but it does appear to have the five bands as in your example. I don't have GWRJ Nos 63 and 68 so it may be worth checking these, particularly the earlier one, to see if there are any earlier examples. Nick

V19 was a one-off flush sided version of V18, No 10450. V18 and V19 were both 16' long, the RCH 17'6" ones start with V21 (V20 was the longer 20T grain hopper van). Atkins et al mention (p379) that some of the vac fitted lot 919 of V18 were fitted with iron roofs. Nick

Great stuff, Rich. I agree with Mikkel's eventual conclusion that the bands on many Swindon MINK drawings are internal. Mostly they are shown correctly as dotted or dashed lines, though it is not always clear, and I don't think we can always treat these drawings as an exact record. The only exception that I can find on a wooden vehicle is the one-off V19. The photo in plate 513 in the latest Atkins et al clearly shows a roof very similar to your's. Perhaps this was what was intended? Nick

How about the latest incarnation as seen in this post in CK's recent topic on the Whiteball tunnel area work? Some other weird and wonderful road/rail equipment there too. Nick

Whilst nickel has ferromagnetic properties, I suggest you try applying a magnet to your nickel silver rail and compare the attraction to that of steel rail. There's a world of difference and in most cases you'll find no detectable attraction to the n/s rail. As to track rubbers, they are one of the worst things you can use to 'clean' track. They are abrasive and put numerous tiny scratches into the surface which are ideal for picking up dust, dirt, grease, etc. All you need is a simple solvent like IPA and a soft cloth. Nick

I asked about the lining because I wondered if you had followed the Russell photo of 1601 but missed the lining on the red frames. Most GWR saddle tanks appear to have lost their cabside lining when they received black frames, though a few were lined at a later date when they received pannier tanks. If you keep the black frames then you are probably safe without lining. Nick

Always good to see another Buffalo! Mine is also 1601, but in a slightly earlier condition with red frames as in the 1902 photo in Russell. I suppose your's would be somewhere around 1907-11 as she was fitted with an S2 boiler in 1911 and converted to pannier tanks in 1915. Have you lined the cab sides? I can't see any lining in the photo. Look forward to seeing the Crocodile. Nick ps. You get much better results if you upload photos directly to the blog rather than linking to the gallery.

As far as I can tell, there is little if any external difference other than, presumably, a frosting or blanking of the window on the toilet compartment. Unfortunately most of the photos I've seen are from the wrong side, wrong angle or just too unclear to be sure about the window treatment. The window is certainly there and the space for the sliding door is behind it. Internally, they lost six seats to the toilet compartment and an extra one next to the centre vestibule door in the other section. Presumably the pair of seats that slightly overlapped the door caused something of an obstruction. At least part of the weight difference results from 2-7 having only a single gearbox whereas 8 and above had two. In the earlier types, the second engine had a direct drive and only came into use once the railcar had achieved a reasonable speed. The later types just used the two engines and gearboxes together at all times. Nick

Thanks, David. I just nipped out for a short walk and missed Rob's reply... Nick

Before you get too carried away witht the weathering, remember that the iron work on the solebars and ends would probably have been picked out in black (see David's photo in post #68) Nick

Dummy parts of the Dean bogie suspension. They fit from behind into the slots in the bogie side plates. The bit with the hole is on the outside. The slots are just above the fixing points for the cross-pieces. The arrowed pieces here show what they are meant to represent. A short piece of wire is needed to complete the effect. The plastic shoes fit in the holes in the ends and bent down parts of the bogie centre. The 'A' frames attach to the outer shoes. The top of the A attaches to pieces that fold down from the top of the bogie frame. Nick

Unsuitable, not to mention unintelligible, blog subject. Try posting here.

If your period is the 1930s, you'll need a certain amount of modellers' licence. Google was right about the build dates, but the livery is post-WW2, top feeds were first fitted during the war and the steps and vertical handrail on the bunker and cab roof were not fitted until the later thirties. Not to worry, though, this is probably the most widespread application of the license known with many years of precedent using the Mainline/Bachmann 4mm panniers, both of which have the same late features. Nick ps. yes, I was amazed to see the sandbox operating rods, you have to add them yourself to the 4mm model.

No, the quote is from here in this topic when you confused Fishermen and Bar Keepers Mind you, it's still a mystery why John quoted it without further comment Nick

Yes, a quick flick through Russell suggests that on most outside frame 4-4-0s the vacuum pipe passes below the bogie front cross member. There were some exceptions, though, including the Armstrongs, 3521s and Badmintons which appear to have a little more room in this area and the pipe appears to pass above the cross member in a more conventional style. Nick

I'm open to being convinced, but given the inclination of the cylinders on the 4-4-0s and the access through the plating between the frames below the smokebox, I don't see how it has any relevance to the pistons. Perhaps it might help removing the valves, but looking at a diagram I cannot see which parts would require such clearance. The locos involved have a wide range of driving wheel diameters which, I suspect, will lead to a range of heights for the valve spindles, yet the buffer beam cutout is fairly consistent in size. Apart from the inside cylinder designs, though, how do you explain the cutouts in the County buffer beams? Nick

It may look a bit unusual, but I'm not sure that "rather oddly" is appropriate for a feature that was common to most GWR 4-4-0s, as well as Aberdares, some Atlantics, the odd Saint and even a few later designs. In most cases, the deeper outer part appears to match the depth of the inner frame, but I've no idea why they are cut away... Nick