Geoff Endacott

Now that it has become clear the Dapol model can represent 17 different examples, I am getting worried. You see I hadn't intended to buy that many... Geoff Endacott

No - it was D6312 - but you can always add the eyebrows! Geoff Endacott

I am not sure that you should upload it anywhere without permission from Rail Express. Geoff Endacott

The Peaks! Geoff Endacott

That seems to be the simplest modification which could be made. I am hoping someone will do an etch for the vents because I always had a soft spot for D6333. I also remember seeing D853 Thruster towing D6307, D6309 and D6312 past Chippenham on their last trip to Swindon works. Eyebrow vents would mean I could model all three of those, except for the fact that D6307 was another one with non-standard headcodes. Geoff Endacott

Trevor is right. I will try to summarise the reasons for the limitations. Three batches of locos were built: D6300-05 which had very different grille arrangements. These are the first six. D6306-33 which were built without headcode boxes but had them added (mostly) like the Dapol model. There are 28 locos in this batch. D6334-57 which had headcodes from new. There are 24 locos in this last batch. Then you have to work out which of the D6306-33 batch had detail differences. The main one is the eyebrow type vents above the cab windows carried by D6306-12 and D6333. That means 8 of the batch must be crossed off leaving 20. Three of the batch had non-standard headcode conversions which means they don't match the Dapol model - D6317, D6322, D6323. That leaves 17 (out of a class of 58) which can be correctly represented by the Dapol model. Trevor has listed these. Geoff Endacott

Typo - should be D6313 - D6332. D6333 had eyebrow vents. Geoff Endacott

No - the current Dapol model can only represent locomotives in the batch D6313 - D6331 (with some exceptions). Geoff Endacott

I think the point about pre-ordering depends on who you order from. I am still waiting for my blue D6326 from Gaugemaster. I don't hold out much hope. It's just as well I got one from Kernow. I also have a pre-order with Gaugemaster for the other blue release. I suspect that Kernow might eventually be going to get my business for that one as well. Geoff Endacott

Why do models have to have working headcode lights? In normal daytime running conditions, even if the lights were on they didn't show up. I have just disconnected the lights from my fleet of Peaks and hey look much better. The Hymeks and Brush 4s were done last year. If the Western comes out with bright headcode lights I will probably disconnect those as well. Why can't we have a cheaper version without lights for those of us who like to run trains in daylight? Geoff Endacott

Almost. The prototypes, with different grille arrangements, were D6300 - D6305. All except D6301 received headcode boxes. Of the first production batch, D6306 - D6312 and D6333 had eyebrow vents above the cab windows. That limits the Dapol model to D6313 - D6332 after headcode box conversion. However, there were several detail differences in the way the headcode boxes were fitted which is why the subject is such a minefield. Oddities include D6323 mentioned earlier in this thread. If small yellow panels had not already been applied they were painted on during the headcode conversion. That is why none of the batch represented by the Dapol model can be green without yellow panels. Geoff Endacott

It also carried two different versions of the nameplate and had no headboard clips. Geoff Endacott

Precision labels headcodes work well. You can see what they look like at Calne this coming weekend. Geoff Endacott

I don't understand some retailers. I had an order in for a 22 from a major retailer before Christmas only to be told that they had not yet been released. Informed sources told me that the company in question had only ordered two from Dapol which had already been delivered. Why not order sufficient stock to cover your existing orders? I bought one elsewhere. Geoff Endacott

No, but it helps you to align them properly if you do. Geoff Endacott

So it should be possible for Dapol to manufacture replacement valances with repositioned holes to cure the problem. However, on on of my examples the body didn't fit properly even without the valences in place. Geoff Endacott

I don't like the valances either. I spent ages trying to get them aligned with the body and they don't stay put. I will also have to look at another means of fixing them before I can commit a £125 loco to exhibition service. Geoff Endacott

That's a start. The best shot would be one taken from inside the cab of the door edge as it opens inwards. The door is a flush fit with the bodyside so the shape of curve should be clearly visible by looking at the edge of the door. Geoff Endacott

That must be the rare italic cab version. Geoff Endacott

If you want to see what the bodyside curve looks like in cross section, have a look at the edge of an open cab door. Photo anyone? Geoff Endacott

Devon local passenger trains were usually 2Cxx. Barnstaple trains were 2C99. Geoff Endacott

True, but 6 seems a better "general freight" option than 9. The problem lies in the fact that the headcodes can't readily be changed - but I am working on that. Geoff Endacott

Here it is at Gloucester in December 1968 http://www.railphotoprints.co.uk/index/detail/6674/D6331-Gloucester-1268-RPPS519.jpg.html . As for headcodes, I suggest the first character should be a 2 if you want to use your loco on passenger workings or a 6 if you are using it on freight. The second character could be A for locos based in the London area, B for those from Bristol and C for Plymouth. You could also opt for Z if you want to use the loco on unusual workings. The last two characters don't matter as much. One option is to set them to the last two numbers of the loco's identity. Another, for DCC users, is to use them to indicate the chip's address code. However, any two numbers will do. As far as D6331 is concerned, in its Gloucester days, 6B31 or 6Z31 would not look out of place. In the photo above it has 6Z39 which fits in with my theory. Geoff Endacott

D6331 was certainly one of the Gloucester regulars. It even acquired full yellow ends in 1970. I have seen many photos of it in the area from 1968-71, often in the company of D6320 "Lister". The allocation history in Model Rail is wrong. Geoff Endacott

It marked the 500th issue of a certain railway magazine. Geoff Endacott