MG 7305

Should a GWR crane be freight grey or departmental black?

Er, 250 at a 15% discount is about 210, 212 in fact so all is well.

Fixed it! This model does not have a very forgiving drive train, the motor worm has to be set pretty exactly above the idler gears, I love insulation tape, and the keeper plates for the axles and pickups have to be tensioned pretty accurately. Wheel cleaning is going to be conducted rather more delicately in future.

Pickups look good, all running on the inside of the tyre.

My model 1361 class ran well until I cleaned the wheels using the isopropanol soaked kitchen cloth over rails method. This required me to apply some downward pressure on the model to both maintain electrical contact and clean the wheels. However the model now has gained a nasty click/hesitation in reverse only, forward it runs like a dream. These symtoms occur every 3/4 turns of the wheels (yes really!) I have dismantled it and: Cleaned the gears (the intermediates are pretty thin and pathetic). Changed the packing height of the motor up and down. Adjusted the axle/pick up keeper plate screw tightness to several states. It is noticable that the chassis centre/driving axle location method is rubbish and seems to be managed by the keeper plates so the margin of tightness between locking the wheels and locating the axles is very small. Glued packing on the chassis block to restrict the lateral movement of the front axle to ensure the crankpins do not foul on the crossheads. Used military language. I has previously cleaned the wheels with peco electric wire brushes and locked it up completely but cured it by one of or combination of the above but success has eluded me this time. Is there a solution I have missed?

The Sunday Telegraph today suggests that Hornby will sell off Scalelxtric: "Hornby is considering offloading its Scalextric operations in a bid to arrest losses. The toymaker will unveil an operational overhaul later this month. A key plank of Hornby's revamp is a move towards the hobby and collectables market. Invented in 1956, Scalextric is Hornby's second-largest division. However, it suffers from low margins.

Fixing Kadee couplings. I swear by Superglue all plastics for all those fiddly bits including Kadees to kits. Short length of plastic tube to bottom of wagon, cut to length and then All Plastics to fit the Kadee, magic. So in this case glue the Kadee into the pocket.

To me the most annoying issue is the way the back of the tender tank sits plumb on the back of the framing and so there is no lip there. It is going to be a bit of a swine to correct. Best regards

With reference to the detailing of 6947. I should point out that the drain on the LHS coming from the oil pipe cover should not be there. Such a drain is indeed on the RHS, driver's side but it comes from the vacuum ejector exhaust pipe, not the oil pipes. The oil pipes each have a shut off cock but are subject to boiler pressure and have no need of a drain. Best regards

I think you will find that the "Atmospheric Caper" was actually undertaken by the South Devon Railway rather than the GWR.

I think you will find that the WR set will be a Midland set after transfer to the WR, see quote from Bachmann announcement below: "We have revised our existing Pullman tooling to allow the later Western Region version of the 6-car former Blue Pullman unit to be modelled, as working on the Western Region of British Rail (1966 to 1973)." My big concern is why Bachmann think I want to pay an extra circa £300 for a controller I do not want and is inferior to the DCC one I already have? The full retail price I was quoted by my local model shop was nudging £1000. If the logic is that the pack is to be a starter set then it is pretty left field, who would start modelling with such a costly and niche model that takes up so much track space? The only reason I can think of is that they are over stocked on controllers and that this is a plan to get rid of them. Maybe they think that WR modellers are both desperate and well heeled.

The white "X" did indeed allow a load over that for the class as a whole but as far as I know it was applied once the drafting had been improved which makes sense with the enlarged superheaters introduced under Hawksworth. I stand to be corrected but I do not think the 300xx with their non GWR boilers had any significant development at that time.

The white "X" indicated improved draughting, not something applied to the 30XX.

Yes, until you pick up the model by the middle again and break them off again.....

The plate behind the slide bars is, I believe, designed to stop any oil coming from the slide bars/cross head/connecting rod from getting on the tyre of the leading driver. It is fitted to other GWR 2 cylinder engines.

Loctite Super Glue Plastix is the stuff. It glues all my Kadee couplings onto kits and models that do not have coupler pockets. It does wonders for gluing on those little bits that keep getting knocked off. It is what I have used to glue on the brake hangers and steps (too many times, fat fingers) and answers the question.

If the drive problem is due to the inter axle gears, why not try the model as a single axle drive by taking them out? The model only needs to propel itself so it may well work. Both my No 8 and No 11 work perfectly well with Zimo MX634 decoders.

Just had my Dapol Railcar in the post now, number 11. The model runs perfectly on DC, but it has no horns fitted and no accessory pack. I've just rung Dapol and they say I have to return the whole loco back to Hattons for a full replacement because they have no spares in stock yet !!!! That's a really STUPID situation ! Why not just send me some horns when they come into stock rather than sending back whole models that run correctly ! Unhappy! I'll buy some brass ones and fit them myself ! I have both No 11 and No 8. The early railcar does not come with lamp or horns. I suspect that the model is meant to represent the railcar as first brought into service. If you look at the front of the vehicle there is no place to fit the lamp/lamp bracket and this is how they were first used. Looking at No 4 it does not have protuding horns either so I reckon that the model is quite correct (other than the holes in the radiators) for what it is meant to represent. The lamp brackets and horns were (I am not an expert) later modifications and are therefore present on the post war livery vehicle.

Apologies in advance if this is thread drift, but it seems that the GWR produced 2 types of C&W tail lamps (I exclude the side lamps that made up a V pre 1934.) A C&W tail lamp having a rear socket as compared to a Loco department lamp that had a side socket. The first type having a bow type handle which matched the loco type and a second type having an indented handle type (designed to fit on the draw hook if no bracket was available) very similar to the BR type. Is this correct and if so, which came first and when did a change over take place? This is relevant in that both types of lamp are shown in ‘photos on this thread and I wish to get it right!

My current plan for the ramjet/jbazooka is to cut it off, slim it down by removing standoff and refit. Get some cling film and stretch over roof as appropriate. Get some suitably coloured cotton thread lay over cling film in an appropriate route and dampen with varnish. When dry, remove now hardened thread and cling film, replace cotton directly onto roof and use Klear or equivalent to fix in place. Will this work?

My records, courtesy of the RCTS GWR locomotive series, gives the following Andrew Barclay 0-4-0T owned by the GWR: Last GWR No First No 2nd No Constituent # Wks No Final Type Other Railway Date Built Built Date to GWR Date Withdrawn 928 928 14 1273 0-4-0T Powlesland and Mason Mar-12 Andrew Barclay Jan-24 Mar-27 1140 701 1140 5 1045 0-4-0T S.H.T. Jan-05 Andrew Barclay Jul-23 May-58 I do not have the books at hand but I suspect that 705 is a faux GWR/BR(W) locomotive. Is the proposed model correct for renumbering to GWR 701 given the proposed livery? Best regards

I am glad that it has been confirmed that these were used on the Abingdon MG car trains. I used to spot at Radley station in 1970-72 and I would see the D63xx and empty carflats come off the main onto the branch and see the loaded trains go back the other way towards Oxford. I have the D63xx and am now making a serious investment in carflats and Oxford Rail MGBs and MGBGTs (when will a modern Midget appear?) My (real) MG TC is rather out of period but a model of it is on a road over bridge!

My apologies. My intention was to highlight an error with the Dean Goods model for your review whilst also pointing out that Hatton's recent models share the same fault. I should have said that the two pipe runs just below the footplating and the top feed pipes should be snug and not stood off, GWR practice was to use a simple series of clips on the footplating pipes. The pipe run on the driver's side also ends rather abruptly. From memory the fireman's side one is steam heat and the driver' side vacuum, not forgetting GWR locomotives are right hand drive. An additional fault is that the cut out in the valve chest inspection cover designed to clear the front vac pipe is also missing, see photograph earlier in the thread. Best regards

One thing that confuses me is the fact that both the Hatton's 48xx/58xx and this model have decided that the GWR fitted their external pipework with standoffs rather than the actual direct contact clipping to the running plate or boiler clothing which is what the GWR did. It cannot be for ease of assembly so why?