Colin parks

Hi Peter, That is a very useful reference photo for modern third rail infrastructure. Er, you appear to be standing on the track!

A few days ago I posted a comment on the comparative head-on view of both the Hornby and the DJM models as seen in the video clip of post #1795 at 2 mins. 55 secs. Both models looked pretty good to me, though I thought that the cab front windows of the Hornby model looked better. However, I quickly pulled the post off this topic. It seemed likely that making the observation that the Hornby cab front looked better in terms of the windows, would cause ire and anguish here. One person here has admittedly embarrassed himself on the minor issue of a broken part, which could have easily been replaced, but the general tenor of some posts seems to be that nobody should dare make any adverse comment about the DJM model. Conversely, there have been no adverse comments on the post which featured the colourful opinion that the Hornby model was 'crap', with some parts designed by 'Mr Bean'. A case of double standards in operation perhaps? As for the disappointing comment that there are those who 'rubbish' pre-production prototypes, here is an example of what some of we 'sad keyboard warriors' are capable of: I was amongst a small group who critiqued (rather than criticised) the Kernow 4 TC cab front on the pre-production sample, contacting Kernow directly. As a result, and I claim no particular credit here, the errant gangway was altered, directly due to the pouring of scorn by those with accurate information on the prototype. The review comparing the Hornby and DJM class 71 models, that caused one person to 'weep', seemed pretty objective to me. The reviewer stated there was 'no runaway leader'. Their comment on the width of the DJM indicator panel being under-width by 'just under 1mm' could hardly be called subjective - just look at a picture of the preserved Class 71 loco, the Hornby rendition of the indicator panel width is demonstrably better. Leaving aside the histrionic posts regarding the broken pantograph on one DJM model, it concerns me that RMweb could descend to a position where critiques of models/pre-production samples or comparisons between manufacturers' offerings are unwelcome. Colin Parks

So that is meant to replace a guard on the train?!

Very nice pictures! Out of interest, what is the purpose of the object on a pole in image 7320? It looks like a mirror or a monitor of some kind.

That is a really nice photo John!

Hi Grahame, If you ever did think of trying your hand at a 4 COR in the future, I have many detail shots of the motor coach chassis you could have. (The SR electric stock was mostly built on 62' or 62' 6" underframes, so Maunsell loco-hauled coach would be too short for the CORs, which were built on the 62' 6" underframes.) Colin

Not quite in the same vein as other posts, but this picture is farily recent, having been taken at the Bluebell Railway on 30 June 2013. This is of course a motor coach from the preseved 4 COR 3142. I cannot remember the vehicle number. Having completed a model of this unit before the opportunity of seeing this handsome survivor of times gone by presented itself, it was interesting to get right up close to the real thing.

It could be the most challenging EMU livery ever!

Hi Piranha 230, That is truly excellent. I do not think that your cab front component could be confused with that of any other manufacturer... Colin

I had several phone conversations with Alistair Rolfe in the spring of the year that he died. He gave me advice on the EMU I was intending to build and he was going to look out some chassis etches for me. Unfortunately, he became too ill to go into his attic to retrieve them. He was quite forthcoming about his motive for buying the MTK range, which he said was for the range of castings, though he was replacing some of the patterns. As for the Bulleid 2EPB kit, I asked how he produced the aluminium body shells for that kit and he indicated that these parts more or less hand-made. It seems that the secret went with him, because Phoenix have not been able to produce these kits (to my knowledge). He offered me the No Nonsense Kits business for £20,000. I declined the offer! Perhaps some businesses are not that easily transferable to new owners. They must have the necessary funds, skills, experience and commitment to produce not only an existing range of products but also involve themselves in product design and development too. Many do not appreciate that being a model railway kit/component supplier does not just entail selling things, (or taking money for non-existent goods, as its seems in the case of Coopercraft), but making them as well. Colin

Hi Grahame, Great photos. What is the location of the third picture in post #112? The station seems overdue for a spot of weeding! Colin

Hi Ark Royal, Many thanks for your comments, though masterpiece might be taking it a bit far! I am not sure how to interpret the reference to a 'black hole' - is it that once you are in one, there is no way out? Re, greater detailing, a the moment I am slowly working on scale point rodding, the position of which has to be planned prior to ballasting the track bed. In theory, the rodding could be made to move realistically, but that is probably beyond my skills. Colin

Oh, I do like the dinosaur styling!

That livery on that stock just looks bizarre to me!

Hi Phil, Trawling through images on the net, it is not just a matter of the ground falling away beneath platform 8, but as you say, there is a tunnel down there which emerged in the goods yard area. Colin

Hi Phil, The presentation of your photos is very impressive! The 'Brighton Arrivals' shot shows the station as being very clean and tidy in comparison to my memories of the place in the late sixties/ early seventies. Also, can someone explain the reason why the track serving platform eight has boarded-over sleepers? Colin

Great shots of Bulleid EPB stock. The first photo rather reminds me that I was going to build a model of a 2EPB (and still might!). It is interesting to note that the two vehicles of unit 5661 are apparently slightly out of line horizontally. Could it be worn suspension I wonder? The following two vehicles of what appears to be a Bulleid-designed 4 EPB, exhibit a similar variation, so it does not look like an effect that could be caused by the train entering a section of super-elevated track. Colin

Great photo Peter. Is there not a hint of 4 COR about those Class 377 cab fronts?! (Perhaps I should get out more..) Colin

Hi Phil, Now you mention it, those pill boxes become apparent in the picture. Bishopstone station and its environs have always had an appeal, perhaps maybe more for the art-deco building which expresses the speculative optimism of the Southern Railway than the surrounding sprawl of genteel houses, which came much later. Colin

Hi Phil, Your excellent photo explains my football train question then. Would such a move seem credible on a model railway layout at an exhibition?! History is repeating itself at Newhaven to a degree with this strange arrangement of halting the train over the level crossing: occasionally, ballast trains used to trundle up through the town station and just when it seemed that the level crossing would open, the wagons would be shunted back into the sidings between the town and hrabour stations. No wonder they built flyover for the A 259, avoiding the tracks. Anyway, my humble contribution to this thread is of a Class 377 at Seaford, which did feature rather obscurely in a kit-building thread some years back. The date was not correctly set on my camera, but it was probably around 2006 or a bit later. 377 325 at Seaford station. Some twenty minutes later, whilst taking photos of the infrastructure at Bishopstone station, this unit arrived. Whether this was the unit seen at Seaford in the previous picture, en route to Brighton, or another unit en route to Seaford, I cannot remember. Judging by the fact that some passengers appear to have left the train, it would have come from the Brighton direction (unless they had just caught the train at Seaford and travelled one stop up the line!) Only caught the top of the vehicles, but interesting none the less: 377 ??? at Bishopstone station, looking towards Seaford station.

Hi Phil, Good to know the Brighton MRC are still there at London Road. Re. the extra-length trains when Brighton and Hove Albion are playing at home: what will happen next season now that Brighton are in the Premier League? More fans arriving by rail?! Though Seaford station has a twelve-car capacity platform, those platforms at the intermediate stations such as Newhaven Town cannot accommodate more than six cars can they? Colin

Great view of London Road station in Phil Sutters' post #36. Aren't those Class 377 Electrostars rather handsome machines? I used to be a member of the Brighton Model Railway Club, whose club rooms were/still are (?) in the station building to the left of the picture. On club nights (which might have been Tuesdays), I would arrive by train from Newhaven Town, step out of the carriage and stroll into the club rooms. A super location for a model railway club! Colin

Thanks Siberian Snooper! Re. the ballasting, the project has now expanded to include point rodding runs (inc. stools) and all the ancillary details such as trunking. All these features will be positioned prior to ballasting. There are also going to be some electro-magnets set in the track bed for auto uncoupling. Colin

Some progress on the point work: All the rail assemblies are laid in position here, with their wire droppers added. I have been refining some alignments and, as Hayfield mentioned, the straight road through the tandem has been the trickiest part to get right. The only issue of any note has been the slight curving of some chair bases - especially those of the check chairs. This will mean using big weights to press them flat when it finally comes to laying the rails permanently. But there are many things to do before the rails do go down, including ballasting - a method my friend Howard Bolton advocates. This method has the advantage of getting the ballast nice and neat, which I am informed is not so easy with thick timbering, but ballasting first does mean losing sight of the Templot templates beneath - scary! The appearance of the Peco Pandrol fixings look better in the photos than I had expected. Though not exactly to scale, they are quite acceptably fine.

Hi Chris, Re. the oil terminal, my vote would be to convert the siding into an engineers' depot. It would permit a greater variety of stock and movements. (Seen one tank wagon, you've seen them all - in my opinion!) Colin