Bomag

All those Toll roads in the Republic must be having an effect if the journey time from Belfast is approaching 2 hours! I have to agree that the Welsh Highland is a poor analogy. Its more like the Strathspey.

It could be as much to do with how it works with your web browser - It looks great on Firefox filling the full screen on my PC (3840x2160) but on IE it fills less than 30% of the screen. This is probably down to MS than KMC

I would like to have seen a 45 go across Trowse swing bridge on the approach to Norwich! When I was with RCE Anglia they were 'banned' - whether this was official or not I am not certain.

Ditto, the last one I received was 31st March.

Can you confirm these numbers as there seems to something missing i.e. a brake As for WEX services in July 1990 the most common arrangement I had noted was variations on 2TSO, BFK, TSO, TSOT, BFK, 2TSO the others were a mixture but generally they wither had two BFKs or a BFK and FK. I always assumed that the BFKs were roughly in the middle due to short platforms.

Probably, but by then the only BCKs left were charter/special ones and the Carstiars spare for the train splits.

Actually about 34 BCKs had B4 bogies (or B4/B5 mix) - SC had four in 1982 - one at IS and 3 at Cowlairs. 21222 was rebogied with B4s before withdrawal in 1980 - 21247 always had C. I don't think any service Mk1s went C straight to B4, although some went C to BR1 to B4 due a dalliance with the southern region But this is beside the point, as Farish produce all three main bogie types they should put the right ones on the model for the time/livery. If needed I will buy them a copy of Longworth, which is mostly right. I wouldn't mind as much if they sold C and B4 bogies as spares; they only thing I have read from Farish why not is an excuse rather than a reason. And to LES1952, yes it does matter a Mk1 coach has the wrong bogies on it. I's the equivalent of running a A3 with a Fowler tender.

The signalman would not have the same powers to stop a vehicle as a per the Police or Traffic Officer. What he/she would have would be the right to place a traffic sign under Sections 64 or 65 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1988 (the latter in this case) which would give an instruction to road users not to proceed. With lights it is no problem but with gates the gate has to be closed and the red roundel visible to give a lawful instruction.

I am with Churchill on the position of democracy as being overrated (with tongue firmly in his cheek). I would have preferred a set list of options given the relocation of the scoring area ( aka goalposts). Anybody want to swap a 9 car order for an 11 car (with appropriate additional wodge)?

You may be identifying a different meaning of arbitrary than I am. Nothing in your factors you have listed should exclude offering a 9 car 390010 named the commonwealth games 2002, 390045 Virgin Valiant etc as one of your options. When I ordered a 9 car set I assumed that that I the odds were 10/51 for any single unit to be chosen and since I would be happy with about 60% of the name options for a 9 car set and OK with half the rest the chances of only having a choice of something I didn't particularly want is less than 10%. Given you are only doing current options and a 60/40 split I have an 85.7% of being lumbered with something I don't want. Being an engineer I did bother to estimate the risks on name number - on what was said at the point of ordering a 10% risk was acceptable. Consider this, if this was a model of an A4 would you think it odd if the only options were the final livery and final names? (and of course not having 4469 as an option)

It proably would have been better to say which units were being made as it would have been a clear choice - if there was not a version I liked I need not have paid for a model. You have missed the point is that limiting choices to only the units in thier current condition is an arbitary descision which should have been indicated at the time you were asking for preorders. Also your maths needs revising - on the assupmtion that apart from 103 there will be no special liveries the only diiference are the set number and name. Therefore driving cars for a set numberd 390005 will be the same for both 8 and 9 car versions. Taking out the the seven exluded for livery, 033 and 003 we are left with 46 3900xx and 31 3901xx options on set number. Although there are online voting systems that can handle this just, the issue can be simpliy resolved by including a three or four 9 car options which are now 11 car or re-named - if they don't get votes then at least people were given the choice.

Given that this is the first time people have had to stump up money for a mainstream RTR model before knowing which units are to modeled then yes you may get some negative responces when some arbitary restrictions are in place. I would not have gone for the second (nine car) unit if I had known that I would be limited to only those which have not been lengthend. A simple answer is that all permutations of number/length/name should be on the voting list. If you don't want to do the same model as both a 9 and 11 car set then the highest voting version is considered. If you get the same four units topping both lists then you may have to reconsider

How about 390137 Virg Indifference! While I was not particularly keen on some of the origonal names, most of the replacements have been particularly insipid. PS I do think that not offering any voting options for anything other then the current name/lengths is short sighted - if earlier variations were included and not popular then buyer cannot realy complain to much, but not offering any as an option is overly restrictive. On a totally separate point have I missed a ban on modeling vehicles which have been involved in a fatal accident. I have had a Farish City of Glasgow and a Hornby Spitfire which where the main causes of the Harrow and Lewisham crashes. Or is it to avoid potential legal claims?

The problem is that while drivers are expected to be able to react and stop in the Stopping Sight Distance (SSD) they cannot be expected to stop if something moves into the carrageway between their vehicle and the relavent SSD point. For a 40kph design speed the SSD is 120m - for 100kph the SSD is 215m. For crossings with lights they should be sufficiently visible so that the red light will be seen outside of the SSD distance relative to the time the carraiageway is blocked and therefore any vehicle will be able to stop normally without haveing to do an emergancy stop. Where there are old type barriers without lights the signalman may start to close them within the SSD distance of an approaching vehicle. The vehicle may be able to stop in time but it may not. For the few crossings with barriers I have been involved with the signalers usually had a reference point where they would not obstruct the carraigeway if there was a vehicle closer to the crossing. This works as long as it is sufficiently far enough away relative to the posted speed limit (or 85th%ile if lower) and vehciles are within the limit.

The TGS were all new build. WR 253s were 7 coaches, when TGS were introduced one TS got bumped instead of extening the sets. Later on they were extended to 8 cars but only after they stoped being considered DMUs. If you look at the set formations for 1985 onwards you can see the impact of this with some coaches being in number order with an outlier normally next to the buffet.

A very selective interpretation of 'England' as they are limited to a single region (London and the SE). While TP lines are being electrified (but not particularly fast) we are not getting any new stock. I was taking to Eric Robson a couple of years ago about upgrading Cumbrian cost level crossings so that a full Sunday service could be run without the need for relief signalman/gate keepers. The cost was as equivalent to 1m of Crossrail tunnel.

You may think it is clear but I don't, even when prompted I had to seach for it in the verbage. So thats 1-2 to those than thinks its clear.

Given the number of people firing up real-time trains website while walking into KX, plus being able to access platforms from the bridge, means that the option of feigning ignorance is not going to work as well as it did.

Given recent rebuildings TRFBs are in less than 50% of sets. The Dapol buffet is a good compromise on a TRUK/RFM and a passable resemblace to TRSB (402xx, 404xx,408xx and 40900). If you want a TRFB get a Farish coach; with a bit of work (depending on livery) it can blend in with Dapol Mk3s

Isn't the existing portions four to six SLE/SLEPs with a RLO and BUO. Each train has two portions and there are two trains in each direction. Plus there are a couple of coaches for the FW section and a set in Inverness for maintenance. This gives 8*9+2 which is 74 coaches

TSO SK CK FK FO BSK BCK RMB RU RFO SLF SLSTP BG GUV CCT Horse Box Bogies vary with livery, mostly BR1 (75% for the ones I have) with the rest C/B4. I cannot see the coaches being anything other that the current versions. The last of the old type was the departmental yellow ones which had the amended windows layouts

I just tried to order two sets one nine car and a 11 car. Desperately looked for a 'continue shopping' button; I then when back to the home page and ordered a the second one only to find it had removed the first! Whoever set up the webpage should stick to modelling!

Having failed 'O' level English three times I would say that it was poor English rather than fiction. The original quote should say that 'sectorisation in 1982 led to new liveries'; it actually reads that sectorisation led to new liveries in 1982, which is not accurate.

Good, but still not as good as a 91+DVT. The quickest time I measured was 53 min 50 seconds (or thereabouts), pity we did not have affordable GPS back then.

390 035 was the first one delivered as a 9 car set.