Bomag

In 1991 ICCX still had most of the Mk2 BFKs, Mk2e TSO and very few Mk2 def BSOs. The first batch of Mk2f RFB (1200-1221) had been converted, while the second batch was imminent, there were still 28 RBR allocated to XC. Until the ex ECML HSTs were transferred most NW to SW had the same formation as earlier (BFK+4TSO each from Glasgow / Edinburgh+ RBR). LHS XC stock to Reading and beyond tended to be the formed with the new RFBs but with more variations e.g. NEAs rather than BSOs, than with the later fixed formations.    

You should get a decent representation of Wakefield Westgate with both up and downs sidings in the pre electrification layout using Code 55 pointwork in the space you have. If you have the misfortune to model 00 and forgot to say then I would suggest moving the turntable to the MPD and carying round the 4 tracks round the left corner and have the crossover on the left hand canal  bridge.  This should give a more even curve.   

56 minutes ago, proton said:

Probably right, but double heading was found necessary on inclines to get traffic effort, rather than horsepower.

In the late 80's a single 90/87 would need two paths to get a full length freight liner over Shap or Beattock; with Class390 timings I would assume not dropping to much below the maximum speed for the train is even more important.

3 hours ago, keefer said:

I remembered mention of 3284 in one of the other push-pull threads.

From January 1982 R.O.:

[The lack of mk3s available was made worse when Sc12018 was set on fire and destroyed by vandals, at Glasgow Works.] "in the meantime mk2f FO Sc3284 continues to run, coupled next to the loco and declassified, in one of the sets" (jan.1982 ed.)

So, as @hexagon789 says, 3284 was already in use mid-late 1981 (in b/g) due to a lack of Mk3s - even before the incident with 12018.

IIRC 3284 ran for some time in InterCity livery (red stripe) before going into ScotRail (blue stripe) in the mid-'80s.

The pressure on Mk3s goes back to 1980 where two TSO were written off and three more coaches damaged at Bushey. When 12018 was withdrawn it was replaced by 12005; 12050 was drafted in but 12006 was lost at Polment. Given LMR shortages and the refurbishment program, 12009 and 12050 had gone back to IWCX/WB in 1986.

There were only ever 7 FOs (11004-11010) and then 7 COs (11905-11910 + 11922), so by 1981 there could be up to a sets worth of Mk3a TSOs which could be formed with 3284 and a spare DBSO to create a spare set (assuming, I think, 6 diagrams with 1 cyclic maintenance spare Mk3a FO). Having a spare set is more flexible than having individual coaches, however, the fluctuation in TSO could have meant that there were no spare TSOs to swap in overnight at all. I assume that conversion of the FO to CO allowed the loss of the fourth TSO without off peak overcrowding to give the ability to more reliably run the number of diagrams. I don't know the rider ship figures for E+G for the mid 1980's but the reduction to 3 TSOs per set predates the UK wide reduction in passenger numbers in the late 80's. 

44 minutes ago, DBC90024 said:

 

I had read that the 83 i think it was literally spent more time not running than running and i think the 84 had a similar fate - i am pretty sure there is more about this further up in the feed. Its not my area of primary interest so i am happy to be wrong on this matter either way

 

kind Regards, kat

The 83s, were stored 67-71 and after the rectifiers were replaced lasted until the early 1980s (except for damage/fire). So not really 'more time not running'.

The 84s were a bag of bolts, being built by NBL.

2 hours ago, Northmoor said:

That's almost exactly what BR was doing.  However while some classes did spend time in store, a lot of miles were run in the active periods of their relatively short lives.

 

The AL1-5 were five manufacturers' responses to the same basic specification; in an outbreak of common sense (it didn't last) BR did specify a standard cab, so there is very little variation in those, it makes driver training much easier as the layout is identical.  Otherwise they are all different; auxiliary equipment is almost all different (each has different voltages), body styles, bogie design etc.  The AL6/Class 86 is the result of lessons learned from the previous five classes, most of the best features came from their own Doncaster-built design, although there may have been political considerations in this.  As I said, the common sense didn't last long so the AL5's under-suspended bogie design was also persisted with, to the detriment of the WCML permanent way until Flexicoil suspension and/or SAB resilient wheels finally dialled out most of those issues in the late 1970s.

AL5/85 had bogie mounted traction motors, only AL6/86 had axle mounted motors. Although the 86/2 and 86/4 may have been better than 86/0 on reducing track damage they still knackered the track. We had to redo several sections of the GEML within a couple of years of electrification as the 86/2 wanted to straighten the curves.

2 hours ago, DBC90024 said:

It looks like a co-co ... an early inspiration for the Class 89 or 92 perhaps ?

Its an A1A - A1A as Class 80

As 18100 it was a Co-Co

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_80

On 10/01/2015 at 01:32, Flood said:

Post removed as the OP couldn't be bothered to say thank you.

I know this is a bit late but he did give thanks in advance. Whether you find it acceptable or not the removal of the data does not help anybody else, nor seemingly dis-benefits the OP

The Dapol Mk3 catering car was a compromise and is not right for any of them.

As initially produced it covered:-

Mk3 TRSB GK401 and conversions to GN401, GN102, GK103

Mk3a RFM (ex Mk3 TRUKs) 10200-10211

Mk3a RFM (ex Mk3a RUBs) 10230-10260

Its not to far from a MK3 TRUK/TRFK and has been used for the Prototype HST 10000 TRB and 10100 TRUK

The end is a mish-mash of bits.  It's also wrong for any of the fGW RFM coaches as they look to all be ex Mk3a FO RFMs, 10212-10229.

Still doesn't justify not doing the ends correctly

On 06/08/2021 at 15:04, JohnR said:

Dont you just hate people complaining about the fact that out of the several model shops within a short distance of them they cant park.hours are wrong etc, when there are plenty of us who have an hours drive to their nearest one....

What irritates me is people who assume that what is good/acceptable/doable for them is perfectly fine for everybody else. Additionally, comments about why somebody should not be disappointed as you have to put up with worse - and which are not tongue in cheek - are also mildly annoying. 

Then again some people just have expectations which are never going to met!

1 hour ago, Trog said:

 

At that time BR was still using 2,4,5T weedkiller. One of the main ingredients of Agent Orange.

 

But they did have safety protocols in place with staff being instructed to turn their backs to the weed killing train as it went past, so that was alright.

On RCE Anglia we were not allowed on the track when the weedkiller train was out, and except for routine safety checks we had to wait until it had rained or after 4 days(ish).

1 hour ago, meatloaf said:

Picked up the new 3 car green unit today with sound fitted.

 

Stunning model and runs great. Sound wise its a different soundfile to the previous 2 car blue release. The speaker also seems to be mounted differently. The blue one it was behind the windows at the rear of the power car. In the new one its still at the rear but sitting flat.

 

As i say sounds great and im really pleased with it. Its the 2nd most expensive loco ive purcahsed only coming second to a Heljan 0 gauge class 20.

 

Edit : Does it matter which way round the centre coach goes?

Depends which livery, by the BR Blue period you can can a different class centre car never mind the right way round. If its green then its more likely to be kept in the preferred orientation (the centre car loo next to the DMBS)/

2 hours ago, Davexoc said:

 

You can't please everyone and you may have to wait a long time to amass a representative collection from multiple manufactureres. It is not a new phenonmenon, in fact I don't think you can realistically buy off the peg for many lines even during the BR period. A quick look at the outer suburban lines comes up with the following omissions;

GWML - no class 117s, 119s or 121 bubble car trailers

MML - no class 127s or 317s

WCML - no class 81-5, 310s or 304s or 501s

ECML - no class 105s

GEML - no emus or class 105s

SR lines - most emus and all thumpers missing

Birmingham area - no class 81-85, 116s, 304, 310, 312 or 323s

 

I have been collecting now for well over 15 years, and there are still items I would like for the 1970-90 period, so Rule 1 will be used for certain workings.

 

With regards to slow progress in re-releases, it could be down to the latest demands on quality and fidelity, where fitting lights and speakers etc. means that it just isn't worth modifying old tools, and new ones have to be designed. The problem with most moulding tools is that metal off is easy, but metal on can be a big problem, thus it is easier to cut new metal. Just consider the cries of derision if the class 158 was re-released without lights and sound options.....

 That's a very London centric list. If you are comparing N with OO then both have similar gaps. I terms of Fraish, if actually available, the combination of 101/108, Mk1, Mk2a and Mk2f with various banger blue and sectoristion locos and suitable wagons will cover the majority of the non-electrified network from west of Salisbury, through northern England, the north east, to Scotland from the beginning of TOPs to the early 1990's 

8 hours ago, grahame said:

 

Those coach ranges were not available in the 'distant' past - I certainly remember them being introduced. They haven't always been available nor all suddenly became available. Plus most of those ranges have been superseded at a later date with better quality versions.

 

And of course you do have a choice when pre-ordering - whether to order or not, or which of the ones (usually several liveries are produced at the same time) and how many, or whether you spend the money on other manufacturers models.

 

The argument is pointless and unreasonable in stipulating a specific modelling period, the type of shop the products can be purchased from and when you can buy them. However, they have produced models for those lines/period but some people will have missed the boat by not pre-ordering or purchasing at the time and will have to wait for the next batch. 

 

Saying they don't produce a particular range for a particular line, for a particular period and equate that to not offering choice and not having a large range is pointless. You cannot expect Farish (as one manufacturer) to produce ranges to satisfy every modellers particular wants, and have them continually available all the time. There are other manufacturers who do and will help fulfil those wants.

 

 

 

Thirty years ago - the dates I mentioned - is a full generation ago. Also the full body versions of all the Mk1s to Mk4 became available within about 5 years.  I don't remember Farish/Bachmann improving the mouldings on either the Mk3s or Mk4s - so no improvements in half the types.

Excluding niche stuff like the prototype HST limiting availability of mainstream models to pre-ordering through a very uneven batch process is not giving good choice nor customer experience. Blue/Gray Mk1 were ubiquitous to the vast majority of the GB network for 25 years it is not pointless or unreasonable to have a selection of models available most of the time.  Not only is Farish not producing a range to satisfy every modeller, it has a range/production schedule that is satisfying almost no modellers in N.

The models are much better, and I am nor recommending flooding the market, but even with my eclectic modelling eras I have been tempted by GF only three times in the last 6 months.

1 hour ago, grahame said:

 

In the dim and distant past you could get a Mk1 coach but that was the only type you could get. No Mk2s or any other types/range of any colour. And now the Mk1s are a world of quality and detail improvements.

 

There's not a lack of choice now - it's just different. And, as most people have cottoned on to, batch production often means you need to pre-order or potentially miss out until the next batch is produced (which can be some time particularly with the current worldwide issues).

 

 

In the late 80/s early 90's GF did

Mk1 4 models, at least 5 liveries.

Mk2c 2 models, NSE livery

Mk2 DEF, 2 models, 4 liveries.

Mk3/3a 4 models, 4 liveries.

Mk4 5 models ICS livery

Your two points in your last paragraph are mutually exclusive. If you need to pre-order, you don't have a choice of which model to buy of you go into a model shop.

And in your point to fezza you miss the point - we are not asking to model every location in every era. Apart from possibly an ECML set of Mk 1 Pulmans you cannot accurately model any principle passenger train from the ECML, WCML or GWML from about 1965 onwards using GF models which are in stock at somewhere like Kernow models.

36 minutes ago, grahame said:

There was a time when we were lucky to get one or two new model releases each year. Things have changed significantly in the 21st century and expectations have increased along with that.

 

But overall, IMO, the picture and future for N gauge isn't bad when considering what's available (quality and range compared with the past) and the list of development due from a large number of manufacturers. It could be better though, especially from Farish.

 

The dim past when we got one or two new models a year was also the time when retailers had the vast majority of the range in stock - if you wanted a Maroon Mk1 you could get them. Yes they needed renumbering and detailing if you wanted them to look good but they were available. Now you have a GF cabinet about a third full  with mainly rule 1 models e.g. LMR Austerity.

9 hours ago, 18B said:

Hi, 

I noticed the other day on a pic of a class 31, AR above its number, I’m assuming that it stood for Anglia Region as the region it belonged to for infrastructure work? Many class 20s had LMR and yellow flashes above their numbers, but not seem many ARs… also iirc some Class 50s had WR near their numbers? I’m assuming there were ER and ScR examples? And SR? But they seem had to find, unless anyone knows of any examples pr has pics of such locos carrying the flashes/insignia? Tia 

There was a change in how infrastructure was managed at the time. On the Anglia region all bits of track, crossovers, siding and buildings had an owner - IC, NSE, Provicial/RR. This included CE stock and locos - however, it took some time to sort out and there were some 'spare' locos. These were the main ones to be branded, mainly Class 31 at Strafford but there were others, to stop them being 'liberated'. Some of them were un-referbished and in dire condition, it was a bit of pot luck if they lasted a full weekend possession.  

19 hours ago, melmerby said:

 

Notice how they are in groups, spaced out, presumably for stability.

Its to allow each row to be unloaded at the same time - the cranes are wider than the rack width.

52 minutes ago, AY Mod said:

 

Have a chat with your rep Maurice; none of us here can do anything whatsoever about it and, may I suggest, that you're not encouraging anyone to use you. Did you really have to be the first with the same old comments?

If Bachmann says it has 'listened' when talking about OO models, then perhaps N gauge modellers have keep on repeating the same 'old' comments until it does listen.  While you are perfectly entitled to be fed up with John Upton's comments, it goes both ways - and no its not about deleting threads without notice or explanation.

3 hours ago, Duncan. said:

 

I normally avoid these sort of discussions and prefer to see what is actually announced. In yesterdays OO class 47 anouncement  one of the presenters did say 'its what our cuslomers have been asking for/ demanding'.  This customer expectation along with the general raising of standards from other manudactures such as Accurascale has probably forced Bachmann to  raise its own game in response, result customer is the winner. 

Therefore @Bomag I have to disagree with your remark 'anything would be an improvement', I think we (N gauge modellers) should be making the same demands for better models and not praising those which really are not so good.

 I know that I along with many others felt that the MK2 air conditioned coaches were a retrograde step from the BR Mk 1 examples and the EFE class 17 loco did not correct any of the school boy errors in original design, giving a too high bufferbeam and too high central cab. If as in some quarters these models are high praised surely the signal being sent back to Bachmann is that we do not need to increase investment in new or better tooling as the customer is perfectly happy with what we have made to date inaccurate (in the case of the class 17) and lacking the possibility of close coupling or installation of a light bar (in the case of the MK2s).  As in OO we have some manufactures improving standards, Revolution and Sonic for example. If we are collectively critical of new models instead of just accepting whatever is presented, together with the raised standards from other  manufacturers I remain hopeful that  we may well see improved models in N from Farish too. 

As a footnote, during my time as Trade Liaison Officer for the NGS I visited the factory at Poole where I had a full tour of the site and a long discussion with the designers and Peter Farish about new product. I was asked at one point if 'a millimeter here or there mattered? So that's 6 inches in the real world (OK nearly 6) imagine looking at differnt examples of the prototype (perhaps a class 47) and the wheels were made 6inch larger or smaller, or the front cab windows were made 6inch deeper on one of the prototypes... would you notice the locos looked different from each other?

My answer, by the way, was 'it is no more difficult to get it right as it is wrong'

Let's see what today brings.

Sorry, I have no idea what your post is on about - it's nothing to do with quality and I never said it was. My point was that as the summer announcement (back in May) had no N gauge in it, then announcing *anything* is an improvement. So three LMS inspection saloons and a 45T tank wagon is an improvement. In the end while quality is nice, you first need to actually manufacture something. 

The LMS had some very interesting light railways - Ballamena to Larne and Red Bay, Ballycastle railway and half of the CDJR with the GN.

3 minutes ago, Western Aviator said:

Based on careful scrutiny of previous announcements, here are my predictions for the next announcement:

 

1. Some moaning about the choice of models that have been announced

2. Some moaning about the prices

3. Some moaning about how long it will take for the models to arrive

4. Some moaning about what the prices are likely to be when the model arrives 

5. Some moaning about the adjectives used to describe the new models

6. Some moaning about the choice of numbers for locomotive X, coach Y and wagon Z.

7. Some moaning that there is STILL nothing for people modelling the Rutland and Back of Beyond Railway between 1910 and 1911.

8. Possibly a transition-era “very-underwhelmed” and a large logo “nothing for me this time” as well.

 

 

Given the Summer announcement anything would be an improvement. Also points 2 to 5 are under Bachmann's control.

The problem for Bachmann is that the occasional disappointment turns into apathy.

Unexpected as none were preserved, but very nice indeed.

On 31/07/2021 at 07:32, Chris M said:

If Its great looking then it isn't an N7!

 

At least its not GW, they all look the awful same - give me a shiny smoke box ring and a Westinghouse pump over Brunswick green and bling brass.

In my loo I have three photos of the N7 and a photo of the last down broad gauge Cornishman at Paddington, the latter behind the door - as it should be.

2 hours ago, D9020 Nimbus said:

Not really true in BR days — yes, the N7 appeared on GN services as well as GE, but there were N2s based at Parkhead. When they were displaced, one found its way to the Alston branch — don't think any N7s got to that part of the country.

 

Whatever it is, though, there's clearly a need for an LNER tank in N…

The N7 were used (in larger number than the N2) in both the West Riding and GCR areas in addition to places such as Lincoln. The N7 didn't get to Scotland but I think they only got 16 N2 anyway.