Armchair Modeller

Thanks for that clarification. Having seen some replacement wheelsets for Farish locos, I would feel much happier if replacement wheels were available for a direct swap. I think maybe I should go back an era or two, so that I can use these wheels. Does anyone know if the replacement wheelsets for the Farish 108 also fit the new 101?

Sorry - I had read somewhere that the modern Farish DMUs had half-axles, so the axle stubs had to be moved in on the wheels to give the correct gauge and total axle length. I must be getting confused - apologies for any inconvenience caused! EDIT In my defence, the article I was thinking of was Mick Simpson's on the NEAG blog about converting a 108. In this he describes the unpowered axles as half-axles. From what you are saying Kris, this is not a concern with the 150.

Thanks for your views gentlemen. I suppose I should not have expected anyone in this section of RMWeb to say do it in N! For the 150s, does the wheel turning service include adjusting the pinpoint axles to the correct setting, or would I have to do that myself?

I am thinking about having a go at a modern image 2mm layout. What do 2mm modellers do about converting the wheels for 2nd generation Farish and Dapol DMUs though? I see this note on the products page "NB. Class 150/x requires slightly different pin-point axle length, this is under development." and I assume the older 158 and 170 DMUs are covered OK. Generally, 2mm scale doesn't seem to cater much for modellers of the 1990s and beyond, apart from plain Easitrac with concrete sleepers. Would I be better to stick to N gauge, with handbuilt points?

I heard a rumour some were sent up to Scotland to work the Kyle line and have recently appeared in Saltire blue. Let's hope Dave has got the version planned with air brakes, ETH and snowploughs.

Whilst broadly true, the wider gauge will make a slight, but significant difference to the position of the frog and the sleepers, as it does between EM and P4. Best find a template for prototypical track that approximately matches the radius you need, rather than try to base a 2mm point on a Peco design. If you don't use points, then N gauge trains will run on 2mm track unmodified. 2mm Easitrac plain track is being used on several N gauge layouts.

Out of curiosity, I checked a few sources about the Oerlikon/Siemens sets. Apparently they were built for the LNWR. The main difference was the electrical equipment, supplied by either Siemens or Oerlikon. The Siemens sets saw action on the Willesden Junction to Earls Court service.This is known as the West London Line. The service was suspended after sustaining bomb damage in WW2. This is why they were available for conversion for use on the Morecambe line.

Apologies for getting that wrong. I had always assumed that the units were built after the LNWR took over the NLR. I didn't realise the North London Railway introduced electric units itself. Guess I had better stick to topics I am sure I know something about!

The Oerlikon sets were LNWR in origin and looked very different. Here is an image of one

Yes - if you read my last entry in conjunction with my entry immediately above Natalie's you will see that I am simply confirming my own observations that your loco is not a general purpose tank, by showing what a GP tank actually looks like. I was trying to be helpful, that's all!

This is what the General Purpose tank looks like -- A jinty on steroids!

It does look more to me like a Holden J69-style tank - the ones introduced when Farish first started in N gauge. They did appear in a range of liveries, which might account for some people calling them general purpose. The one most commonly known as the Farish General Purpose tank was a much later, stretched Jinty-style design produced originally for a cereal promotion if I remember correctly. Your model is definitely not one of those.

An OO9 layout for £7,500 anyone? 90% to be paid in cash on collection, too! http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/ONCE-LIFE-TIME-CHANCE-OWN-LAYOUT-Chelthwaite-Beccadle-LR-/230706887984?pt=UK_Trains_Railway_Models&hash=item35b733bd30#ht_650wt_1185

It is easy to accidentally type a comma instead of a decimal point, which definitely gives vastly inflated bids - I have done it myself! Just as easy with postage charges.

I don't know... with 8 legs we might be able to model a bit faster - and making the wires for OHLE would be a doddle

You are forgetting the Victorian revival, when many new Anglican churches were built in the newly developed urban areas, often close to lines that had already been laid. Also, some stations were built in already developed urban areas, like Liverpool Lime Street or the GC line through the heart of Nottingham. There were churches very close to these.

ECW did one on a Bristol Chassis in the late 1950s - it looked very silly

Looking at Friar T's photo link, I suggest a black felt tip pen is all you need to represent the hinges!

The flux in cored solder is non-corrosive, so doesn't need to be cleaned up afterwards. If that is not sufficient, used something like Carr's orange flux which is non-corrosive.

Wonderful photo! Please don't take this as a criticism, but I think the strong shadows in the foreground do expose the limitations of a 2-dimensional backscene more than with normal layout lighting. I subconsciously expect the background to have similar shadows to the foreground, as they would be exposed to the same direction of sunlight if this were an image of the real world. It is still a wonderful photo though!

Just noticed a photo at Culmstock of the branch train with what appears to be an ex-LNER Thompson 3rd brake in November 1962. I can't read the number but the prefix and suffix are both E. I guess this may possibly have replaced the ex-Barry Railway stock previously used on the line, rather than being a one-off substitution? If so, I wonder if that suggests the prefixes were not necessarily changed straight away when stock was reallocated to foreign regions?

OK - my knowledge of this sort of thing is not great, BUT... when the WR took over SR lines west of Salisbury they did take over all the stock - and the SR inherited GWR locos etc. on ex-GWR lines east of Salisbury - some panniers ended up banking at Folkestone Harbour. when the LMR took over all GWR lines in N Wales they took over the stock too.

There is a tendency to think of BR (WR) as the GWR in all but name and livery, but this was not quite true, even in 1954. When the new regions were set up on the formation of BR, some lines were transferred fairly quickly, based on geographical and operating reasons, along with their stock. Joint lines were given to one region or other very early on, as were some fairly minor invasive lines - like a few LMS lines in South Wales, for example. Later on, of course, much broader regional boundary changes took place in which whole swathes of stock and territory ended up belonging to a foreign power. Whilst there may have been a tendency to do mutually-advantageous swaps of stock to get things back where they belonged, or scrap foreign stuff,, there must have been some ex-LMS stock inherited by the WR that was not scrapped straight away - and could easily have been reallocated somewhere else on the region - especially if it was in decent order. It was probably only when the widespread closures of branch lines in the early 1960s and the introduction of DMUs that large culls of stock could easily be carried out. Might it be that this coach was actually part of WR stock, though not renumbered? It would be interesting to know how much foreign stock was reallocated to the WR in this way and what happened to it.