The Evil Bus Driver Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 I'll get one when I have the money. What was the Pencil Trick? Does anyone have a link? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xerces Fobe2 Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 I'll get one when I have the money. What was the Pencil Trick? Does anyone have a link? Can you post a photo once you have done it please Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Page 12 gents. Incidently, am I right in thinking the black on the corridor connection isn't over all the front? It looks like the top right corner is squared off not curved like the corridor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted September 13, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 13, 2011 Post 317 shows how the gangways should appear. The rubbing pads around the outer faces are clearly formed of separate pieces. It was SR practice to paint in the corner which is slightly recessed just above the driver's window in yellow (on FYE units) or with the base livery colour. This gave the appearance of one squared-off corner and one rounded one when seen head-on. Perhaps one of our SR EMU experts might also be able to advise why this was done. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRman Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 I have to say that this practice has mystified me too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Both are Godfrey's photographs from earlier on in the thread. Makes interesting comparisons. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uk_Steve Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 pencil does work well here is another angle why the pencil works well "in my view" reason being in real life it was a quite a bold gap line when you look closer Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 You see, that last photograph (thank you for posting that, by the way), sort of emphasizes why the gangway connection when the model is pristine, makes the front end look "wrong". The gap between door and corridor connection needs to be more emphasized - the pencil trick works extremely well here - but I note the left portion of the bottom of the door is shaped wrong (the slanted cut inwards). It should jut inwards, not outwards as on the Hornby model. The air horns look severely undernourished too. Replacements would improve that portion of the "look" but I'm not sure what can be done about the door aside from cutting it out entirely and replacing it with a better shaped one. Overall I've slept on it and thought about what would need doing to the model to make it look better, and I can't quite place whether the initial cost of this unit then justifies the outlay on additional detailing pieces and wheelsets to satisfy my requirements. Looking back at Gareth's superb modification, and the rather neat pencil trick, it can be made to look better significantly, but there's still a few niggles that I simply don't how I'd modify it to match the prototype. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uk_Steve Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 (edited) can i ask the following to the people in the know here why is traction wheels not that good on trains? i am concerned because i have no idea what is the main problem is with them last thing i want to do is buy the train and make it all looking OK to my eye then the performance around the track is not that good and then i have to buy more parts to make it perform well thanks in advance Edited September 13, 2011 by Uk_Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Oldddudders Posted September 13, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 13, 2011 why is traction wheels not that good on trains? i am concerned because i have no idea what is the main problem is with them last thing i want to do is buy the train and make it all looking OK to my eye then the performance around the track is not that good and then i have to buy more parts to make it perform well My perception is that in a model where metal wheel to metal rail is the usual way of conducting the current to the motor, then having traction tyres reduces that interface on the very wheels that carry most weight (the motor) and thus have the best chance of a good path for the current. Traction tyres are also by their nature perishable - in order to grip the rail better than metal, they need to have a rubber-like consistency, which implies a limited life, at least compared with metal. If the rest of the unit has plenty of pickups, the electrical problem may be lessened, but the perishing wil not. When the Hornby T9 appeared with traction tyres, there was much wailing and beating of breasts, but mine will all happily walk away with 9 or 10 Hornby Maunsells, the tender pickups work fine, and I do not notice the presence of the traction tyres at all in running. Incidentally your pic of the Class 423 at Dover Piggery shows the CIG driving trailer composite, albeit pretty similar to a VEP in end detail, being of similar age. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 (edited) Just got the email - Hattons now have the NSE version in stock. Do I take the plunge, or not... Edited September 13, 2011 by S.A.C Martin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kintbury jon Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Not quite, it's 76275 originally from a 4TC unit. I travelled in it once. One of the few vehicles that retained bulbs instead of fluorescent tubes. It ended up in Connex livery and now resides in St Leonards depot having been purchased by the Hastings Diesel Group. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uk_Steve Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 (edited) thank you Oldddudders for the info also thank you for pointing out the picture, i be honest i am only learning all the names as we speak i never did look at them in detail however i can see me changing and wanting to learn the trains in more detail in due course give you a brief example i always classed these in "two" older style windows and newer style windows which is my picture on my posts "jaffa pic" i know the diffrences in side buy just looking at the windows when the train come in on the platform is there anywhere online which explains the diffrences in the trains buy its code? i think i need to get up to speed with this sooner rather then later thanks in advance from Steve Edited September 13, 2011 by Uk_Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Graham_Muz Posted September 13, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 13, 2011 is there anywhere online which explains the diffrences in the trains buy its code? i think i need to get up to speed with this sooner rather then later thanks in advance from Steve Steve Try the SeMG website's emu pages, indexed here hth Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kintbury jon Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Not quite, it's 76275 originally from a 4TC unit. I travelled in it once. One of the few vehicles that retained bulbs instead of fluorescent tubes. It ended up in Connex livery and now resides in St Leonards depot having been purchased by the Hastings Diesel Group. Here it is (taken last October): After refurbishment the unit was renumbered 3582 but I don't think 76275 was refurbished itself, just the three genuine VEP vehicles. Don't renumber your VEP to 3582! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathan452 Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 After refurbishment the unit was renumbered 3582 but I don't think 76275 was refurbished itself, just the three genuine VEP vehicles. Having not known about this hybrid unit until then I remember looking up at the tungsten light bulbs in the ex 4TC coach as I was walking up the Victoria Embankment one night. Doesn't seem that long ago. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted September 13, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 13, 2011 The fully-open standard-only saloon should also be a give-away. 3582 was deficient in first class seating because of this reformation though I dare say it benefitted more than it inconvenienced with the extra standard seats. 76275 had tungsten lighting to the end but did it retain its deep-cushioned TC seats or were they replaced with the Vep-type hard ones at some stage as per most TC stock. Note that it is also fitted with shoe gear which was not there in its 4TC days. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uk_Steve Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 (edited) Steve Try the SeMG website's emu pages, indexed here hth Thank you for the link ;-) all the best from Steve Edited September 13, 2011 by Uk_Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
meld Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 (edited) Hi Gwiwer, Yes 76275 did retain it's tungsten lights and deep fill bouncy seats to the end .. IIRC it replace the DTC after an accident, alway looked out for it at Victoria on the way home as it was a nice comfey ride back Home.. It is possible that it recieved a bogie swap to obtain the shoe gear and the height limiting bar ( Note from Cigs onwards they didn't technically have a shoe beam as we see it, the collector shoes were mounted on a 'beam' that was further inside the bogie and the bar on the outside is there to support the height limiting braket - hence the name ;o) and that is why it is also so much lighter in section as it takes no load unlike the CEPs and EPBs Beam ) , and obviously a unit power line and in line shoe fuses to allow it to supply power to the MBSO and not let the unit become a 'gapper'. The unit control lines already being there from it's days as a TC . HTH Mike P.S. I don't ever remember any TC's getting the VEpP 3 + 2 seating in them ?? which ones do you know of then ?? Edited September 13, 2011 by meld Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickL2008 Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Did the VEPs ever venture onto the SWML? trying to justify an NSE one to recall my spotting days on the SWML NL Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve1023 Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 (edited) I think 76275 received its shoebeam when it was reformed into one of the short lived 6 REP sets (1903??). Following the disbanding/withdrawal of the 6 REPs it then went into 3169 to indeed replace one of the DTC which was written off. Just an idea but if I got a surplus Bachmann Mk1 TSO and maybe one of the many 4 VEPS that appear not be overly popular, cut the ends off the MK1 and removed the cab and first seating bay off one of the VEP driving cars I think i've got myself a TC driving trailer. Did the VEPs ever venture onto the SWML? trying to justify an NSE one to recall my spotting days on the SWML NL Yes - VEPs allocated to Fratton, Wimbledon & Bournemouth and definately seen on the SWML. Edited September 13, 2011 by steve1023 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kintbury jon Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 On Southwestern Lines, 4VEPs were used on: Waterloo - Reading Waterloo - Alton Waterloo - Basingstoke - Sothampton - Bournemouth (stoppers + some semi fasts) (Waterloo) - Ascot - Guildford Waterloo - Woking - Guildford - Portsmouth (stoppers + some semi fasts) Eastleigh/Southampton - Portsmouth Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Oldddudders Posted September 13, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 13, 2011 The VEPs started their illustrious career on the South Western, being comissioned for the secondary services for Bournemouth electrification, which arrived on 10th July 1967, so 7701-20 (at least) were in traffic from that day. They were officially described as "Outer Suburban" in design, hence the 3+2 seating, and all those doors, in contrast to the CEPs and CIGs that had preceded them. Only the civil servants could come up with such a description for trains to stations in the New Forest! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trains4U Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 I think the height comparison between the VEP and CEP s a little unfair when the CEP isnt the same height within the same model! On the left is the powered car, on the right the unpowered car So this causes some considerable variation with the VEP Powered car Unpowered car I now need to fill that hole and fix the hanrail that got damaged at the weekend... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Excellent Gareth, Many thanks for the side-on comparison photos, you couldn't have highlighted the problem any better. It can now clearly be seen, that the Hornby VEP is decidedly squat, when compared with the Bachmann CEP, it's almost as if they've built it to the old British Trix scale of 3.8mm/ft. Even your end-on photo of the two types of cab, shows the discrepancy. The dimension to study is between the cantrail guttering and the bottom of the body, it should be 25.3mm, like the correct Bachmann CEP and EPB. A friend of mine, who is also a RMwebber reckons that they may have squashed the body, so as to raise the underframe up over the bogies, whilst maintaining the roof height, but helping the unit handle sharp Hornby curved track? Shame really, because overall it looks quite smart and the colours are good. I wouldn't worry about the different height of the CEP ends (we know why), depends on the track pitch, the load being carried and sagging of the springs, but bodies of different sizes will never match up. Well done, you've just saved me a lot of money. My kit VEPs can now be refurbished. Cheers, Brian. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now