John Isherwood

Alongside my up-to-date super-detailed S&DJR (BR) fleet, I still have my original 1970s / 80s locos with detailed bodies but basic chassis; (no brakegear, etc.). I have recently decided that, instead of disposing of them, I will bring them a little closer to modern standards. Amongst others, the Tri-ang / Airfix kit West Country, the Tri-ang / Airfix kit BR 4MT 2-6-0 and the Tri-ang BR 3MT 2-6-2T will all have new Kemilway chassis with Markits wheels, and the Airfix 4Fs and 2Ps will have Comet chassis with Mashima motors and Markits wheels. The original Ringfield tender-drive Tri-ang - Hornby 9F will have its loco chassis block milled in order to install a High Level slimline gearbox and a Mashima motor / Markits wheels. I would like to replace the coupling / connecting rods and valvegear od the 9F with current production items, but am unsure whether the chassis axle spacing on the original chassis matches the current production. I appreciate that neither is likely to be to prototypical dimensions, due to limited clearances between oversize model flanges but, if the axle spacing matches, fitting slimmer rods should not be too difficult. Can anyone advise if the axle spacing matches? Regards, John Isherwood.

Short-sighted, IMHO. However, there seem to be quite few Bachmann Mk.1s on Ebay. Regards, John Isherwood.

If I were going to renumber a model, I wouldn't buy the weathered version. It isn't very difficult to become proficient at weathering, any more than it is to renumber models - but you do have to be prepared to try. Regards, John Isherwood.

Huh - that's nothing! The GWR had a special wagon for their weathering pigment - they used cow manure. BR too had a special wagon for weathering material - but they used sludge. I can't speak for the LNER and SR - perhaps they just used withdrawn traffic wagons? Come to think of it, though - the SR weathering compound may have arrived on the Dover Train Ferry in continental ferry wagons; similarly the LNER's via Harwich. The opacity of the muck carried by these railways' stock suggests a continental source, perhaps containing rotten garlic and Gitanes ash? Just my theories, anyway. Regards, John Isherwood.

He did later manage to get one for a longer stint, though. It's not generally known that, contrary to most references, 47994 was not withdrawn on 14/03/1958. As the last of the ex-LMS Garratts was no longer required for coal traffic, it occurred to Harold Morris that it would be ideal for banking the summer holiday trains from Evercreech Junction. The lone survivor served in this role until the end of the 1961 summer timetable but, unfortunately, Ivo Peters singularly failed to record its exploits. Regards, John Isherwood. (Well - that's my story, anyway)!

Agreed - but we're in a minority! Given a choice between self-numbering or having identical items of rolling stock, I'm afraid that the majority of purchasers apparently prefer the latter. Regards, John Isherwood.

Hornby did try it many years ago - they maintain that they didn't sell well. Regards, John Isherwood.

Unlike the GUVs, no CCTs were green. The prototype GUV and CCT were crimson - but unfortunately they were both significantly different from the production vehicles. As to renumbering, my transfer Sheet BL64 (see http://www.cctrans.freeserve.co.uk/products.htm ) covers both the CCT and the GUV, including the prototypes. Regards, John Isherwood, Cambridge Custom Transfers.

..... burger, gammon or steak? Oh - you mean grilles! Regards, John Isherwood.

I can't say that I've ever seen a suggestion of a canvas coal space cover - and the limited number of BR-period photos that I have certainly don't show one. Regards, John Isherwood.

I am sure there is or was a Jidenco kit of these? Mark Saunders Forthcoming from Cambrian Models. Regards, John Isherwood.

Rich, The washers are placed over the tender coupling pin, between the loco coupling bar and the underside of the loco - a dab of adhesive will stop them falling out when you uncouple the tender. The purpose is to prevent the loco 'nodding forward' in the absence of the spring on the bogie pivot. The removal of vertical movement between loco and tender may also transfer a little tender weight onto the loco driving wheels. I have now added some lead to the loco bogie, between the two clip-fit mouldings that make up the bogie. I have also removed the cast 'coal' from the tender and replaced it with sheet lead, covered with crushed real coal. Haulage performance is now entirely in keeping with the prototype. Etched plates, including an RCTS headboard, from 247 Developments provide the finishing touches. Regards, John Isherwood.

Well - that works !! I took out the front bogie spring and washer, put two 10BA washers on the tender coupling pin, between the tender drawbar and the underside of the tender, and the haulage has vastly improved! ..... and the front bogie doesn't derail, even without adding extra weight. Sorted !! Regards, John Isherwood.

I have found that, by removing the tender / loco buffers (they just pull out), much more realistic close-coupling is possible. Haulage is not huge, but the ability is there. External weight on top of the loco transformed matters. I wonder if weighting the front bogie to keep it on the track, removing the bogie spring, and putting some tender weight onto the draw-bar would be effective, (perhaps via the spring from the bogie) ......? Regards, John Isherwood.

You should have seen the pink Brush Type 4's (Class 47s) on test down the Midland Mainline in the 1960s !!! Regards, John Isherwood.

Not a wagon, just a container. BR A40709B - I have the cast plate, ask not how - and ...... it appears in an episode of "All Creatures Great and Small". Bishopdale, Yorkshire. Regards, John Isherwood.

Don't ask !!! - just go back a bit in this thread, reading D1030......'s postings. Regards, John Isherwood.

I suspect that there is some frantic research underway! " Following feedback on the project the exact identities of the vehicles are being reviewed" suggests to me that they are hoping against hope that there is an authentic identity that they can apply to the model that has already been tooled. I think that they'll find that the answer is a resounding "No"! I'm afraid that I have no sympathy - we did try to help when the subject was first raised but it seems that we wasted our time; our information apparently fell upon deaf ears. Regards, John Isherwood.

As requested. Such a cruel close-up highlights the deficiencies of my modelling and painting techniques but, like Tony Wright, I am producing 'layout stock', not museum pieces! Regards, John Isherwood.

As promised, a photo of the TRESTROL with shortened bogies. Sorry for the low res. - this image size limit is a real pain! Regards, John Isherwood.

Well - a bit of a fiddle, but it worked. The correct, shorter length of the bogies really emphasizes the length of the extended well body. Just a bit of touching up to the paintwork tomorrow, then I'll take and post some photos. Regards, John Isherwood.

Adrian, The old wheels, (sliding wheels / half axles on a plain axle), came our very easily by springing apart the bogie sideframes. The bearing holes were drilled a little deeper, brass pinpoint bearings dropped in, and Markits wheels sprung into place - no bother at all. Right - off to have a hack at the TRESTROL bogies - again! Regards, John Isherwood.

Mike, A razor saw and a bottle of solvent - no probs!! Regards, John Isherwood.

Mike, You are correct in that my bogies are now too long; you have also solved the mystery as to why the buffers are too high, and require the substitution of LOWMAC wheels to correct this. In order to restore the correct relationship between the buffer-beams and the outer axleboxes, it will be necessary to move back and consequently lower the buffer-beams. Tri-ang moved the buffer-beams out and higher, following the rake of the frame ends, in order to move the outer axle inwards. So, ASAP, I will move the buffer-beams and, I trust, install the correct diameter wheels. Photos to follow. Regards, John Isherwood.

Mike, I'm away from home at present, but I'm sure that I checked the stretched bogies against the diagram (reduced to 4mm. scale). Whatever; I'll check when I get back. Anyone got a pair of TRESTROL bogies to dispose of, just in case? Transfers - something that I compiled for myself, I'm afraid. Regards, John Isherwood.