Adam

Just in case anyone's interested (and because I can't find the original thread), here's a shot of dad's model. The sharpness of the paint job is not matched by the sharpness of the picture unfortunately! He still hasn't got around to weathering it so far as I'm aware. Adam

The short answer, Arthur, is paint and lots of Tamiya masking tape - with judicious retouching where required. The trick is working out the width of the stripe and cutting the tape as required. I think with the YEC it was 9" so 3mm. If you use another piece of 3mm tape as a spacer (then remove it) everything should end up parallel. This is slightly less frustrating than chasing bits of transfer around to my mind and you can tone down the black a bit rather than have to do it all with the weathering. It remains a faff however, but is worth it when it comes to annoying some club members - it isn't green or maroon with Walschert's valvegear you see. It also has the advantage for a slow moving loco' on a large roundy roundy layout that you can always spot where it's gone... Does that help at all? Adam

I know Mike Edge liked it too. It says a lot for the kit that the paint job took longer, and was more difficult than building it. Must fit some pickups to my Thomas Hill... Adam

And such a lovely simple paint scheme too! Dad's done one of these, nice kit, plenty of space for a flywheel. Adam

That's very nice indeed Eric and I empathise, there comes a point where doing things the prototype way has to be sacrificed to producing a model that will survive in service. What you've done there is nicely subtle and will be all but invisible in service - it's certainly hard to see one and a half times full size on the laptop screen. Perhaps it's worth considering whether you need more than one fixing screw? Iain Rice, I recall, advocates only using one to avoid distortion in one of his books. Adam

Similar, yes, but a poor representation if you compare with the real thing: http://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/apcmpresflo/h17951752#h1ea4158e If I were to be boring about it, the step in diameter to too great and the larger is too large and the smaller too small. That this is the kingd of thing that bothers me probably says nothing good! So far as I can tell, the APCM (Blue Circle) vehicles all had this sort of buffer from new and it's worth noting that all the shots in Paul Bartlett's gallery show these buffers. I've no idea how easy or otherwise it would be to spring these - I didn't feel the need since Presflos are quite short. For my money, they're one of the best things Bachmann have done; the only non-technical (wheels, couplings) change I made to my trio was to replace the buffers. Adam

Never mind the brakeshoes CK, the buffers on those Presflos are decidedly naff and could benefit from replacement. Since the relevant OLEOs can be had from both ABS and Lanarkshire Model Supplies and installing them is a ten minute job for three wagons, it's well worth the effort. Adam

I can't think of a period picture, either of an eight legger flat or of an artic, with side strakes like that for steel. Timber, certainly, but not steel. The bars under the trailer are a function of later legislation. Since I generally model the '60s exactly when doesn't bother me but I think it was post 1980? You still see red cloths, rags, or whatever hung off overhapnging loads on occasion. As a cyclist they're very helpful. Adam

I do like that a lot Arthur, very purposeful. It shows just how good that casting is in my view and the Big J was a rather handsome lorry. Almost as good as the Scammell Routeman... Adam

I'd concur with CK here. High Level have a downloadable gearbox planner: http://chrisgibbon.com/webftp/gearboxplanner.pdf which, in conjunction with a scale drawing (or a sketch based on the internal dimensions of the body), should provide a good, clear guide. The High Level site also features a speed calculator: http://chrisgibbon.com/webftp/speedcalculator.xls If you key in the relevant figures, a theoretical scale top speed will result. Now my guess with a E2 - a middle-sized 0-6-0T - would want something like a Mashima 14 series can, flywheel (always worth it if you can fit one) and 54:1 gearing (that would be my preference, but no more than that). Several gearboxes will give you that and keep the cab clear. Adam

That's suddenly come to life Andrew, a real sense of space and place. Adam

Hi Colin There's no specific layout idea - though something small* and industrial will probably happen some day - I just happen to like building the things. The Shochood B featured back on page 1 of this thread, though I'd always liked the prototype, was simply an application for a spare underframe I had by me and attempting the difficult bit, the hood, opened up another range of vehicles to have a go at. It's no great accident that these vehicles were products of the mid-1960s; partly it's the period dad has always modelled and that it makes sense that my stock can work with his, and partly that these new wagon types and the range of conversions show BR's attempts to cope with the changes in traffic and industry. Since I'm a historian by training, that sort of thing appeals to me as does making the best of indifferent and misleading resources! In any event, steel coil wagons did get around the country in ones and twos and threes so they have a reasonably wide application. Sludge wagons seem to be a creature of major works and large sheds (at least, until steam ended) so aren't of immediate appeal, interesting looking beasts though they were. Adam * We have, probably, about twenty times the number of wagons needed to service any layout we have the space to build.

Thanks Colin. The only visual aids used were the ones I use to do everything else, from Cricket to cycling; glasses or contacts. And light, lots of it. You've done a sludge wagon haven't you? Did I see a picture of it on Newhaven? I don't need one of those. That isn't necessarily a barrier, of course, but there's a whole boxfile worth of other things on the go. The next scratchbuilds (well barring a pair of coil carriers converted from Highs which are awaiting the inclination to get the soldering iron out) will be a pair of bogie coil carriers like these: http://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/coiltferry/h341bec27#h341bec27 . I've got as far as assembling the basic frames, but work on these will go on the back burner until I've got the appropriate Cambrian bogies to put them on. The lightening holes in the cradles put me in mind of your Tin HAL... Adam

When I'm good and ready Andrew. I've still nowhere to put one. Thanks Griff, I've no idea what Geoff would reckon to them, but I'm happy with them and that's what matters for the moment. Adam

And now, both Coil H and Shoc High are finished and pictures taken on dad's not quite complete 'photo plank' Thanks for all the comments and information: Adam

Jenny Emily: the MSC railway had lots (well, more than 10 is a big fleet by industrial standards). There's one preserved at Williton on the West Somerset Railway - try www.wsr.org for pictures of that one (its restored in its original livery, very smart). Adam

Mike, thank you very, very much. I can now add the last three digits to the running number and call it almost finished. Happy Christmas and thanks again. Adam

A quick question/request - if anyone has a copy of David Larkin's 'Wagons of the Final Years of British Railways' and could find the illustrations of the Coil H (or better yet, the numbers for the 10 vehicles) and tell me what they are I would be very grateful. Guess who forgot to write these down and left the book in Southampton before thinking about the lettering in Somerset? Merry Christmas, one and all. Adam

Probably - the black lining along the sidesheet is reasonably indicative and the wasp stripes on the end look like those Sentinel applied themselves. Probably though is the best I can do in lieu of an earlier photo. Adam

I've seen a shot of the real NCB (Opencast Executive) liveried one and that's probably fine. The Tarmac example is actually in standard fresh from the factory style (except the modern Tarmac logo) so again, that would be suitable, if you're happy to remove the logo. The Esso liveried version is the one that isn't: it's done exactly per the preserved example at Cranmore - the loco' wasn't named at Cattewater so far as I know. It is a reasonable approximation of the ESSO livery of the period though. It faded to pink: http://paulbartlett....746e0a#hd746e0a Ignore the date of registration with the Railway Executive on the Paul Bartlett photo. Either Paul has got it wrong (unlikely), or the plate was transferred from an earlier loco' since the Sentinel probably wasn't built until at least 10 years later. Adam

I'm not all that sure how many 4w Sentinels the MOD actually had. I get the impression that a large quantity of diesels were supplied during the war years (Barclays/Drewrys mostly) and during the 1950s so it's unlikely they'd have been in the market until after Rolls Royce had stopped had stopped production, i.e., when Thomas Hill had taken on the goodwill and designs - there are some details on what is actually a rather good Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hill_(Rotherham)_Ltd . The short answer is mid-1970s, but I'm not convinced that it was Sentinels hat were being replaced. Adam

I'm aware of the differences Wally and that 'D series' is just a label covering a variety of different trucks with a similar cab. This is hardly an unusual feature of commercial vehicles of course. Based on looking at pictures of the various different sizes - they are all there on the CCMV pages and the differences are reasonably apparent) and - all I'm pointing out that the Base Toys version differs in shape, detail and proportion to any of them. It's probably closest to the heavyweight version - based on the heft of the bumper - but even then has the fundamental errors already noted. The point is that it's a rubbish starting point for a 4mm model of any of the different types of Ford D. It's up to the individual as to whether it can be lived with: my perspective is clear enough! Adam

Fair enough Paul, but the point was that it's fundamentally the wrong shape - we're talking a Playcraft baby warship level of wrong here - and I'm not certain it's worth even going so far as you have: it's a poor toy and not anything approaching a scale model and cannot possibly by to the standard of what looks like it'll be an excellent layout. There's quite a few good period shots on the CCMV site which balance, to some extent, balances Peter Davies's chasing of high end vehicles (nice though such things are/were) at the expense of the Fords, Bedfords and BMCs that were the norm. Adam

The Bedford is a TPM kit. I think Bernard late did them in resin. As you say, very nice little kit. The Ford D, on the other hand is a very, very poor representation of the real thing on a host of levels. Most of the Base Toys lorries are 'impressionistic' at best, but I'd rate the D as among the worst along with the LAD which is a right old melange of diferent versions. I guess the prototype for your lorry would be the medium weight version and there's a host of photos of the real thing here: http://ccmv.aecsouthall.co.uk/p431379483 Note the spacing and size of headlights, the repesentation of the corrugated front panel which should come round the corners and doesn't, the shape of the mudguards, too little door in front of the wheels, the wheels themselves... Adam

Hence my careful wording Jazz. It's the kit that's lacking, not yourself. Adam