S
Simon Dunkley
Guest
Ian, that might be why Steve referred to them as D6300.iploffy said:
I used the TOPS classification as for the period of interest to me, that is what they were, at least officially if not in everyday (spotter) use.
iploffy
OC Blue Brigade
Yes I understand the D and E prefixes and that is no problem for me to comprehend, newer enthusiasts do not understand the older system of numbering and classifying individual vehicles.I dont intend to go off topic but look at Mk2 coaches MK 2, Mk2a, Mk2b, Mk2c, Mk2d, Mk2e, Mk2f there is no Mk2z, it has just snuck in under the radar the same as tops numbers for loco's and vehicles that were alocated them but never carried them.
I worked with older Western drivers at Wolverhampton, Westerns were called 1000's, Warships were called 800's and so on no mention ofa D prefix at all it got totally confusing when a certain driver was talking about a County class loco and I thought he was on about a Western.
No offence was meant by my comment above as I can see how confusing it was and still is to some members of the fraternity.
Ian
Edited to add second and third paragraphs
I worked with older Western drivers at Wolverhampton, Westerns were called 1000's, Warships were called 800's and so on no mention ofa D prefix at all it got totally confusing when a certain driver was talking about a County class loco and I thought he was on about a Western.
No offence was meant by my comment above as I can see how confusing it was and still is to some members of the fraternity.
Ian
Edited to add second and third paragraphs
Ressaldar
Western Thunderer
Jordan said:A bit like D6320...
Sorry couldn't resist gratuitous picture...
Ballast was delivered by road from Whitecliff Quarry to Marsh Sidings; the staple traffic that kept the line open so long after all other rail activity in the Forest had closed (like the direct rail link to the quarry). 9B51 and 9B52 seem very common headcodes, along with 8H71/8H72.
really looks the part Jordan, isn't it about time you started another one, or two?
regards
Mike
Simon
Flying Squad
I agree, that picture shows what a very good job Jordan has made - looks very believable, especially in that lovely layout setting.
Name-wise, back in the day we just called them the "North British" diesels. I knew that there were NBL Warships (because that nice Mr Ian Allan told us in his little books) but I made no distinction and didn't appreciate the differences at the time.
I am afraid I was still in mourning for steam engines and never got totally enthusiastic about diesels, although looking back it was all brilliant stuff.
Modelwise we are very lucky to have Fred's interpretation in G1. It remains to be seen how good a job Dapol do, call me pessimistic if you like but I can't help feeling that there will be some probably minor but glaringly wrong aspect to it - if it ever gets produced.
Hopefully the wheels will at least be the right size :
Name-wise, back in the day we just called them the "North British" diesels. I knew that there were NBL Warships (because that nice Mr Ian Allan told us in his little books) but I made no distinction and didn't appreciate the differences at the time.
I am afraid I was still in mourning for steam engines and never got totally enthusiastic about diesels, although looking back it was all brilliant stuff.
Modelwise we are very lucky to have Fred's interpretation in G1. It remains to be seen how good a job Dapol do, call me pessimistic if you like but I can't help feeling that there will be some probably minor but glaringly wrong aspect to it - if it ever gets produced.
Hopefully the wheels will at least be the right size :
S
Simon Dunkley
Guest
Blue 22s in the Forest of Dean: nomenclature
Looking back through the posts, the Baby Warships have been referred to as:
Class 22
63's
63'ers
D6300
They have not been referred to as 6300 or 63XX, which all the fans of diesel hydraulics immediately recognise as Churchward moguls (and very nice looking locos, too).
Although these are similar, they are not the same and I can't personally see a problem there, although I can see how confusion would easily arise. Lets face it, I have seen Brush type 2s referred to as type 31s, they are either type 2s (power grouping) or class 31s (TOPS classification) - and this in the railway press.
Mind you, on the LMS, a "class 4" could refer to a whole range of locos from a Claughton to an Ivatt 2-6-0!
As for Jordan's D6320, I have still not seen it, but Mr. Cook of this parish reported back to me earlier this week of his encounter with it at Warley, and he was very favourable in his admiration. Very favourable indeed.
Jordan, there is a general consensus that if you can make a silk purse out of that particular sow's ear, then you can probably do anything you wish to turn your mind to.
Looking back through the posts, the Baby Warships have been referred to as:
Class 22
63's
63'ers
D6300
They have not been referred to as 6300 or 63XX, which all the fans of diesel hydraulics immediately recognise as Churchward moguls (and very nice looking locos, too).
Although these are similar, they are not the same and I can't personally see a problem there, although I can see how confusion would easily arise. Lets face it, I have seen Brush type 2s referred to as type 31s, they are either type 2s (power grouping) or class 31s (TOPS classification) - and this in the railway press.
Mind you, on the LMS, a "class 4" could refer to a whole range of locos from a Claughton to an Ivatt 2-6-0!
As for Jordan's D6320, I have still not seen it, but Mr. Cook of this parish reported back to me earlier this week of his encounter with it at Warley, and he was very favourable in his admiration. Very favourable indeed.
Jordan, there is a general consensus that if you can make a silk purse out of that particular sow's ear, then you can probably do anything you wish to turn your mind to.
Ressaldar
Western Thunderer
Simon said:Modelwise we are very lucky to have Fred's interpretation in G1. It remains to be seen how good a job Dapol do, call me pessimistic if you like but I can't help feeling that there will be some probably minor but glaringly wrong aspect to it - if it ever gets produced.
Hopefully the wheels will at least be the right size :
..............or indeed, what Mr Waterman makes of his version when it arrives.
regards
Mike
S
Simon Dunkley
Guest
I was under the impression that he had spoken to Fred Phipps about the details, etc, so hopefully that's a good sign.Ressaldar said:
. The class 40 that I have is a lovely piece of kit if he spends the time (which he will) perfecting the little bits it will be a work of art.
Geoff
Western Thunderer
Simon said:It remains to be seen how good a job Dapol do, call me pessimistic if you like but I can't help feeling that there will be some probably minor but glaringly wrong aspect to it - if it ever gets produced.
Hopefully the wheels will at least be the right size :
I share your concerns Simon and will not be pre ordering at a cost of ?125 until I have seen the model. I don't know about wheel size being an issue but wonder if they will have spokes ?
Mind you I will have to change them anyway seeing as I model in EM which begs the question as to who will make the correct type ?
The Cad Cam drawings on Dapols site look ok as do the photos of pre production models, an interesting feature will be the seperate side valances with full detail modelled behind them.
Delivery is now May 2011 which is twelve months later than first intended but if it is going to be as good as Dapol say then it should be worth the wait.
Geoff
Jordan
Mid-Western Thunderer
The Dapol 22 was on show at Warley last weekend; didn't see it myself but there's a pic of it posted on RMweb:-
http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index. ... h_id=68447
The Dapol guy on RMweb (Dapol Dave) says it's still at pre-production phase and this paint job was a bit of a rush... and to take no notice of the first "error" that jumps out, which is that the numbers are too big. They know. It is also still lacking some details such as bufferbeam and bogie pipework, to be fitted. I think it has got spoked wheels.
Other than that, I think they've nailed it.
On the other hand, for the price, they ought to get it right!! 
http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index. ... h_id=68447
The Dapol guy on RMweb (Dapol Dave) says it's still at pre-production phase and this paint job was a bit of a rush... and to take no notice of the first "error" that jumps out, which is that the numbers are too big. They know. It is also still lacking some details such as bufferbeam and bogie pipework, to be fitted. I think it has got spoked wheels.
Other than that, I think they've nailed it.
On the other hand, for the price, they ought to get it right!!