NSW RailCars
DJ NightShade
Hi
I was just wondering if anyone knew of a place or company that i can get a
nsw railcar HO scale model or kit from. Also any resonably detailed
pictures would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Paul Jones
Bob
DJ NightShade wrote:
Paul,
the only kit availible at present is the Lloyds 620 class kit. It
sells for $150 for the body kit of $275 for the complete kit with mechanism.
You can ring Lloyds on (02) 62547958 or email them at
llo...@bigpond.com.au and they will give you any info you may want about
their kit. Hope this helps.
Bob Gioia
brett.fi...@employment.gov.au
In article <3528F1DB...@fastlink.com.au>,
Or the Casula Hobbies CPH Railmotor Kit available from Casula Hobbies. They
can be contacted on (02) 9602-8640.
Price? CPH Railmotor Kit $125.00
Spud to power the above $70.00.
CPH Railmotor + CTH Trailer Kit $195.00
Spud to power the above $70.00.
Brett
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
david virgo
Seeing they haven't been mentioned yet.
Stephen Johnson Models makes kits of the following:
400 class railmotor
500 class trailer
CPH Railmotor
CTH/CTC trailer
Railmotor No. 38
The rail motors are $60 each and the trailers $50 for the CTH and $35 for
the 500 class.
He also does Silver City Comet kits, $50 for the power car and $35 for the
trailer cars.
These kits require spud motors and for the trailers , wheelsets.
address
SJM models
PO Box 1534
Orange 2800
hope this helps
brett.fi...@employment.gov.au wrote in message
<6gcktp$h8b$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
Eben Levy
david virgo wrote:
> Seeing they haven't been mentioned yet.
>
> Stephen Johnson Models makes kits of the following:
>
> 400 class railmotor
> 500 class trailer
> CPH Railmotor
> CTH/CTC trailer
> Railmotor No. 38
>
> The rail motors are $60 each and the trailers $50 for the CTH and $35 for
> the 500 class.
>
> He also does Silver City Comet kits, $50 for the power car and $35 for the
> trailer cars.
>
> These kits require spud motors and for the trailers , wheelsets.
>
> address
> SJM models
> PO Box 1534
> Orange 2800
>
> hope this helps
It does but I seem to remember him stating RAILCARS not railmotors. There is a
difference.
--
Bye for now,
Eben.
Barry Campbell
Eben Levy wrote in message <352A1FB9...@klever.net.au>...
>
>It does but I seem to remember him stating RAILCARS not railmotors. There
is a
>difference.
>
>
<Ralmotor No 1 was certainly a rail motor. The 620 class were railcars.
Where do you draw the line when you come to the Comet and the 400/500 class.
Barry Campbell
brett.fi...@employment.gov.au
In article <6ge985$fsm$1...@news.mel.aone.net.au>,
I'm probably wrong here (quickly coating myself with various flavours of
marshmellow to take advantage of the glorious flames) but if you want to be
really picky, there are no NSW RAILCARS at all.
600/770, 620/720, 670/770, 900, 950, are all DMUs.
100 class are DMUs too.
CPH, CHP, 400/ 500 class are Railmotors with DMU capability.
No 1 & No 2 are Raimotors.
FPs are Railbuses.
Endeavours & Explorers are DMUs.
Therefore, strictly speaking there are no models of NSW Railcars because
there are no NSW Railcars to model! :-)
Brett (expecting a nice long roasting!)
Eben Levy
brett.fi...@employment.gov.au wrote:
> In article <6ge985$fsm$1...@news.mel.aone.net.au>,
> "Barry Campbell" <camp...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Eben Levy wrote in message <352A1FB9...@klever.net.au>...
> >
> > >
> > >It does but I seem to remember him stating RAILCARS not railmotors. There
> > is a
> > >difference.
> > >
> > >
> > <Ralmotor No 1 was certainly a rail motor. The 620 class were railcars.
> > Where do you draw the line when you come to the Comet and the 400/500 class.
> >
> > Barry Campbell
> >
> >
>
> I'm probably wrong here (quickly coating myself with various flavours of
> marshmellow to take advantage of the glorious flames) but if you want to be
> really picky, there are no NSW RAILCARS at all.
>
> 600/770, 620/720, 670/770, 900, 950, are all DMUs.
>
> 100 class are DMUs too.
>
> CPH, CHP, 400/ 500 class are Railmotors with DMU capability.
Shouldn't these be PMU (petrol multiple unit) as they weren't diesel.
>
>
> No 1 & No 2 are Raimotors.
>
> FPs are Railbuses.
>
> Endeavours & Explorers are DMUs.
>
> Therefore, strictly speaking there are no models of NSW Railcars because
> there are no NSW Railcars to model! :-)
>
> Brett (expecting a nice long roasting!)
>
> -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
--
DJ NightShade
Actualy i was refering to anything on rails that had a desial motor in a
passenger car.
Rail Cars, Rail Motors, Endevors, Explorers, Whatever..?
If i rember corectly, powerline are releasing an Explorer shortly?
Anyhow...
Paul Jones.
brett.fi...@employment.gov.au wrote in article
<6gevb8$cr7$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> In article <6ge985$fsm$1...@news.mel.aone.net.au>,
> "Barry Campbell" <camp...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Eben Levy wrote in message <352A1FB9...@klever.net.au>...
> >
> > >
> > >It does but I seem to remember him stating RAILCARS not railmotors.
There
> > is a
> > >difference.
> > >
> > >
> > <Ralmotor No 1 was certainly a rail motor. The 620 class were railcars.
> > Where do you draw the line when you come to the Comet and the 400/500
class.
> >
> > Barry Campbell
> >
> >
>
> I'm probably wrong here (quickly coating myself with various flavours of
> marshmellow to take advantage of the glorious flames) but if you want to
be
> really picky, there are no NSW RAILCARS at all.
>
> 600/770, 620/720, 670/770, 900, 950, are all DMUs.
>
> 100 class are DMUs too.
>
> CPH, CHP, 400/ 500 class are Railmotors with DMU capability.
>
brett.fi...@employment.gov.au
In article <01bd62e5$2b64c8a0$7e60868b@paul>,
DJ, sorry. I'm not trying to put you off your desire for a model.
You're probably thinking: "What a pack of ...............*"
I think that a few good alternatives have been presented for you to choose
from, and you are right in that Powerline appear to be considering the
Explorers.
Enjoy your choice!!!
Brett
* insert derogatory term of your choice.
Bob
brett.fi...@employment.gov.au wrote:
> I'm probably wrong here (quickly coating myself with various flavours of
> marshmellow to take advantage of the glorious flames) but if you want to be
> really picky, there are no NSW RAILCARS at all.
>
> 600/770, 620/720, 670/770, 900, 950, are all DMUs.
>
> 100 class are DMUs too.
>
> CPH, CHP, 400/ 500 class are Railmotors with DMU capability.
>
> No 1 & No 2 are Raimotors.
>
> FPs are Railbuses.
>
> Endeavours & Explorers are DMUs.
>
> Therefore, strictly speaking there are no models of NSW Railcars because
> there are no NSW Railcars to model! :-)
>
> Brett (expecting a nice long roasting!)
You forgot the 1100 and 1200 class! How could you forget such an important part of
our railway history? Anyway, for my money a railmotor was a CPH as was clearly
marked on the outside and the others were railcars.
Bob
Bob
Eben Levy wrote:
Shouldn't these be PMU (petrol multiple unit) as they weren't diesel.
Only the CPH motors were petrol engines when new however this did not last long and
were converted to the 6/71 series GM engines. All the rest were always diesel
engines.
Bob
Rob Kearey
Bob wrote:
> You forgot the 1100 and 1200 class! How could you forget such an important part of
> our railway history? Anyway, for my money a railmotor was a CPH as was clearly
> marked on the outside and the others were railcars.
Ah - memories. I remember the Budd cars roaring through Engadine station
at what seemed like the speed of sound. Whatever happend to the Budd
sets, anyway?
I also remeber being, with my father, the only passengers on a CPH from
Engadine to the South Coast. We both got to sit in the front next to
driver as we roared down next to highway, passing cars. Wheee!
It was only with adult hindsight that I later came to realise the driver
was _pissed_.
> Bob
--
Robert Kearey 07 3365 8527
Network Services Prentice Centre
University of Queensland r.ke...@prentice.uq.edu.au
Chris Stratton
I too remember watching the "Silver Train" as we called it speeding north
from Wollongong in the late 60s and at that time my aunt worked on board
selling refreshments through the train. But unfortunately all the Budd cars
have been cut up. After a derailment at, I think, Redfern at least one
suffered underfloor damage and the decision was made to remove their
engines. They then became loco hauled on the South Coast Daylight for a few
years. After that two of them used to run a service from Griffith to Junee
to connect with the main line trains. I remember seeing a third one at this
time in Junee roundhouse but it was damaged and out of service. I know some
were cut up at Redfern, I don't know if they were all brought to Sydney to
be scrapped.
BTW there was only one set of Budds, but the Tullochs were later used in
Wollongong as well after they were a failure on the Riverina Express.
Regards,
--
Chris Stratton
Wollongong, NSW, Australia
stratton...@bhp.com.au
Rob Kearey wrote in message <352C4CA6...@mailbox.uq.edu.au>...
David Proctor
Chris Stratton wrote in message <6ghl7r$5j...@atbhp.corpmel.bhp.com.au>...
>I too remember watching the "Silver Train" as we called it speeding north
>from Wollongong in the late 60s and at that time my aunt worked on board
>selling refreshments through the train. But unfortunately all the Budd cars
>have been cut up. After a derailment at, I think, Redfern at least one
>suffered underfloor damage and the decision was made to remove their
>engines.
I believe, although I stand to be corrected here, that the decision to use
the Budd carriages as loco-hauled cars was taken due to increasing
mechanical unreliability - they were being used as loco-hauled cars even
before they had the engines removed.
>They then became loco hauled on the South Coast Daylight for a few
>years. After that two of them used to run a service from Griffith to Junee
>to connect with the main line trains. I remember seeing a third one at this
>time in Junee roundhouse but it was damaged and out of service. I know some
>were cut up at Redfern, I don't know if they were all brought to Sydney to
>be scrapped.
>BTW there was only one set of Budds, but the Tullochs were later used in
>Wollongong as well after they were a failure on the Riverina Express.
The 1200-class (Tulloch carriages) were actually the best cars on the system
(from a passenger viewpoint!) The ride was better than anything else going
around, and the seats, particularly in first class, were superb.
Regards
David "The Doctor" Proctor
dap...@bigfoot.com
Albert Alcoceba
In the message about NSW RailCars, from BRETT.FITZPATRICK@EMPLOYM to ALL!, BRETT.FITZPATRICK@EMPLOYM said:"
BB> 100 class are DMUs too.
100 class run in multiple??
Regards,
Albert.
* RM 1.31 * Albert! alb...@zip.com.au http://www.zip.com.au/~alberta/
Albert Alcoceba
In the message about NSW RailCars, from GI...@FASTLINK.COM.AU to ALL!, GI...@FASTLINK.COM.AU said:"
GG> You forgot the 1100 and 1200 class! How could you forget such an important part of
GG> our railway history? Anyway, for my money a railmotor was a CPH as was clearly
GG> marked on the outside and the others were railcars.
GG> Bob
Rail motor number 38 was labelled "Rail Motor" but was not a CPH :)
Chris Stratton
I checked some books over the weekend and it was mainly mechanical failures
which caused them to be loco hauled, but the derailment (which was at
Erskineville) made things worse by damaging the drive train on one or two
cars.
From what I have been told and read the 1200s were a failure from a
reliability point of view when used as a self propelled unit. The electrical
system was overly complex and prone to causing failures.
David Proctor wrote in message <6gk89n$7c3$1...@wbn.sydnet.com>...
stea...@bigpond.com
On Wed, 08 Apr 1998 21:12:34 +1000, Eben Levy <eben...@klever.net.au>
wrote:
>
>
>brett.fi...@employment.gov.au wrote:
>
>> In article <6ge985$fsm$1...@news.mel.aone.net.au>,
>> "Barry Campbell" <camp...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > Eben Levy wrote in message <352A1FB9...@klever.net.au>...
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> I'm probably wrong here (quickly coating myself with various flavours of
>> marshmellow to take advantage of the glorious flames) but if you want to be
>> really picky, there are no NSW RAILCARS at all.
>>
>> 600/770, 620/720, 670/770, 900, 950, are all DMUs.
>>
>> 100 class are DMUs too.
>>
>> CPH, CHP, 400/ 500 class are Railmotors with DMU capability.
>
>Shouldn't these be PMU (petrol multiple unit) as they weren't diesel.
They were converted to diesel, and run as such today
>>
>> Brett (expecting a nice long roasting!)
Just a short one.
>> -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
>> http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
>
>
>
>--
>Bye for now,
>Eben.
>
>http://www.klever.net.au/~ebenlevy/
>
>
Terry Flynn
For up to date HO scale model railway standards go to
http://www.freeyellow.com/members/trainstandards/index.html
Includes extra finescale standards.
d822...@ozemail.com.au
In article <6gm7u8$bur$1...@the-fly.zip.com.au>,
alb...@zip.com.au wrote:
>
> In the message about NSW RailCars, from BRETT.FITZPATRICK@EMPLOYM to ALL!, BRETT.FITZPATRICK@EMPLOYM said:"
>
> BB> 100 class are DMUs too.
>
> 100 class run in multiple??
>
As usual on newsgroups, everybody weighs in with opinion, and facts go by the
board! Sorry, but a lesson in basic English appears to be necessary first!
Firstly, the term 'dmu' is only shorthand for 'diesel multiple-unit RAILCAR'.
'dmu' by itself has no meaning - it is an adjectival descriptor. Secondly,
the term 'railcar' is so generic as to be able to describe any
non-self-propelled vehicle - it is splitting hairs to declare that one type
of vehicle is a 'rail motor' and another is a 'railcar'. Thirdly, the group
name for such vehicles on the NSWGR was 'motor trains', as printed on the
cover of their 'Passenger Rolling Stock - Motor Trains' diagram book. Within
that grouping individual types were identified 'motor cars' and 'trailer
cars'. Fourthly, even the NSWGR wasn't sure at the beginning. RM No.1 was
described officially as a 'Motor Rail Car' (three separate words) during
construction, then as a 'Rail Motor Car' upon introduction. No.2 and CPH
Nos.1-36 were also called 'Rail Motor Cars' upon construction. The legend
"Rail Motor No. ...' was not painted on these vehicles until some time later.
Fifthly, No.1, No.2, CPH1-36, No.38 and the 400 class were all petrol powered
until converted to diesel. Sixthly, the 100 (Silver City Comet) and 400 class
were NOT dmu cars - they had no mu capability. Seventhly, the manufacturer's
nomenclature for the 1100 class (which does not seem to have been adopted by
the NSWGR) was Budd Rail Diesel Car (Budd RDC). Finally, ALL self-propelled
petrol, diesel and electric vehicles can be designated railcars. Hope that
clears up a few misconceptions!
Bob
d822...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
I believe that the term DMU is a recently used one in this counrty but probably very common in the UK. Two diesel
locomotives coupled to a train could be called a DMU train. This is not a term we use. In fact a much more
appropriate name for the "Railcar" type train would be "A self propelled train".This would indicate that the train
does not require a locomotive to haul it as the power is from the train itself. Even in more modern times this
name has been modernised to XPT which stands for Express Passenger Train . Maybe it should have been a SPXPT! , a
self propelled experss passenger train. No doubt there will be those that don't consider XPTs to come into this
catagory.
Cheers
Bob Gioia
WerrisCreek
Steve Shotton
WerrisCreek wrote in message <35375DF3...@Bigpond.com>...
>Is d8225hnl any relation to R2D2?
>
>Werris
>
>d822...@ozemail.com.
Perhaps a distant cousin to C-3PO
Steve Shotton