Darth Vader Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 Well, I think it's probably a little more complex. There is a much longer wheelbase in play here than on a C0-C0 diesel chassis with larger diameter wheels too. I accept that a cemtre motor with flywheels and individual gearboxes would be the logical set up, but I'm convinced you'll need a motor with a lot of power and torque to get the Garratt to move in a convincing manner. Any idea what they use in the Australian model? Dave. I'm not sue what motor is fitted, but it does have two motors, the link below takes you to the web site. Australian Garratt Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted August 7, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 7, 2011 Well done Heljan for having the balls to do it. Put my order in for a British Rail version, well it might have been tried out on the Fawley oil tanks, that's my excuse. Did rather fancy a plain bunkered version. No being a LMS man my information library is not that comprehensive. Did the early bunkers get converted to rotary bunkers before BR days? The coal bunker history on the LMS Garratts is not entirely simple: 4997 came with a rectangular sided bunker and I presume 4998/99 matched this but the latter two definitely had a single coal rail atop the bunker whereas this is not entirely clear on the only pic I can find of 4997 (and one source states that it did not have coal rails); these 3 locos were also equipped to work vacuum braked trains and thus had screw couplings. 4998/99 remained unaltered into early BR days but I don't know if they were altered later. With one exception the second, large, batch (4967-96) of 30 originally came with the top of the bunker turned inwards to increase capacity and didn't have coal rails; they also had 3 link couplings as they were not equipped to work vac braked trains. However 4986 of this batch was built with a 9 ton capacity roatary bunker - which was later transferred to 4997 when the whole of the second batch (4967 to 4996) were fitted with 10 ton capacity rotary bunkers in 1932-3. The whole class was renumbered in 1939 when they changed from 4967-99 to 7967-99, in the BR period 40,000 was added to these later numbers resulting in the series 47967 - 47999. Thus - assuming the above information from one of Brian Haresnape's volumes is correct - the only locos not to have rotary bunkers when they they numbered in the 79xx series were 7998 and 7999 and they also had vacuum pipes and screw couplings. The rest had rotary bunkers (albeit with 47997's being slightly different), no vac pipes, and 3 link couplings. Hattons appear to be producing only the second pattern of bunker and the larger revolving bunker but their date information against the loco specs in the ad sounds to be spot on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkSG Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 As others have said: Wow. When I was a teenager I saw a kit-built Garrett in a model shop in Norwich. Ever since then, I've always wanted one. One of my best memories is seeing a real, full-scale working one in South Africa. Even though I have pretty much zero justification for one of these on either my current layout project or anything I've ever considered building, I think I'll find it hard to resist buying one. I'll either have to come up with a fictional justification for having one run in the Potteries, or build something just for the sake of it! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DerekEm8 Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 Respect to Hattons for having the inclination to do this. Never seen evidence of one over on the Black Country, although they worked into Washwood Heath I've no doubt. So Heljan - Surely the Stanier "crab" is not so different then is it ? Phil Photo of 47998 at Castle Bromwich in 1950 in LMS Locomotives Vol 5 (Essary& Jenkinson) is that near enough ?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium 7013 Posted August 7, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 7, 2011 Just tried to pre-order but Hattons say they are not accepting pre orders at present despite it being on the site available to pre-order? Be interested to hear from anyone who has managed to succesfully pre-order. What a brave and welcome move from Heljan, one cannot help but be impressed by these huge beasts. It will be intersting to see what motor(s) go in because that will dictate the decoder that one uses, one thing for sure it will not be a wishy washy weak thing, it or they will have to be quite robust. EDIT Just tried again and successfully placed my order. With so much good stuff on the horizon I can feel my card crying out 'No more, no more, Oh go on then just one more loco.' Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold RedgateModels Posted August 7, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 7, 2011 Ah, and there's me getting all excited thinking they were branching out into Welsh narrow gauge .... Although, could I stretch the timeline a bit and show a late example on Summat Colliery - would mean less wagons to get it on the sector plate Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Nile Posted August 7, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 7, 2011 Does anybody have any experience of Heljan's Danish steam locos?A post on uk.rec.models.rail would indicate they have had problems.Lets hope they are not being too ambitious with their first UK steam loco. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
(The) Youth Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 If it is hattons special, I'm surprised that they have gone with Heljan rather than Dapol Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 The Garratts had the traditional 8' + 8' 6" coupled wheelbase and so it is like two Crabs mounted back to back. Negotiating sharp curves can be a problem with the rotary bunker variant seeing as the bunker fits inside a large hole in the cab backhead. Heljan will probaly give it a slightly larger than scale hole to allow for toy curves. It all depends on what the specification is from Hattons. Pre-ordered mine as soon as I got out of bed this a.m. and everything went smoothly. The 2-motor variants are all LMS. I wonder if there is a presumtion that they hauled less weighty trains in BR days....? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Great Western Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 My guess is a GWR 2-8-2T and 2-8-0T. Now that would get me ordering ! Bluebird. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCCmad Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 this sounds interesting as a member of Wingfield model railway group this loco would be at home on our Hasland loco shed with behind 60 16tone mineral wagons. http://www.wingfieldrailwaygroup.co.uk thanks Connor Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pennine MC Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 Surely the raison d'etre for any articulated loco is to get round tighter curves than rigid loco's? With a length approaching 90ft, I'd think the reason for articulation was more so that it could get round curves at all... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D605Eagle Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 If it is hattons special, I'm surprised that they have gone with Heljan rather than Dapol Whys that? The class 14 and very soon to be released 28 Hattons specials are both with Heljan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
m0rris Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 A bold move by Hattons... but as many have hinted here it is a wise one. Whilst many of us don't have a prototypical situation to use said Garrett it is a massive, unique and epic piece of kit and likely to find itself across the land. My sources, for example, have stated that an unknown loco exchange occured in 1949 where a Garrett was swapped for a 72xx and as a result was seen up the welsh valleys! Well done Hattons, the only thing that would stop me from buying one of these would be a GWR 2-8-0/2 rocking up! m0rris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D605Eagle Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 My sources, for example, have stated that an unknown loco exchange occured in 1949 where a Garrett was swapped for a 72xx and as a result was seen up the welsh valleys! I believe they were tried round the whole country! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Ian J. Posted August 7, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 7, 2011 I believe they were tried round the whole country! I believe they visited every single foot of track on every route on a very regular basis (more than once an hour in fact!) and still do, with several members of the class preserved 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 To eliminate double heading, the Garratt Tank locos were in essence:- Two locos on one frame with just one footplate crew. Bags of power with low axle loading. Articulation to allow the 'unit' to negotiate curves. Low-slung central frame allowed fitting of very large boiler and simple firebox/ashpan design. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkSG Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 I believe they visited every single foot of track on every route on a very regular basis (more than once an hour in fact!) and still do, with several members of the class preserved And, of course, they were particularly common on routes used by the Blue Pullman! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium petethemole Posted August 7, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 7, 2011 And, of course, they were particularly common on routes used by the Blue Pullman! At the same time! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJH584 Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 From what I have read elsewhere, some models will have two electric motors BUT only ONE DCC socket for both motors. Given Heljan's propensity for being power hungry, what decoder is going to be able to cope with it? Regards David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium 7013 Posted August 7, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 7, 2011 Lets face it one does not need a justification to have one of these mighty beasts on their layout, I see no common sense at all in depriving oneself of such a potentially wonderful model just because it does not fit in with what one is modelling at the time. As others have said before they were everywhere!! What is interesting is that this is the first commission of a large steam loco AFAIK. Given that the Garratt is an evocative loco and will probably sell by the bucket load it might just bode well for the three GW locos that are popular (42XX,72XX and 47XX) and a miriad of LNER locos not to mention SR and other LMS types. Hattons are to be congratulated for their boldness, now we wait to see who will jump in with others. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dagworth Posted August 7, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 7, 2011 From what I have read elsewhere, some models will have two electric motors BUT only ONE DCC socket for both motors. That will cause problems for back emf decoders. Andi Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cornish Triang Paul Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 Someone once told me that their best mate had heard of a picture of one hauling the Pines over the S&D.... I dont know about the Pines but they often reached Bath and Bristol via Mangotsfield. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edcayton Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 ....and the one repainted into BR lined green, named "Duchess of Cambridge" and used on the Cambridge Buffet Express until 1964...... Well, if you want silly... Ed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Captain Kernow Posted August 7, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 7, 2011 I dont know about the Pines but they often reached Bath and Bristol via Mangotsfield. Now that's just plain silly. Everyone knows there were a couple of them shedded at Edington Junction for use on the Bridgwater branch!... 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