Jump to content

MarkWHL

Members
  • Posts

    12
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

96 profile views

MarkWHL's Achievements

2

Reputation

  1. The numbering as 62950-62969 is a possibility. Thanks for the information on the numbering side. As a nickname for the class, Gazelle and Impala are names of members of the Thompson B1 class. Considering the dances that were in at the time, and Cyperman's description of the locomotive looking 'fleet of foot'... I don't know whether this dance was 'fleet of foot' but what about the 'Charleston'? or shall I get my 'dance' shoes on.
  2. I will endeavor to source a suitable nickname. The reason for the difference in height between locomotive footplate and tender is that the locomotive body isn't properly secured and may need a little tweaking to sit correctly. I agree with the splash guards though - they don't appear to have the right curvature to suit the drive wheels. Looking at it now and from what others have said it looks almost certain to be a neverwas bodged together from leftovers - but it does look smart. It certainly has the profile of an A3 but I think the boiler looks slightly smaller in diameter than the A3. I will have to get the drawings out to compare and measure.
  3. Well the 'Never-wazza' Gresley 4-6-0 locomotive has arrived and the quality in the detail, valve gear and braking rods are perhaps the best that I have ever seen on a kit built locomotive. After the conversations that has stemmed from my post I have decided to draft a plausible Class Name and History for this 'might-have-been' class - I can only credit those who have contributed to the conversation (I have borrowed/stolen your ideas). GNR 'I' Class 4-6-0 Looking at the GNR Classifications - the GNR never had a classification for a 4-6-0 as they never had a 4-6-0 class, however listed in the Classification Archives - The Letter 'I' was listed but not used; therefore the 'I' Class will be the allocated letter for a 4-6-0 configuration. As stated by DaveCBroad: "Between 1900 and 1914 all the main line railways had an ever increasing demand for fast freight trains. Some addressed it, the GCR, Caledonian, and especially LNWR with powerful fast impressive small-ish wheeled 4-6-0 locos specifically designed for the purpose. Others well didn't. The Midland stuck their heads in the sand and prayed it would go away, The GNR built 0-6-0s with 68" driving wheels and also used 4-4-0s and 4-4-2s. Neither really got the job done effectively so Herbert "Nigel" Gresley designed the 68" wheel K1 2-6-0, something of a gutless wonder, and then bigged up its boiler to make the very successful K2. This was still on the small side so he enlarged it...Cue your 4-6-0 because it looks like an elongated K2, a 2 cyl 4-6-0". The model has 26.6mm dia. wheels (6ft 8in at OO Gauge) meaning that this was for fast long distance running, either fast/semi-fast passenger working or express fitted freights (fish). In fact the wheel diameter is the same as on the A1/ A3 and even A4 locomotives and also the B17 locomotives. The GNR 'I' 4-6-0 would most likely have been the intermediate step between the mixed traffic K2 and the Express A1/A3. The GNR 'I' has 6ft 8in and certainly would have rivalled the later Thompson B1, but with a more enclosed Cab and larger 4200 Gallon tender, the later B1's would have larger coal and water capacity and more comfortable for crews and the smaller 6ft 2in dia. wheels of the B1 would have made it more suitable for freight workings. The B17, A1/A3 and A4 locomotives all had 3 cyl and were more suited to smoother running at speed. The larger tenders of the B17, A1/A3 and A4 - and there larger tenders made them more suitable for long distance running. The LNER numbering of GNR locomotives was 3001-4770 (3000 added to original number), however the 1946 LNER Numbering designated numbering between 1000-1999 for six-coupled passenger and mixed traffic tender locomotives (combining 4-6-0, 2-6-0 and 2-6-2 configurations), so the GNR 'I' 4-6-0 would have fallen into this category. The LNER classification for a 4-6-0 was designated as 'B' so the GNR 'I' would have been classified as 'LNER B?' - Therefore to keep it simple the GNR 'I' 4-6-0 will be classed as an LNER B 4-6-0 locomotive. But as the Thompson B1 commenced the 1000-1999 category, the likely numbering of the GNR 'I' would have been immediately after B1's, but the B16's took that place, leaving a gap between the B16's (61410-61478) and the B12's (61500-61580). The B18's were number 1479 and 1480 (1946 Numbering), the B4's were numbered 1481 to 1489, the B19's were numbered 1490 to 1493 (1946 Numbering) and the B3's were numbered 1494 to 1499. A suitable Number and BR Number needs to be allocated to Locomotive. As with the a lot of the earlier locomotive classes being scrapped in the late 1940's and early 1950's, the lesser engines would have succumbed to the cutters torch, and as the more predominant classes extended there sphere of influence. The GNR 'I' / LNER 'B' would have either been moved further north 'my take' or scrapped very early in the 1950's when the need for older engines were surplus to the requirement, with newer locomotives from the Standardisation programme more evident. I have attached images of the GNR 'I' and the GNR 'H3' LNER K2 as a comparison.
  4. The only thing that needs to be sorted on it is securing the body to the chassis. Managed to get a hold of this for £80, which I think was quite something given the build quality. I think the B16 was known as S3. I am open to a bit of modellers licensing, however I model early BR period, and modelling Scottish Steam. I am therefore proposing that the GNR 4-6-0 followed the Scottish K2's to Scotland. Whether I decide to remodel the cab to a GNR Side Window cab as on the Scottish based K2's is to be decided. It may have headed north when displaced by B17's and then B1's, finally coming to the cutters torch in the early to mid 1950's when the B1's and Black 5's and BR 5MT's finally made it in force to Scotland. Thanks for your post though, as it only adds to the locomotives potential story.
  5. That is a really detailed and plausible reasoning for this 'never wazza' class. I'm afraid that I may have to steal it for this locomotive. Just need to decide on a plausible class name for it and a running number.
  6. Thank you all for the comments. It really has kicked up a conversation over this model. Stumbled across text suggesting that it was a concept design by Ivatt and later influenced Gresley into the design of his first pacifics (how true that is I don't know). With regards to its classification its a bit of a ball ache. The profile of the boiler is not too dissimilar from the O1 or O2 (running plate of the O2 - cab of the O1) so whether it could have been a one off modification of an O1 or O2 - or the other is it has the same profile but elongated boiler version of the K2 2-6-0 and even sports the same cab profile. There are plenty of avenues that this could go down. Trying to find a GNR locomotive that was withdrawn circa 1920, there are a few but it is trying to legitimise the numbering of the unknown locomotive. Would classifying the locomotive simply as 'B' Class. Also I have noticed that the K2 locomotives were formally known as H3. Although there were no 4-6-0 locomotives constructed by GNR, is there evidence of what the B classes (i.e. B1, B2 etc. were known by prior to the LNER reclassification of locomotives)?
  7. Hi all, This is my first post on this site and I hope the more knowledgeable and experienced members will be able to shed some light. I have very recently acquired a kit built OO Gauge locomotive from eBay - bought it because it looked such a smart and nicely proportioned engine and because I hadn't seen it before it was of great interest. However, I have looked high and low on sites and forums, databases, web pictures etc. to try and identify the class of the locomotive but I can't see anything that remotely represents it. From my initial judgement it looks to have some design features similar to those of Gresley's and/or Henry Ivatt's designs - possibly LNER or GNR origins but I'm stabbing in the dark. Can anyone help me or shed light on this locomotive. Regards, Mark
  8. Thank you Andy (uax6) for the Highland Clan plans. and thank you Portchullin Tatty for that lovely image of the Clan Goods - it really does look impressive.
  9. Andy G and Blandford 1969, Both plans for the River Class and Clan Class would be great. I look forward to receiving both plans. Regards, Mark
  10. Hi Andy, Just caught up with this thread about the 'Clan Goods' and 'Clan'. I too am looking for plans for both 'Clan Goods' and 'Clan' and also the 'River' Class - too either build from kits or attempt to scratchbuild/modify from ready to run stock. Plans for the 'Clan' would be greatly appreciated. Mark
  11. Thanks for the reply regarding this post. I look forward to seeing your Class 60. I may hold off to see how the masters do it. Mark
  12. Ben Alder, I am actually blown away by all the Scottish locomotives that you have modelled, especially the Small Ben's, and to think it is achievable from a Hornby T9. I am biased towards the West Highland Line, but think I will be modelling part of the route that was proposed through the Great Glen, which means I can have engines that ran over the West Highland Line, and those that were based around Inverness, so I think I will be having ago at a Small Ben. What I would like to ask is can a RTR model be converted into a personal favourite engine of mine, the Pickersgill 72 or 113 4-4-0 locomotive? If so, have you made one and can you advise me how to create one? The other one I have a personal interest for is the Caledonian Class 60, which I think can be knocked together with the following parts: - chassis from GWR Hall 4-6-0 - boiler from a B12 - 6 wheel tender from T9 Would you say this is feasible? I look forward to hearing from yourself (and others) who have shown such epic modelling skills. Regards, Mark
×
×
  • Create New...