Miss Prism Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 Did Heljan consult any drawings, or is this another epic fail of laser-scanning 'accuracy'? I despair, I really do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 To lower the boiler would throw the tanks out. But then judging by the two pictures the tanks are too high anyway. So it looks like the saddle needs 'hollowing out' to lower the boiler, then the side tanks need a good slice off the tops and new beading put in place. I'm looking at this as if it was a production jobby and I needed to improve it! It isn't a production job and so naturally it would be in Dapol's interests to make correct this early mock up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Froxfield2012 Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 These are the best "crops" I can offer. One 61XX seems to be trying to escape the side of the picture! I am not sure the images help much. To add to the general confusion, it seems to me that the stays up from the buffer beam don't go high enough up the saddle. Does there seem some variety in the chimneys? 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Joseph_Pestell Posted November 22, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 22, 2016 Did Heljan consult any drawings, or is this another epic fail of laser-scanning 'accuracy'? I despair, I really do. Perhaps not the scanner to blame but the article that has been scanned. Has "preservation" not been quite true to the original? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 Perhaps not the scanner to blame but the article that has been scanned. Has "preservation" not been quite true to the original? I think we can discount the possibility that the dozen or so preserved large Prairies (WSR, Llangollen, GWS, Tysley, et al) have all changed their boilers, chimneys, smokebox saddles, tanks and valances to be wrong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted November 22, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 22, 2016 Did Heljan consult any drawings, or is this another epic fail of laser-scanning 'accuracy'? I despair, I really do. It could well be the scanning. I understand that if whatever is scanned is bright and shiny - such as a well cleaned loco - it can confuse the scanning gear and produce false readings. This ought to be correctable as the editing stage when taking it forward to a CAD but that needs a lot of care and a lot of cross checking which costs time and money so might not necessarily happen to the extent that it should. But these are presumably EP samples so it might be correctable (but on the other hand as they are seemingly decorated samples are they beyond that stage?). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium boxbrownie Posted November 22, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 22, 2016 I think we can discount the possibility that the dozen or so preserved large Prairies (WSR, Llangollen, GWS, Tysley, et al) have all changed their boilers, chimneys, smokebox saddles, tanks and valances to be wrong. But they only had to scan the one that was not as originally built? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 But they only had to scan the one that was not as originally built? I am not aware any of the preserved large Prairies have been altered to look like that Heljan travesty. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 (edited) There are the old fallbacks called scale drawings that we simple folk worked from back in the stone age. Or do we live amongst a generation for whom technology rules and rulers dont? I'm really hoping they get this one, and others locos, right. The prices are a breakthrough. Edited November 22, 2016 by coachmann Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Joseph_Pestell Posted November 22, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 22, 2016 Out of curiosity, just had a quick look at both Airfix 00 models. On these matters, they seem to be better than the Heljan. So much for nearly 60 years progress. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Hal Nail Posted November 22, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 22, 2016 Is the smokebox sitting too high? This was what I said in the comment I removed as thought maybe I was jumping in too soon with negativity! I cant quite decide if perhaps the whole boiler is too small? It all rather reminds me of one of my childhood drawings - everything is represented but the proportions, particularly around the front, don't quite hang together! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardenwall Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 Did Heljan consult any drawings, or is this another epic fail of laser-scanning 'accuracy'? I despair, I really do. Do we know that Heljan used scanning? I understood they had yet to embrace the technology and were still 'old school'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve fay Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 Looking at the body off the chassis it does look good, I wonder if various bodies have been put together for the pictures and it hasn't been all screwed together tightly?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Hal Nail Posted November 22, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 22, 2016 I wonder if various bodies have been put together In the finest Swindon tradition, of course! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kev_Lewis Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 The outside steam pipes look, to my eye, to be too small a diameter. And the steam heating pipe on the buffer beam looks more like an air brake. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arun Sharma Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 As an aside, all 61xx [as opposed to 41xx, 51xx, 81xx etc] were fitted from new with tripcocks and associated pipework as they were intended to run over LT lines. Didn't spot any such bits on the GWR liveried samples in post #63 et seq. No doubt Radley Models will do a roaring trade in 0gauge tripcocks! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 I think the above were the 'late' versions (the early GWR mounting plates were a bit more substantial IIRC). But were all 61xxs fitted with tripcocks?: https://plumbloco.smugmug.com/Trains/Old-Oak-Common-MPD/i-PzJfZK7/A Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve fay Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 That's a casting I will need to track down! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium boxbrownie Posted November 23, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 23, 2016 I am not aware any of the preserved large Prairies have been altered to look like that Heljan travesty. Oh well if it is a "travesty" you had better let Heljan know before they do something really silly Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arun Sharma Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 Miss Prism wrote, "But were all 61xxs fitted with tripcocks?: https://plumbloco.sm...MPD/i-PzJfZK7/A" According to page J33 of the RCTS "Locomotives of the GWR" Part 9, Standard 2 cylinder classes - " The 6100s replaced 2-4-0T on duties over the electrified lines in the London Area and all were fitted with trip gear for automatic brake application in case of overrunning an adverse signal." That some might have been eventually posted away from London and lost the trip gear is a matter of detail relating to individual engines but doesn't change the requirement for a GWR era 61xx operating in London to have needed trip gear. I don't know how long into the BR period this practice lasted though I dimly recall a BRILL article relating to this. Mike [The Stationmaster] would probably be able to give a better opinion as he spent time in and around Reading and would regularly have seen London-shedded 61xx. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 Tower Models is happy with the overall shape but will not approve production until the various tweaks have been carried out. If they could tweak the overall shape I think we can handle the rest ha ha... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 For protocol, should comments be sent to Tower or Heljan (or both)? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium boxbrownie Posted November 23, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 23, 2016 For protocol, should comments be sent to Tower or Heljan (or both)? Send them to the people who will listen....................Dapol? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted November 23, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 23, 2016 61xx-tripcock-late-version.jpg 61xx-tripcock-late-version2.jpg I think the above were the 'late' versions (the early GWR mounting plates were a bit more substantial IIRC). But were all 61xxs fitted with tripcocks?: https://plumbloco.smugmug.com/Trains/Old-Oak-Common-MPD/i-PzJfZK7/A Don't forget the Plumbloco pic is a late one (dated 1963) by which time there can have been very little, if any, passenger work carried out by London Division 61XX that required them to run into Padd suburban and of course some class members had gone from the London Division by then (although 6135 was still at Old Oak in 1963 according to the source I looked at). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 Thanks Mike, that is logical. (But it begs the question as to what was still running into Paddington Suburban.) 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