Oxford Rail Wish List?

[DugaldDalgetty]

PS, does anyone know if Oxford even read this, or should I email them directly?

 

John

I wrote to them in June 2016 pleading for a J36 & D30, and received the following reply:

 

"Thanks you for your email. We’ve a planned release programme covering the next 5 years or so, but I’m afraid we never share that until we have moved into an advanced stage of development."

[Ian_B]

A 45 ton Warflat to go with their Warwell and different to the Bachmann 50 ton version!

 

Mark Saunders

 

Or a modern warflat to go with the modern warwell!

Ian B

[tomparryharry]

You can't be partisan, so I suggest a locomotive from each of the different regions.

 

From the north, it's a Great Western pannier from (North) Birkenhead, (South) Winchester, (East) Old Oak Common, (West) Truro.

 

No fighting now, children!

 

Tootle Pip!

 

Ian.

[Talltim]

Reading through the first few pages of this thread, pretty much everything OR have produced/announced has been mentionrd

[Enterprisingwestern]

Releasing a carflat with a bit of common sense around the bogie area would be a good idea.

Taking a milling machine to a brand new model shouldn't be necessary.

 

Mike.

[Dunsignalling]

I wrote to them in June 2016 pleading for a J36 & D30, and received the following reply:

 

"Thanks you for your email. We’ve a planned release programme covering the next 5 years or so, but I’m afraid we never share that until we have moved into an advanced stage of development."

That being the case, maybe this thread should be designated as a Guess List rather than a Wish List? 

 

John

[Dunsignalling]

My own preferences (or guesses) would include a LMS goods van, there hasn't been a convincing one available r-t-r since the old Airfix one, and they always need a kit chassis.

 

Bachmann's effort looks all wrong, but especially the roof. While on that subject, their BR, SR and LNER vans are all very good, but every one of the GWR types has the body made over-wide to cover the buffer beams on their standard 10' wheelbase chassis. Some or all of those to the correct proportions would be welcome, too. 

 

There's also an opening for an LNER Toad B brake van, the old Parkside kit was discontinued long ago and their new one (excellent though it is) covers the later sort.

 

John

[cctransuk]

On the basis of what has been released so far - anything, as long as I'm not expected to buy it !!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[The Johnster]

On the basis of what has been released so far - anything, as long as I'm not expected to buy it !!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

I'd have thought you'd like something that needed a variety of transfers for you to provide, John...

[cctransuk]

I'd have thought you'd like something that needed a variety of transfers for you to provide, John...

 

By no means - I'd like to see models correctly marked at point of sale.

 

I supply copies of transfers that I print for my own use - I do not / could not provide myself with a living from the activity.

 

Less transfers supplied = more of my own modelling done.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

My own preferences (or guesses) would include a LMS goods van, there hasn't been a convincing one available r-t-r since the old Airfix one, and they always need a kit chassis...

I am encouraged by their selection of the LNER six plank general merchandise open - no 3 in the most common Big Four wagon stakes, and easily the best model from this maker to date I feel - so maybe they might go for LMS designs of standard general merchandise vans and opens too. I could still do with some more after years of kit builds and adding running gear to the old Airfix van body. Here's hoping, since Bachmann's programme of common steam era wagon types appears to have stalled.

[The Johnster]

Yes, by and large Ox do some nice wagons and the 6-plank LNER is a good little model, a nice change from the uniformity of 5-plankers.  They describe it as a mineral, though, which I am not sure about; is this not more a general merchandise vehicle?  

 

I could do generally with more wagons in post war pre-nationalisation 'austerity' liveries, with the smaller company initials.  There could not have been too many still around in pre-war liveries in the early 50s, my period, though I do have a very nice weathered 'Moy' coal wagon with coke rails from Baccy which is one of my favourites, faded Moy livery and a BR number.  One or two more like this wouldn't be a bad thing, either!

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

... the 6-plank LNER is a good little model, a nice change from the uniformity of 5-plankers.  They describe it as a mineral, though, which I am not sure about; is this not more a general merchandise vehicle?  ...

It is a general merchandise open (GMO) design, and in common with other LMS and LNER designs a foot longer than the five plank mineral type. (I know little of GWR and SR freight vehicles, because basically they were the minority. It's the two 'L' group's freight vehicles that are truly vital as these two groups had far and away the most of the nation's trade mileage between them, and thus they necessarily supplied most of the wagons.)

 

Airfix (again!) kindly provided a five plank general merchandise open in their range, which has made it to occasional production by Hornby. (Hornby made a hash of the livery last time out, but never mind.) This was a class pick too in terms of prototype; a GMO body construction used from the late 30s onwards and pretty close to later designs by all of the Big Four. We now have the situation that between Bachmann's 'high steel' and Oxford's 'six plank' GMO's the LNER contribution is decently covered in RTR OO, by the normal standard of RTR wagon provision. (Bachmann also provide a good suite of LNER general merchandise vans and variations too, which is amazing frankly.)

 

But of the most numerous of all Big Four construction GMO's and general merchandise van designs, the big one, the LMS, has the poorest coverage! One very poor van model of dubious accuracy from Bachmann: it might possibly be of a late Midland design, the sort of vehicle that was largely gone to scrap by the 1940s. Yet once we get to BR operation, with all vehicles in single ownership, it is LMS freight vehicle designs that should dominate any general merchandise traffic, until they began to be displaced by the BR freight vehicle build. 

[tetsudofan]

My wish is that if Oxford Rail is to continue releasing sound-fitted locos they design the models so that the sounds produced can be clearly heard. The sound emanating from the Adams Radial was rather pathetic but that emanating from the Dean Goods is even worse.

 

My impression is that the sound option was a last minute decision made by Oxford Rail well after the models had been tooled up and produced without any planning for sound decoders. Look under any sound equipped model by other manufacturers and you will normally see some holes to let out the sound, something lacking on the Oxford Rail models.

 

Keith

[The Johnster]

It is a general merchandise open (GMO) design, and in common with other LMS and LNER designs a foot longer than the five plank mineral type. (I know little of GWR and SR freight vehicles, because basically they were the minority. It's the two 'L' group's freight vehicles that are truly vital as these two groups had far and away the most of the nation's trade mileage between them, and thus they necessarily supplied most of the wagons.)

 

Airfix (again!) kindly provided a five plank general merchandise open in their range, which has made it to occasional production by Hornby. (Hornby made a hash of the livery last time out, but never mind.) This was a class pick too in terms of prototype; a GMO body construction used from the late 30s onwards and pretty close to later designs by all of the Big Four. We now have the situation that between Bachmann's 'high steel' and Oxford's 'six plank' GMO's the LNER contribution is decently covered in RTR OO, by the normal standard of RTR wagon provision. (Bachmann also provide a good suite of LNER general merchandise vans and variations too, which is amazing frankly.)

 

But of the most numerous of all Big Four construction GMO's and general merchandise van designs, the big one, the LMS, has the poorest coverage! One very poor van model of dubious accuracy from Bachmann: it might possibly be of a late Midland design, the sort of vehicle that was largely gone to scrap by the 1940s. Yet once we get to BR operation, with all vehicles in single ownership, it is LMS freight vehicle designs that should dominate any general merchandise traffic, until they began to be displaced by the BR freight vehicle build. 

 

Good points well made, 34.  I have just done a count of my massive wagon fleet, to find that I own 36 freight vehicles, 3 of which are GW toads.  The other 33 break down as follows: BR standard=14, LMS=5, LNER=8, GW=2 (on a WR layout, and both vans; I have no GW opens), SR=0 (but one of the LMS vans is a Southern design).  4 are ex private owner wooden minerals.  This suggests that I probably have enough BR standard vehicles for now and, in terms of future purchases, need to be backpedalling a bit on LNER wagons in favour of LMS designs, and to attempt to represent GW opens and at least one Southern 'token' in there!  

 

My parcels fleet, all 6 of 'em, is 2x GW, 2x Southern, 1 LMS and 1BR standard, so here I could do with an LNER representative and maybe more LMS as well.  All my passenger coaches are GWR except 1 BR suburban strengthener, and I have no plans for any more BR or other non GW coaches.  This is for a South Wales BLT in the 50s, but not more pinned to a date than 1948-60.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Where you are significantly short for an early 1950s (?) scene is minerals. Roughly 50% of the wagon fleet. Unless of course all the local mineral traffic was handled in a yard off scene from your layout location? If not you might fit in a Pole 21 tonner, and an LMS build steel  sixteen tonner, to aid the rebalancing?

 

It would be rude not to have a Gresley BG, as the Hornby model is easily best of their gangwayed LNER coach selection, and they really did 'get everywhere'.

[tomparryharry]

Coke wagons please, and some more 16 & 20 ton mineral opens. Oh, and chuck in a few more opens in any size. Did I mention open coal wagons? Seem to have forgotten about them...

 

Ian

[Covkid]

A decent RCH 21' 6" Over Headstock with 12' Wheelbase chassis that is suitable for use on all sorts of RCH 20t all steel minerals and prewar Private Owner Hoppers as supplied to Electricity Authorities!

 

Mark Saunders

You will be meaning these then Mark ?

https://photos.smugmug.com/Foxfield-Railway/Railway-Wagons-Cranes/i-Z28wMMx/0/adbcb0b9/X2/PO%2023%20Coal%20Wagon-X2.jpg

 

Yes please

[Covkid]

My plea would be late GWR or BR(WR) non corridor stock as used on nearly BR(WR) suburban routes.

 

Just a Third would do to start with, maybe followed later by a composite and a brake.

 

There were lots of rakes of these performing suburban services on the network and considering the range of 4mm GWR steam locos available there is very little to represent other than the cliched "B sets".

[The Johnster]

Where you are significantly short for an early 1950s (?) scene is minerals. Roughly 50% of the wagon fleet. Unless of course all the local mineral traffic was handled in a yard off scene from your layout location? If not you might fit in a Pole 21 tonner, and an LMS build steel  sixteen tonner, to aid the rebalancing?

 

It would be rude not to have a Gresley BG, as the Hornby model is easily best of their gangwayed LNER coach selection, and they really did 'get everywhere'.

 

 

 

 

 

Sold; well I wouldn't want to appear rude now would I?  Blood 'n custard or plain crimson, even late LNER, and I need at least one vehicle with Gresley bogies!  And it's got shelves, so I can run it on an occasional pigeon special!  I already have 3 BGs, a rather high proportion for a branch at a time when I assume main line circuit work was preferred for them, but a Gresley would be nice, as would a Thompson...   Well they don't have to all run all the time and there is an argument for main line stock being more varied at such a location in comparison to the passenger carrying stock or locos, all Tondu allocated.

 

I have a 10 wagon coal train, loaded, and am going to make up a similar train of empties.  10 and a van is the most I can accommodate in the fiddle yard.  My imagined scenario is that, unlike almost every South Wales colliery branch I can think of, the pit is not up at the end of the valley beyond the station but back down it half a mile or so 'off stage'.  But, because the connection to it trails up the valley and there is a very steep incline between it on which shunting and leaving unbraked stock even with the handbrakes pinned down is forbidden by the Sectional Appendix, coal trains have to come up to the station to run around before making their way to Tondu and the rest of the world.  

 

So, there will be eventually 20 minerals, mostly short wheelbase but some double door examples.  I already have two LNER 21tonners and a Pole would sit perfectly in the middle of the empties.  The single door wagons are a variety of rtr from Bachmann with a couple of Oxford, steel 16tonners including a slope sider, 7-plank woodens XPO or LNER (the LNER is, if anything, over represented but they owned a lot of minerals), and the Baccy 'Moy' with coke rails and a coat of my own weathering on top of Baccy's.  There are 2 without end doors, something I never remember seeing in South Wales where a lot of traffic in the 50s was still centred on the ports, though I was more interested in just locos in those days!

 

On the shopping list for the train coal of MTs; a cupboard door ex-SNCF steel 16tonner, a very weathered MOT, and possible a vacuum braked steel 16tonner (but only one as a token), and at least one ex LMS.  I may replace some of the Baccys in the LD train with Oxfords, on which the brakes can be 'pinned down' for the descent of that unmodelled gradient beyond the scenic break bridge, said Baccys being unloaded and transferred to the MTs.  The gradient is also the excuse for such short coal trains hauled by a 42xx or 56xx!

 

20 minerals, with a few more general merchandise that I'm bound to be tempted into, particularly in postwar pre nationalisation liveries, will be not far off the correct ratio.  I also know that the period saw a continuation of the prevalence of vans over opens; vans currently outnumber opens 12 to 7 and there is 1 conflat.  Vacuum fitted general merhandis outnumber unfitted 13 to 5, which is probably ok for later in the period, but I could do with one or two more unfitted for the earlier part of it I reckon.  My vanfits often run in parcels trains anyway.

[The Johnster]

My plea would be late GWR or BR(WR) non corridor stock as used on nearly BR(WR) suburban routes.

 

Just a Third would do to start with, maybe followed later by a composite and a brake.

 

There were lots of rakes of these performing suburban services on the network and considering the range of 4mm GWR steam locos available there is very little to represent other than the cliched "B sets".

 

100% agree, Covkid, and preferably not Collett bowenders, to get further away from the B set cliche.  Flat enders please, Collett or Hawksworth.  A problem for manufacturers in the case of these coaches, though, is the variety of different lengths; if is not the same as BR, LMS, or LNER non corridor suburbans which can share common chassis between 3 different vehicles; this might push the cost beyond what what is considered marketable.  So we'll probably get Collett bowenders, if anything...

 

And I'm not going to miss an opportunity to bang on again about a pre-Collett auto trailer, any pre-Collett auto trailer though my personal request would be a diagram N.  Diagram L, a 70' panelled behemoth, were the single most common type.  They lasted well into the BR era and can legitimately carry a very large variety of liveries.

Edited August 27, 2017 by The Johnster

[The Johnster]

By no means - I'd like to see models correctly marked at point of sale.

 

I supply copies of transfers that I print for my own use - I do not / could not provide myself with a living from the activity.

 

Less transfers supplied = more of my own modelling done.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

Fair enough.  And we are grateful for your transfers.

[brian777999]

Have pre-grouping wagons been mentioned at all ?

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

... preferably not Collett bowenders, to get further away from the B set cliche.  Flat enders please, Collett or Hawksworth.  A problem for manufacturers in the case of these coaches, though, is the variety of different lengths; if is not the same as BR, LMS, or LNER non corridor suburbans which can share common chassis between 3 different vehicles; this might push the cost beyond what what is considered marketable.  So we'll probably get Collett bowenders, if anything...

Given the background in this para. I think you have reached a reasonable prognosis. Mucho discontent if any Hawksworth type is produced, as not suitable for the pre-WWII Big Four period interest. And there's a Collett type that does have a standardised underframe length.

 

(I reel in shock at the revelation that Swindon failed to standardise at least some proportion of its non-gangwayed stock design's underframe lengths. Was there some heretical faction in Carriage and Wagon at Swindon, deviating from "and everything shall be standardised and shall look the same, forever and ever, Amen"?)

[Mad McCann]

By no means - I'd like to see models correctly marked at point of sale.

 

I supply copies of transfers that I print for my own use - I do not / could not provide myself with a living from the activity.

 

Less transfers supplied = more of my own modelling done.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

 

That's true and fair play to you, John but we do like your stuff and we hope you'll keep on making it. :-)

 

D.