Hornby announce the ex SECR / SR / BR(s) Wainwright H Class 0-4-4 tank as part of their 2017 range

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

no traction tyres please! weight not rubber! (it only needs to pull small trains)

 You never know, Hornby might show us that what they did so well on the D16/3 in mechanism layout, has been transferred to their new 0-4-4T. The ideal place for the motor is in the firebox area - between driven wheels and bogie - with the decoder socket in the bunker. That frees most of the volume over the driven wheelbase to be solidly filled with metal, for optimum traction and stability.

[Scottest]

If you want pre-group coaches in pre-group/early group condition in r-t-r, I think it can be fairly argued that the LSWR is not the company to pick.

 

The reason is that, the Ironclads aside, relatively few survived in anything resembling their original condition past the mid-1930s and the r-t-r manufacturers, for good or ill, want the predictable "base load" of sales that survival of prototypes into BR ownership ensures.

 

In many cases, formerly steam-hauled stock was split up into modules of various sizes and reassembled into EMUs of completely different lengths on new underframes. Backdating models simply by "removing" the added steel sheeting over the original panelling just won't do it.

 

What Edwardian and others do to old Tri-ang clerestories frankly pales into insignificance compared to what the Southern Railway got up to, even if one ignores the greater excesses visited upon ex-SECR and ex-LBSCR vehicles on the Isle of Wight. 

 

So, forget the LSWR and be very careful with old GWR types as Swindon, too were not averse to modernizing old coaches, the difference apparently being (if photographs are a good guide) that their much-trumpeted myth of standardization was well and truly forgotten in the process.

 

So, what else is there? Quite a lot actually, though not much on the Southern. Bachmann have picked a type that does fit approx.1919-1959 but plenty have complained that they are too "new" so they can't really win, can they.

 

There must be others, though I'm not greatly familiar with how long older non-Southern stock lasted. I suspect quite a lot until 1955, a year marked by a big national clear-out of old locos and stock displaced by BR new-build, and rather less until the issuing of the notorious 30-year rule which would have done for whatever still survived.

 

It won't be easy, as the mid-1930s did constitute something of a watershed and a lot did change around then.

 

Sorry guys, but when the last of we BR-era types have been transferred to daisy erecting duties, denying the manufacturers' the "base load" of a dominant era, I reckon that such r-t-r models as do see the light of day will come in much smaller numbers at much higher unit prices. As now, many of those demanding them will baulk at stumping up the price of admission and/or not buy because "their" period is 1908 and the model is in 1912 condition.

 

When you no longer have BR steam and transition to snipe at, you'll start on each other.

 

John

 

.  

 

A useful thesis John, but I foresee that further discussion will be way off topic. Perhaps you would care to launch a new topic for pre-grouping carriage stock in the post-grouping era.

[Torn-on-the-platform]

Excellent news. I bought the Maunsell set 610 with the hope that a H would be on the way in the not too distant future.

 

I had a feeling that the SECR terrier was a bit of a practice run for the livery. They can do better, I feel, but it was a good attempt.

 

Certainly in the market for BR Black and SECR as preserved.

[KeithHC]

Well I want one at least....... Was hoping that it would be produced as I need one for my proposed model of Rowfant. Now if a C2X could just appear I will be very happy indeed.

 

Keith HC

[ruggedpeak]

Well done Hornby, there is clearly a head of steam building for this new release! Sounds like they'll be flying off the shelves.

[locoholic]

Well I want one at least....... Was hoping that it would be produced as I need one for my proposed model of Rowfant. Now if a C2X could just appear I will be very happy indeed.

 

Keith HC

And a K class mogul - one of the most graceful locos to last into the 1960s.

[trevor7598]

Great news, just the thing to haul Bachmann's forthcoming Birdcage set, whether it is in SECR, SR or BR liveries.

This combination should keep everyone happy !.

[Colin]

M7 and H did overlap on the East Sussex lines, out of Tunbridge Wells West. I remember, as a small boy, watching both classes, from the grandstand at the agricultural show, which used to take place in the area called, logically enough, Showfields, right next to the station, which has been a housing estate since the 1970s

IIRC the M7 were tried and rejected in SR days, but they were certainly there in the late-50s and early 60s. The H supersed the Brighton D3 and D1 quite early, as there was a gradual concentration on fewer classes.

BTW, these lines also had E4 and C, as well as BR Standard 4 tanks (and before them Fairburn tanks), and a lot of other things, some available RTR, some not, and The West had a ludicrously heavy schedule of (largely empty, I guess) trains at this time.

Chapter and verse, funny stories, films, and much, much more here http://thesussexmotivepowerdepots.yolasite.com/tunbridge-wells-west.php (what a fantastic website SMPD is!)

These lines make interesting modelling prototypes, and, of course, the Bluebell collection, from which a lot of manufacturer inspiration is drawn, is centred around locos and stock from these lines.

Now, what is needed is a C2X goods, to complete the trio of long-surviving pre-grouping goods engines for the SR.

This piece of bedtime-reading suggests that Nine Elms had both classes "on the books" during WW2 http://www.semgonline.com/shed_allocations/sr-shed-alloc3.html but I have an inkling that the H there were "fire engines", fitted with pumps for fire-fighting during the Blitz, rather than used in traffic, but doubtless someone will be able to say for sure.

Anyway, I really want someone to make the H in Coarse-0, not 00, so I'm not sure why I'm wittering on.

Kevin

IIRC Nine Elms also had a few H class c. 1959-62, presumably rendered surplus by SE Division electrification. I've certainly seen pics of them on shed alongside various other SE Division locos such as C 0-6-0s and various 4-4-0s but wonder how much actual work they did, presumably they had been intended for use on ECS workings.

[Ian Hargrave]

no traction tyres please! weight not rubber! (it only needs to pull small trains)

So what small trains and which r-t-r stock are you perhaps proposing....because current 4 coupled tank locos have a haulage problem with the new Hornby Maunsell stock? I speak from current personal experience. The T9 with traction tyres has no such difficulty.Perhaps worth pondering over.

[Wheatley]

....because current 4 coupled tank locos have a haulage problem with the new Hornby Maunsell stock? I speak from current personal experience.

Doesn't help when the design of one such recent release has most of the ballast weight aft of the rear coupled axle. 0-4-4s are tricky enough to weight effectively without making it harder than it needs to be.

[Fay Sets the Pace]

Awesome news. Thank you, Hornby!

[The Bigbee Line]

Regarding the Livery and which era debate.  To me the analogy is like dinner cooked by my Mum.  She cooked a nice dinner and we ate what was dished up.  A lot of children today won't eat this and won't eat that.

 

Does that sound a familiar theme....  It enters a lot of threads on this forum...

[Edwardian]

Regarding the Livery and which era debate.  To me the analogy is like dinner cooked by my Mum.  She cooked a nice dinner and we ate what was dished up.  A lot of children today won't eat this and won't eat that.

 

Does that sound a familiar theme....  It enters a lot of threads on this forum...

 

Some people are easily pleased ... !

[Ventnor]

Looking at the CAD images the chimney looks to be the wrong shape. The base should be wider than the top. The CAD images make the chimney look more like a Drummond product rather than a Wainwright one. The accompanying photos on the Hornby blog show the true shape. Early days so hopefully it'll be corrected.

[47606odin]

So what small trains and which r-t-r stock are you perhaps proposing....because current 4 coupled tank locos have a haulage problem with the new Hornby Maunsell stock? I speak from current personal experience. The T9 with traction tyres has no such difficulty.Perhaps worth pondering over.

 

 

why do i need to propose what stock to haul? it only really needs to haul 2 or 3 coaches so does it matter? i removed traction tyres from my schools, and it happily pulls 8 Pullmans plus luggage vans on 2nd radius curves without any issues at all. would i expect an H class to do that? of course not. Horses for courses. traction tyres are not always necessary

[Dunsignalling]

Some people are easily pleased ... !

If what they produce is close enough to what you want, buy it. If it isn't, don't. Simple as that.

 

Hornby make mass produced models and the pretty versions are primarily aimed at collectors/ people who have ridden behind the preserved example/ those who fancy one for the display cabinet. I wouldn't mind betting that people who fall into each of those categories outnumber those who actually model the SECR prior to 1923 by a fair margin.  

 

If the few advocates of pre-group r-t-r models active in this sector of RMWeb are set against the total contributing to pre-group modelling topics, it suggests that many of the latter lost whatever interest they might have had in mass-produced models long ago. Many will already have gone to the effort/expense of building/acquiring kit-built SECR-liveried H Class locos. It therefore shouldn't be assumed that everyone who models the SECR will rush out to buy these or, even less, that Hornby will be relying on them doing so.

 

How "accurate" the livery is will depend on the exact period modelled. For many, the Bluebell Railway's rendition of it is what they will want anyway.

 

John

Edited September 25, 2016 by Dunsignalling

[Ian Hargrave]

why do i need to propose what stock to haul? it only really needs to haul 2 or 3 coaches so does it matter? i removed traction tyres from my schools, and it happily pulls 8 Pullmans plus luggage vans on 2nd radius curves without any issues at all. would i expect an H class to do that? of course not. Horses for courses. traction tyres are not always necessary

Using the argument "..it only needs to ...* is a slippery slope IMHO.There is also the question of how a model performs,how it moves a load smoothly from start and slow speed control.,The new Maunsell coaches have an issue with their free running capabilities and challenge four coupled tanks with an annoying and frustrating drag.M7 tanks on their day were the choice for empty stock workings at Waterloo. THe Hornby version can't handle that in model form as can be testified to by the number of justifiable gripes about its qualities on this forum.Take a look at the thread on these coaches to see what I mean.If the current Hornby R&D team find it necessary to use the dreaded TT to ensure smooth capable prototypical haulage without wheelspin and damage to gears and motor,then I won't complain. However,that's down to them to decide,isn't it ?

[Dunsignalling]

Using the argument "..it only needs to ...* is a slippery slope IMHO.There is also the question of how a model performs,how it moves a load smoothly from start and slow speed control.,The new Maunsell coaches have an issue with their free running capabilities and challenge four coupled tanks with an annoying and frustrating drag.M7 tanks on their day were the choice for empty stock workings at Waterloo. THe Hornby version can't handle that in model form as can be testified to by the number of justifiable gripes about its qualities on this forum.Take a look at the thread on these coaches to see what I mean.If the current Hornby R&D team find it necessary to use the dreaded TT to ensure smooth capable prototypical haulage without wheelspin and damage to gears and motor,then I won't complain. However,that's down to them to decide,isn't it ?

 I think they need to sort out the coaches, which do not run as freely as they should or as earlier products mounted on ostensibly the same bogies do, rather than "hotting up" the loco to cope with them.

 

John

[Captain Kernow]

Some people are easily pleased ... !

I know.

 

Great, isn't it!

[Dunsignalling]

Looking at the CAD images the chimney looks to be the wrong shape. The base should be wider than the top. The CAD images make the chimney look more like a Drummond product rather than a Wainwright one. The accompanying photos on the Hornby blog show the true shape. Early days so hopefully it'll be corrected.

I've just stuck a ruler against my screen with the front elevation CAD from this week's Engine Shed.

 

No idea what the scale is, but on my laptop, measurements are: chimney width at base = 43mm, chimney width at top = 39mm.

 

So it seems you have nothing to worry about.

[MGR Hooper!]

I've just stuck a ruler against my screen with the front elevation CAD from this week's Engine Shed.

 

No idea what the scale is, but on my laptop, measurements are: chimney width at base = 43mm, chimney width at top = 39mm.

 

So it seems you have nothing to worry about.

 

How did you manage that? I drew a perfect rectangle and the chimney looks parallel.

 

[Robin Brasher]

There are 15 pages of pictures of the H class locomotives and a summary of their shed allocations in Locomotives Illustrated 56 published by Ian Allan. Hornby made the T9 and the Adams Radial after the M7. Both the T9 and the Adams Radial will haul 11 coaches (6 Hornby Maunsells and 5 Bachmann Bulleids) so it looks like Hornby has overcome the lack of haulage ability of the M7.

[gc4946]

One of my work colleagues pointed out to me this new announcement - he collects anything connected with the Bluebell and will buy a model of the railway's example.

 

I'm sure this model, especially the preserved version, will sell well. For once, Hornby's modelling a prototype that's worked on its home patch.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Ian Hargrave]

I think they need to sort out the coaches, which do not run as freely as they should or as earlier products mounted on ostensibly the same bogies do, rather than "hotting up" the loco to cope with them.

 

John

I wasn't in any sense suggesting that but let's face it,the two four coupled 044 SR tanks we do have are in strictly haulage capacity not up to the mark are they,to be quite candid ? Maybe the Hornby R&D team will find the Holy Grail with the H. Who knows ?

[Dunsignalling]

How did you manage that? I drew a perfect rectangle and the chimney looks parallel.

 

1.jpg

I misunderstood your post, the measurements I took were across the widest point of the crown and base, not the shaft/flue (or whatever the main part is called). 

 

Should I take it you mean that part should taper inwards towards the top?

 

John

Edited September 25, 2016 by Dunsignalling