Jump to content
 

Churminster & Stowe Magna, Southern Railway


Tony Teague
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold
13 minutes ago, thegreenhowards said:

Go on. You know you want to - What an excuse for a locoholic!
 

 

 

I don't deny that I'd love to, but unfortunately space, money and time are all in limited supply!

(Plus I already have more locos in stock drawers than on the layout)

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Tony Teague said:

 

I don't deny that I'd love to, but unfortunately space, money and time are all in limited supply!

(Plus I already have more locos in stock drawers than on the layout)

 

Triple head, and bank every train, that'll use 'em up!

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
5 hours ago, Tony Teague said:

 

Cheat, wot me! No guv.:unsure:

 

Well perhaps the key for me is that the SR gave different class numbers to T9 / L12 / S11 but not to the variations within class H15 - and that's where I started, one for each class in service at nationalisation; the Drummind 4-4-0's do however also have different cab width's, wheel sizes, tenders and so on.

 

However, my purpose in acquiring a large-boilerd H15 is that really it is quite a significant difference, and certainly there is at least as much of a difference here as there is between say and E4 and an E4X.

 

In the end, there are almost as many variations within certain SR classes as there are loco's, so short of modelling every loco the SR had at nationalisation, as opposed to one of every class, there is no way that one could get complete coverage - and no, I am not going there! :crazy_mini:

 

Tony

 

Have you got 335? That one was quite different to all the others - and had the most ludicrously mismatched tender I've ever seen.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
12 minutes ago, Michael Edge said:

Have you got 335? That one was quite different to all the others - and had the most ludicrously mismatched tender I've ever seen.

 

No I haven't - I have only got the two H15's shown - but looking at pictures of No.335 I agree it does look really strange with it's over-height prototype Drummond water cart!

This is a classic illustration as to why modelling every possible variation would be a massive task.

A further aspect is just how many SR loco types are still unavailable RTR, and of those there are still a good proportion for which no kit is available.

Tony

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Despite all of the ribaldry I thought I would post a further picture of No.483.

 

Having recently posted an SECR loco with what few SECR wagons I have, I thought that No.483 might look good alongside some LSWR wagons (yes, I know, she was an SR built version, but from good LSWR stock!):

 

1352648596_SJP2020-06-2817-46-25(BRadius8Smoothing4)02200628.jpg.5bc2516761f2d034a52d782702cc400b.jpg

 

Note that Stowe Magna goods yard appears to be suffering from some subsidence - old mine workings perhaps?

 

I do have some further ex-LSWR wagons somewhere but they will take a bit of locating; the brakevan in this case is a recently completed LSWR 10T goods brake van, or road van, from a Smallbrook Studios kit:

 

1171002147_SJP2020-06-2817-47-59(BRadius8Smoothing4)02200628.jpg.a7439031b379574419df679889dba278.jpg

 

I have to say that this was not a particularly easy build & that I am not really a fan of this type of resin kit (having built a couple of vans before); the parts reuire a lot of fettling, despite the resin being quite brittle, and it is not easy to get things square. The running / step boards were especially fiddly and (as can be seen) I didn't manage to get all of the supports perfectly aligned. Nevertheless, it is an interesting protoype.

Tony

 

Edited by Tony Teague
  • Like 12
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
13 hours ago, thegreenhowards said:

Tony,

 

I'm slightly confused given my sketchy knowledge of the fineries of SR loco classifications. Is there any less difference between 522&483 than between (for example) an L12/T9/S11? If not then I think you’re ‘cheating’ and need to expand your list immediately!

 

Andy

 

The H15s were quite a varied bunch!  First you had the 10 built in 1914 (482-491) with parallel boilers, massive smokeboxes, and stepped running plates.  As there was no spare boiler, 491 was later fitted with a King Arthur type taper boiler, to create a spare boiler to swap around the others.

335 (1914) was a one-off, a rebuild of Drmmonds single E14 design.  It was outwardly similar to the first batch, but had a slightly longer coupled wheelbase, and that massive Drummond tender.

330-334 (1924) were "Rebuilds" of Drummonds F13 class.  They had the massive parallel boiler/smokebox, but straight running plate. (and Drummond tenders?)

473-478, & 521-524 (1924) were new-builds, with taper boiler and straight running plates.  Appearance wise, they could be confused with S15/N15s.

 

I think that covers it!

Cheers, Dave,

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Sorry, couldn't resist my H15 antenna picked up this thread. DLT knows his H15's very well. A few pictures of mine, 389 was built by PDK, 333 body by PDK and 491 chassis by PDK. The rest by me from kits and where needed, scratch built - 335 is my favourite. 335 and 33o series all had extended main/rear wheelbase (6")  to accomodate the longer shallow Drummond firebox.

 

724036603_IMG_4140copy(2).jpg.7f6450d1a4339f8976ebfdbe6dedc3ce.jpg

 

1090970040_IMG_4366(2).JPG.faeae64380c0328048703b84bbb3a372.JPG

 

602946101_IMG_4374(3).JPG.63a85ed5533156b11c4b239eabe531d4.JPG

 

390825560_IMG_4945(2).JPG.1923a4cd444e8624c3e59513c315a006.JPG

 

Sorry about the crap snaps.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard B

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
3 hours ago, 30368 said:

Sorry, couldn't resist my H15 antenna picked up this thread. DLT knows his H15's very well. A few pictures of mine, 389 was built by PDK, 333 body by PDK and 491 chassis by PDK. The rest by me from kits and where needed, scratch built - 335 is my favourite. 335 and 33o series all had extended main/rear wheelbase (6")  to accomodate the longer shallow Drummond firebox.

 

724036603_IMG_4140copy(2).jpg.7f6450d1a4339f8976ebfdbe6dedc3ce.jpg

 

1090970040_IMG_4366(2).JPG.faeae64380c0328048703b84bbb3a372.JPG

 

Richard

 

No need to apologise - a great collection of H15's illustrating the differences perfectly!

 

Tony

 

Edited by Tony Teague
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Thanks Richard, quite a fleet!

It took me a while to get my head around the variations, especially that some of the later locos had lower numbers as they were rebuilds.

I was helped greatly by several RMweb-ers, especially Guest Belgian, who goes into far more detail on this thread: Urie H15 Chonker

Cheers, Dave.

Edited by DLT
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Back to my weakness for building vans & wagons - I decided to whip out my Python, so to speak:

 

1702038499_SJP2020-07-0115-03-22(BRadius8Smoothing4)02200630.jpg.4e101035f41b3f49c7dbeed83541734b.jpg

 

Another PecoParkside kit, this went together as easily usual but as I approached the end of construction I realised that the buffers were missing from the kit.

All credit to Peco, they provided replacements within 48 hours without question - good old fashioned service!

That roof needs some serious weathering!

 

Tony

Edited by Tony Teague
  • Like 11
  • Craftsmanship/clever 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
2 hours ago, Jack P said:

Looks fantastic Mr T. 

 

What are the origins of the LMS van next to it please?

 

Hi Jack

It is from a Cambrian kit (ref: C87) for an LMS 6T Fish Van to d.1885.

It is current & available see:

https://www.cambrianmodelrail.co.uk/store/C87-LMS-6-8ton-Fish-Van-D1885-p94163450

 

These go together pretty nicely.

Tony

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • RMweb Gold

I have to report that Tony Teague is a Good Chap. During a recent conversation I was made aware of a book that had been recently published, containing lots of splendid colour and black and white photographs of things Southern. I mentioned this in The Right Places and, lo and behold, an appropriate Birthday Present was delivered by No 1 Daughter.

 

Why all the Capital Letters? You need to be made aware of the Important Things in Life.

 

:locomotive::sungum:

 

P1020321.JPG.e1b4c04aa6de674bf3b4153d3cd935bb.JPG

  • Like 5
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
46 minutes ago, Mick Bonwick said:

I have to report that Tony Teague is a Good Chap. During a recent conversation I was made aware of a book that had been recently published, containing lots of splendid colour and black and white photographs of things Southern. I mentioned this in The Right Places and, lo and behold, an appropriate Birthday Present was delivered by No 1 Daughter.

 

Why all the Capital Letters? You need to be made aware of the Important Things in Life.

 

 

Well I am delighted for you Mick - and a very good book it is too! - but isn't that a bit of a sneaky way of telling me that I missed your birthday?:fie:

 

(Wow, is it really almost 8 weeks since I posted on my own thread!) :(

  • Friendly/supportive 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

The sudden realisation that I hadn't posted here for 8 weeks took me rather by surprise; I knew that I had completely lost my modelling mojo but it is amazing how time moves along.

 

I happened to have two (socially distanced) visits to other railways arranged and so after looking at what Mick Bonwick has been doing on Easton, Isle of Portland, and re-visiting Tony Wright's Little Bytham, I felt sufficiently re-inspired today to enter the railway room and consider where to start!

 

There have been a small number of deliveries during my period of absence - and perhaps the most important was the return of my 4-gang controller from Gaugemaster. Just before my loss of enthusiasm I had been having trouble with power to the Down Main, and after testing with a meter I was able to pinpoint a problem with the controller; I also had the presence of mind to remove it and send it off to Gaugemaster who still give a guarantee for life on such things.

 

It was back repaired in less than two weeks - great service! - and so re-fitting it, followed by extenisve testing was the most important job of the day!

 

A second delivery was the latest model from OO Works; this is an ex-LSWR class 0330 saddle tank, which is strictly outside of the era of my train-set, because they had all been scrapped by 1933, but it is an unusual prototype for the Southern and so Rule 1 came into play.

 

SJPP826004402200826.jpg.6db4667f66708acbc301caf1f8f33510.jpg

 

This is how it looks straight out of the box and it clearly needs a crew plus some serious weathering! - especially as it would be right at the very end of (or beyond) it's working life!

 

SJPP826004302200826.jpg.d2e02ede6895c9be88d58981bc987a6a.jpg

 

I might write a fuller review in due course if it would be of interest.

 

The third delivery, and a very important one, was the return of my TPO train from Mick Bonwick who had very kindly undertaken to weather it for me, and it looks excellent with No.738 'King Pellinore' at it's head!

 

86132401_SJP2020-08-2618-45-46(BRadius8Smoothing4)02200826.jpg.46c4186faa3398bb4d12d550aeaa0a83.jpg

 

I'll post some pictures of the separate vehicles making up the TPO in my next post, and if I can find them, I'll include some pre-weathered images.

 

Tony

 

Edited by Tony Teague
  • Like 18
  • Round of applause 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Good to see your return to the the railway room!

 

That 0330 really looks good, and some weathering is definitely the order of the day. A review would certainly be well received.

 

I think that you should do an article about your signals, too. Just sayin'. :P

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I offered a review of the new OO Works LSWR / SR class 330 saddle tank and at least one of you (well just one of you actually) said 'yay' so here goes:

 

OO Works have been producing 4mm ready to run models of what, at the time, were Southern Railway prototypes not covered by any of the mainstream manufacturers, since about 2002. Their contribution to my "missing locos" collection has therefore been reasonably significant, although several of their models have subsequently been produced by Hornby and Bachmann - the King Arthur, C, and H classes for example.

 

Some of their models are, or have, also been available as kits (from other manufacturers), and because they are limited run, hand made, models they are typically priced significantly higher than those mainstream RTR models (this one is available at £279); however, if you want models of unusual or obscure prototypes - then this is one route to obtaining them.

 

SJPP826004302200826.jpg.d905c8ecd7fd727d179e41a442b3ebda.jpg

 

In my view, OO Works models have progressively improved in accuracy over the 18 year period that they have been in production and now include a lot more detail than was the case with their earliest models - but then, this is also the case for the major manufacturers. The new class 330 saddle tank certainly follows this trend and there is good representation of external pipework, rivet detail and the backhead is also loosely modelled. The body is cast in metal and the model weighs 260gm, there are sprung buffers, brake pipes and shoes are modelled as well as some, but not all, lamp brackets.

 

Most of the dimensions appear to correspond to the drawings in 'Russell', however there are a couple of fairly odd exceptions, the most significant being that the wheels are 1mm undersized at 16mm vs. 4'3" on the prototype. in addition, the model is 2mm too long over buffers and around 1mm of this is within the footplate itself (the balance coming from the buffer length) but the superstructure dimensions appear accurate. At the front end, the two bottom lamp brackets are modelled but not the three above, which should be affixed to the smoke box; the cab windows are not glazed but this is easily rectified, and although the brake shoes are modelled, brake rodding is not.

 

SJPP826004402200826.jpg.ba91cbd64eb63ae63504734b208426e2.jpg

 

The model is fitted with a coreless motor which ran smoothly on my rolling road but I have yet to undertake any kind of haulage test; for DCC enthusiasts, I can't imagine that this would be an easy loco to chip - indeed it might require fitting into a separate coupled vehicle as there is little or no suitable space available.

 

Overall, and despite a few shortcomings, I feel that the model is a pretty good representation of what is an obscure prototype, and for which no kit or RTR model is available; since the LSWR only built 20 of these locomotives, and all had been scrapped by 1933, it seems unlikely to me that a RTR model will ever be produced.

 

I hope these comments are useful; for my part the model now needs glazing, the addition of a crew and considerable weathering before it enters the operational fleet on Churminster and Stowe Magna.

 

Tony

 

Edited by Tony Teague
  • Like 6
  • Informative/Useful 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...