Hornby Princess Coronation Class (Duchess)

[Brocp]

That's true, 6232 and 6252 being the first. There is a great shot in the lms profile book of 6252 with deflectors with a still streamlined tender, though i don't think she ever ran like that.

[MikeParkin65]

Without checking my books etc, off the top of my head, it's a straight identity swap to get Alexandra from City of Birmingham

Unable to check at the moment but I think the the draincocks and the brakes shoes are different on the early streamliners to the later ones. The brake shoes might be irrelevant as you can see from the Hornby CAD that they are again omitted from the new model  - don't really understand why they are repeating these on a newly tooled model.

[Brocp]

Unable to check at the moment but I think the the draincocks and the brakes shoes are different on the early streamliners to the later ones. The brake shoes might be irrelevant as you can see from the Hornby CAD that they are again omitted from the new model - don't really understand why they are repeating these on a newly tooled model.

I spoke with a member of the design team regarding the fact that the Ivatt pair had different drain cocks and he said that all the models they'd make wpuld have the standard drain cocks from the 6225-6255, just as it was more cost effective to tool up just the one type on such a small detail part.

[Hilux5972]

Unable to check at the moment but I think the the draincocks and the brakes shoes are different on the early streamliners to the later ones. The brake shoes might be irrelevant as you can see from the Hornby CAD that they are again omitted from the new model  - don't really understand why they are repeating these on a newly tooled model.

I don't know why you thought so but the brake shoes are quite clearly there on the CAD.

[250BOB]

Without checking my books etc, off the top of my head, it's a straight identity swap to get Alexandra from City of Birmingham

 

Thanks....that's the good news I have been looking for.

Bob.

[MikeParkin65]

I don't know why you thought so but the brake shoes are quite clearly there on the CAD.

Sorry - typing fast in my lunch hour - have a look at the front drivers - thats the missing set of brake shoes.

Edited January 9, 2017 by MikeParkin65

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

... I personally did not think that, in major dimensions at least, that they were that bad to justify this...

 

Brace yourself; I had to wait to check out the model I once owned, now operating on a friend's layout to remind myself of my discontent with it. It took me a while to work out what was amiss on the current model when I acquired it some dozen years ago. It looked lumpen beside the grace of Doncaster pacific models, but then you would expect that to some extent; although not to the degree I was feeling. But gradually, by inspecting it against photos the shape errors made themselves known. It's a clear 2mm overheight overall and on boiler centreline, and the firebox shape is incorrect with easily noticeable knock on effects on the cab front. (Look at the consequent angle of the firebox sides, far too near vertical on the model, compared to the prototype.)

 

Judging by the scan samples shown in the first page of this thread all this is going to be corrected, and I suspect when these models are released there will be some consternation among those owning the earlier model. Those with long memories may recall the fuss accompanying the releases of the first models of Swindon designs with the correctly rendered taper in plan of the fireboxes; or the complaints over Bachmann's Deltics caused by eyes suffering the effects of Lima Deltic induced distorto-vision.

 

The new model if delivered corrsponding to the scans, will immediately look significantly leaner and longer - and righter and better! -  positioned alongside against the old model I reckon.

[melmerby]

It's a pity that the trailing truck has the now standard (for Hornby) fixed position and flangeless wheels.

I suppose that's the penalty of a having a scale width bottom end of the firebox/grate.

 

We could do with some sort of inter-changeable assembly that could be used on large radius curves with flanged wheels and movement.

 

Keith

[Hilux5972]

DSC_7545_lr-1024x485.jpg

Sorry - typing fast in my lunch hour - have a look at the front drivers - thats the missing set of brake shoes.

Ah yes I see what you mean. Perhaps to do with clearances behind the Bogie to enable trainset curves to be negotiated?

[trevor7598]

Heartwarming to see how many of you "liked" the picture of my dad and the Duchess.....thanks.

 

Right, I have a couple of Semis that I want to run on my layout, non of which are in the 2017 release range, but I'll only mention one at the moment so as not to confuse the replies, I'll mention the other a little later.

I would like to model if possible, 46224 Princess Alexandra in its final years, the sixties, and want to ask if City of Birmingham would be the best starting point, as it too was built originally as a streamliner. What are pitfalls/ differences of loco and tender if I wanted to rename and renumber the model.?

Bob

 

And here is another pic of 6229 in 1964 outside the paint shop at Crewe, same time as the earlier photo with my dad alongside

 

I was at Crewe works on that day too. We arrived on an Ian Allan rail tour from Paddington,

hauled by 46245 City of London, It went like the wind on the return journey !.

I have a photo of 6229 taken in an identical position to yours.

[Francis deWeck]

It's a pity that the trailing truck has the now standard (for Hornby) fixed position and flangeless wheels.

I suppose that's the penalty of a having a scale width bottom end of the firebox/grate.

 

We could do with some sort of inter-changeable assembly that could be used on large radius curves with flanged wheels and movement.

 

Keith

Yep, but please address this to Hornby by PM as referred to in earlier posts. I have City of Sheffield and others in the Pacific range modified with Comet/Scratch built trailing bogie assemblies to permit pivoting, not perfect, but these chassis were never top notch in my humble opinion. I dug out my rebuilt Bulleid light Pacific to check its running characteristics just to remind myself and found it was cranky even after cleaning and light oiling. I presume that the more recent chassis will be smoother runners, which is evidenced somewhat by the J15 and the O1 that I have, although I have a J50 which is a poor runner at low speeds. I'm hoping that Hornby will a resurgence in popularity, as competition in this hobby can't be too bad a thing.

[coachmann]

It's a pity that the trailing truck has the now standard (for Hornby) fixed position and flangeless wheels.

I suppose that's the penalty of a having a scale width bottom end of the firebox/grate.

 

We could do with some sort of inter-changeable assembly that could be used on large radius curves with flanged wheels and movement.

 

Keith

Assuming you are not one of the large majority on here totally dependant on manufacturers for all your needs, that is where the railway modelling comes in. We see something we can use RTR and adapt it to suit our needs. For me, the sight of a swivelling trucks or sections of mainframe swinging about under the cab are anathema, but i have to accept that RTR has always been designed the trainset sector with its settrack curves.

[Francis deWeck]

Assuming you are not one of the large majority on here totally dependant on manufacturers for all your needs, that is where the railway modelling comes in. We see something we can use RTR and adapt it to suit our needs. For me, the sight of a swivelling trucks or sections of mainframe swinging about under the cab are anathema, but i have to accept that RTR has always been designed the trainset sector with its settrack curves.

Anathema, well, I'm limited to radii of 24-30", with express points, by circumstance. It doesn't take much of a pivoting action to cater for this, and the bogie doesn't swing, unlike the cab above it! If I had radii of >48" and more like 60", then the model would be ok, but not with flangeless wheels. However, if you observe a 1:1 scale Brit, then the trailing bogie is just that, a bogie which is by definition pivoted. As for trainset, we all run trainsets in one form or another and play with them, even the EM and P4 boys.

[MikeParkin65]

Ah yes I see what you mean. Perhaps to do with clearances behind the Bogie to enable trainset curves to be negotiated?

Seems a strange omission to me - every modern steam release has featured a full set of brakes - with a scale pony wheel I can't see how the clearance on a Duchess is more problematic than a Scot, a King, a Brit or a Merchant Navy etc etc.

 

A model of a Duchess should be a range topper so needs be at least to same standard as the Britannia. Missing off subtle detail like the front brakes is spoiling the model for a half pennys worth of tar (or a little more ingenuity in the design department) in my opinion. I take Coachmans point about about the need to apply modelling to RTR product but for the price being asked for the Duchess it should be exemplary as a starting point. 

[Ian Hargrave]

Yep, but please address this to Hornby by PM as referred to in earlier posts. I have City of Sheffield and others in the Pacific range modified with Comet/Scratch built trailing bogie assemblies to permit pivoting, not perfect, but these chassis were never top notch in my humble opinion. I dug out my rebuilt Bulleid light Pacific to check its running characteristics just to remind myself and found it was cranky even after cleaning and light oiling. I presume that the more recent chassis will be smoother runners, which is evidenced somewhat by the J15 and the O1 that I have, although I have a J50 which is a poor runner at low speeds. I'm hoping that Hornby will a resurgence in popularity, as competition in this hobby can't be too bad a thing.

FYI if your Bulleid is a cranky runner,then check the gear assembly.Split gears are a common fault with these.

[cctransuk]

Anathema, well, I'm limited to radii of 24-30", with express points, by circumstance. It doesn't take much of a pivoting action to cater for this, and the bogie doesn't swing, unlike the cab above it! If I had radii of >48" and more like 60", then the model would be ok, but not with flangeless wheels. However, if you observe a 1:1 scale Brit, then the trailing bogie is just that, a bogie which is by definition pivoted. As for trainset, we all run trainsets in one form or another and play with them, even the EM and P4 boys.

 

It is not difficult to make fixed Hornby trailings trucks pivot; I've done it on West Countries and 71000.

 

All that is needed is a piercing saw, needle files and a little ingenuity.

 

If necessary, my Ivatt Duchess will come in for the same treatment, in due course.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[coachmann]

Anathema, well, I'm limited to radii of 24-30", with express points, by circumstance. It doesn't take much of a pivoting action to cater for this, and the bogie doesn't swing, unlike the cab above it! If I had radii of >48" and more like 60", then the model would be ok, but not with flangeless wheels. However, if you observe a 1:1 scale Brit, then the trailing bogie is just that, a bogie which is by definition pivoted. As for trainset, we all run trainsets in one form or another and play with them, even the EM and P4 boys.

Railway modellers of my acquaintance have always operated thier layouts, not played with them. 

[MikeParkin65]

. As for trainset, we all run trainsets in one form or another and play with them, even the EM and P4 boys.

Never a truer word spoken - there is no one on this forum who is not playing trains. The time you start thinking your trainset is real is the time you should start to worry

[adb968008]

The time you start thinking your trainset is real is the time you should start to worry

It's not real ?

Oh thunder I lie awake at night when one of my timetabled services runs late and think about passengers missing connections

 

:-)

Edited January 10, 2017 by adb968008

[Buhar]

Added to the as built non streamlined locos after the Castlecary accident which was apparently caused by drifting exhaust steam obscuring the crew's vision leaving them unsighted of a signal.

 

I can't recall my references but I thought it was the Ecclefechan crash of 1945 that led to deflectors being fitted, although I think there was some reticence to acknowledge drifting smoke as being a factor.  Certainly it was caused by a signal passed at danger.  Castlecary was in 1937 (before the non-streamlined group were introduced), was largely caused by a signalman's error and was on the LNER.

[Bomp]

I initially thought this was bad news, as I've just come by a conversion kit for the Ivatt version (albeit I think for the older tender drive one).  However, seeing the price suggested for the new ones, I think I'll look for older ones being offloaded and get one of them and get the fun of doing it myself.  Also, that way I can have one in LMS black (as mentioned above, the best livery ever applied to non-GWR steam locos).

Edited January 15, 2017 by Bomp

[ikks]

Seems a strange omission to me - every modern steam release has featured a full set of brakes - with a scale pony wheel I can't see how the clearance on a Duchess is more problematic than a Scot, a King, a Brit or a Merchant Navy etc etc.

 

A model of a Duchess should be a range topper so needs be at least to same standard as the Britannia. Missing off subtle detail like the front brakes is spoiling the model for a half pennys worth of tar (or a little more ingenuity in the design department) in my opinion. I take Coachmans point about about the need to apply modelling to RTR product but for the price being asked for the Duchess it should be exemplary as a starting point. 

Hi Mike,

I think Hornby have mentioned that the old chassis was used in the photo.....I hope so!! I agree  a model of a Duchess should be a range topper.

 

Rgds........Mike

[pH]

I can't recall my references but I thought it was the Ecclefechan crash of 1945 that led to deflectors being fitted, although I think there was some reticence to acknowledge drifting smoke as being a factor.  Certainly it was caused by a signal passed at danger.  Castlecary was in 1937 (before the non-streamlined group were introduced), was largely caused by a signalman's error and was on the LNER.

The first engines to get deflectors were 6232 and 6252, in 1945. The other non-streamlined engines got them in 1946 or, in the case of 6253-6257 from new (1946-48). Streamlined engines got them as the streamlined casings were removed from 1946 onwards.

 

None of the books or articles I looked at gave a reason for fitting them, other than the general problem of drifting steam. But 6232 and 6252 got deflectors in February 1945 and March 1945 respectively, and the Ecclefechan accident happened in July 1945, so the initial fittings were not as a result of the accident.

 

Sources - 'British Pacific Locomotives' by CJ Allen and 'British Railways Illustrated' August 2001 "The Coronation Pacifics -A Primer"

[MikeParkin65]

Hi Mike,

I think Hornby have mentioned that the old chassis was used in the photo.....I hope so!! I agree  a model of a Duchess should be a range topper.

 

Rgds........Mike

No such luck I am afraid, I PM'd Paul at Hornby as suggested elsewhere with a few questions regarding the CAD and he said the following :-

 

'Firstly, front brake shoes. Short answer: yes, they are missing. This is one of those design compromises that have to be unfortunately, the front bogie will foul if they are fitted.'

 

I've replied saying I am disappointed and  surprised about this as a) its going to really stand out and b) the clearances don't appear any tighter than for other models in the current range. Compare for example the Royal Scot which has the same diameter drivers, bigger bogie wheels and (based on photo's - I haven't got drawings to hand) very similar clearances. Thats got full brake gear and sanding gear fitted. I am assuming Hornby have realised that the bogie wheels fitted to the current Duchess model are way too large - if scale wheels are fitted there is plenty of room.

 

I hope the Duchess is getting a new chassis both for cosmetic reasons and performance and that being the case (and that was what was indicated at Warley) it should be possible to fit full brake gear.  

[Horsetan]

It's not real ?

Oh thunder I lie awake at night when one of my timetabled services runs late and think about passengers missing connections

 

:-)

You don't work for Southern, then!