Model Rail/Rapido Trains GER/LNER 'J70' 0-6-0T 'Project Toby'

[Edwardian]

Thank you to 31A for the explanation.

 

However, while I defer to those who know more about later periods, and, particularly, some of the other locations where the class worked, I would have thought that these locomotives were, throughout their lives, employed at locations where at least part of the running was on unfenced lines where skirting was required. 

 

As Dublodad says, the small diesel classes (and the later steam Sentinels) were supplied skirted to dock locations, were they not?  It makes little sense to remove the skirts for some areas and then put them back for others.  I would be genuinely interested in the extent of, and reasons for, skirtless running (Matron!) and wonder whether this was a relaxation of regulation or of standards in later years, or whether the locations where this was permitted were finite and closely prescribed.

 

Except in the final years under BR when standards seem to have slipped in many places, I find it hard to believe it was that common.  Clearly not unprecedented, but not necessarily that typical either.  Though, I note that Midland Mole has just posted to say he has spotted 3 LNER examples in Ipswich.

 

While happy to be educated further on the point, for now I remain doubtful that skirtless running was quite so common as the mix of proposed models suggests. But, mine is an unreliable impression, as I have never researched these periods and locations and am not pretending any great wealth of knowledge.

 

EDIT: Looking at the excellent GERS website, I concede to a preponderance of skirtless C53s!  Including 2 in GE livery (though perhaps they did not run 'naked' in those days): https://www.gersociety.org.uk/index.php/locomotives/j-holden/c53

 

Another point I picked up on is the skirtless BR J70 pictured in Model Rail in charge of the train is on the W&U; the picture is available on Wiki (see below).

 

Happy to admit that skirtless running was probably more common than I had supposed.

 

The point, though, I suppose, is about selling the models commissioned. Far be it for me to mistrust the polls, but I really am not persuaded that enough modellers exist who will buy 1,000 BR versions without skirts, whereas under 500 modellers would buy a BR version running in skirts. 

 

And I am certainly not persuaded that Model Rail could not shift a minimum production run of blue & brown GE ones!

Edited June 28, 2017 by Edwardian

[micklner]

Brief history of the J70

 

https://www.lner.info/locos/J/j70.php

[31A]

Whilst Midland Mole and Edwardian were beavering away as per the above I was also doing a bit of mild research.  They have provided plenty of information but for what it's worth I might as well share what I found!

 

I didn't find any more pictures of steam locos on Yarmouth Quay, but "North Eastern Steam from Lineside" (Bradford Barton, 1974) has an undated picture of 68226 at Hythe junction near Colchester "returning to the depot after a morning shunting on Hythe Docks".  This one has neither skirts nor cowcatchers; the picture shows it on the main line, but from what I remember the Hythe Docks line did involve some street running.

 

The second reference is to "East Anglian Steam Gallery (Part 5)" (South Anglia Productions, 1990).  This has a lovely picture of 68225, taken in exactly the same location as GERS Collection 759/087 on the page linked by Edwardian.  Dated 25th March 1954, it shows the loco with cow catchers in place but skirts removed, i.e. the same condition as the GERS photo.  The trolley bus wires and the flag man were still there, but the advertising hoardings on the side of the building behind the loco seem to have turned into painted adverts for its occupiers, demolition contractors(?)!

[Downer]

It might, in due course, be worth finding out how easy it will be to remove and reattach the shirts on the skirted model.

[Edwardian]

Propaganda:

 

Edited June 28, 2017 by Edwardian

[Guest Midland Mole]

They really are lovely looking, wish they were in colour though...

Alex

[Edwardian]

They really are lovely looking, wish they were in colour though...

Alex

 

If Model Rail listen, they will be!

[31A]

 

As Dublodad says, the small diesel classes (and the later steam Sentinels) were supplied skirted to dock locations, were they not?  It makes little sense to remove the skirts for some areas and then put them back for others.  I would be genuinely interested in the extent of, and reasons for, skirtless running (Matron!) and wonder whether this was a relaxation of regulation or of standards in later years, or whether the locations where this was permitted were finite and closely prescribed.

 

Except in the final years under BR when standards seem to have slipped in many places, I find it hard to believe it was that common.  Clearly not unprecedented, but not necessarily that typical either.  Though, I note that Midland Mole has just posted to say he has spotted 3 LNER examples in Ipswich.

 

 

 

 

Meant to say before I was interrupted by the delivery van driver I'd been waiting for (!), I suspect the skirts were taken off and left off to make it easier to get at the valve gear for lubrication and maintenance, in places where they could unofficially get away with it; presumably Wisbech wasn't one of those, although at the other places they were used, they were hardly hidden from the public gaze.  I suppose when new diesels were provided to replace them, officialdom had to be seen to be complied with!

 

Out of interest I looked up the LNER's 4-wheeled tram engines in the RCTS (Part 9B); of the Y6s it says "Like the J70s, where the Y6s were not engaged on duties taking them on public highways, the cowcatchers and aprons were frequently removed" and three pictures show them in that condition albeit 'on shed' rather than working.  The two double cab Sentinel tram engines (Class Y10) were originally intended for the W&U but proved unsuitable and were then used mostly at Yarmouth.  Of the three pictures in the RCTS book, two are captioned as being at Yarmouth; one (dated 1951) shows the cowcatchers removed but not the side plates, and the other (undated but probably late '30s) shows the "full set".

[Chris Chewter]

I suspect the skirts were taken off and left off to make it easier to get at the valve gear for lubrication and maintenance, in places where they could unofficially get away with it; presumably Wisbech wasn't one of those.

Doesn't post 101 above show a loco on the Wisbech line without skirts?

[Edwardian]

Doesn't post 101 above show a loco on the Wisbech line without skirts?

 

Indeed, which is why I posted it, though I daresay this may prove to have been a less common occurrence on the W&U than at some of the locations mentioned.

 

Given my proclivities, however, I am more interested in the fact the that No.135 is travelling to her new destination, over the mainline, apparently skirtless, in 1912.  

[jwealleans]

Presumably that would be to help lubricate the motion and keep an eye for overheating bearings.

[Guest Midland Mole]

What I don't understand is why in other parts of the country, in towns and cities, and in other dockyards steam locomotives were allowed to run on and across public roads and areas without any side skirts or cow-catchers? Makes me wonder about whether the rules only applied in certain parts of the country? Other places seemed to have allowed locos to run in public spaces with only a flagman as a safety feature!

 

 

Alex

[31A]

Doesn't post 101 above show a loco on the Wisbech line without skirts?

 

 

So it does, yes - sorry Edwardian, didn't notice that!  Don't think I've seen any other pictures of them running on that line without the side plates, though.

[£1.38]

What I don't understand is why in other parts of the country, in towns and cities, and in other dockyards steam locomotives were allowed to run on and across public roads and areas without any side skirts or cow-catchers? Makes me wonder about whether the rules only applied in certain parts of the country? Other places seemed to have allowed locos to run in public spaces with only a flagman as a safety feature!

Alex

Regulations for skirts existed (or not) on a line by line basis. Some lines had them, some didn't and some ignored them anyway.

 

I think the W&U was opened under tramway legislation, not as a railway, which probably made a difference.

[dibber25]

This is a purely personal comment and entirely outside of my involvement with the J70 project, as I have not been involved in any way with the choice of liveries/quantities. With regard to the issue of a GER model (which could be included in a second batch, if sufficient support was forthcoming).

1) I did see the messages of interest as they came in and the original livery requests were heavily in favour of LNER or BR liveries.

2) At one time we thought we could do a single model that could be fitted with skirts supplied separately in the pack. This would have halved the number of detail variants and consequently a wider spread of livery variants would have been possible. The fact that we have to do at least two different models in order to do the skirted/unskirted/partial skirted versions, each in several different liveries/numbers with a minimum run of 500 each, means that something has to give, and it was the livery with the least support. 

3) Those who were interested in the GER livery were generally also interested in the coach. When the coach was dropped from the plans it may well have been felt that the level of interest in GER livery would reduce without the coach.

4) The choices have to be ratified by commercial people who are persuaded purely by commercial matters (ie quantities we can sell) and are not swayed by arguments about prettiness or the 'gut feelings' of Model Rail editorial staff.

5) Related to (4) above is the fact that we still have stock of the 'pretty' and 'gut feeling' USA tanks, while the BR-liveried ones have sold out. Presented with this argument, it's very difficult to put forward a proposal that we think a GER J70 might sell because it's blue. Personally, I'd love to see a GER one but we need the e-mails of support if we're to progress this. You can e-mail cj.leigh@bauermedia.co.uk and I'll make sure they get to the right person. (CJL)

[dibber25]

It might, in due course, be worth finding out how easy it will be to remove and reattach the shirts on the skirted model.

The skirted and unskirted models will necessarily be two different models. It will not be possible to convert one into the other. (CJL)

[dibber25]

Meant to say before I was interrupted by the delivery van driver I'd been waiting for (!), I suspect the skirts were taken off and left off to make it easier to get at the valve gear for lubrication and maintenance, in places where they could unofficially get away with it; presumably Wisbech wasn't one of those, although at the other places they were used, they were hardly hidden from the public gaze.  I suppose when new diesels were provided to replace them, officialdom had to be seen to be complied with!

 

Out of interest I looked up the LNER's 4-wheeled tram engines in the RCTS (Part 9B); of the Y6s it says "Like the J70s, where the Y6s were not engaged on duties taking them on public highways, the cowcatchers and aprons were frequently removed" and three pictures show them in that condition albeit 'on shed' rather than working.  The two double cab Sentinel tram engines (Class Y10) were originally intended for the W&U but proved unsuitable and were then used mostly at Yarmouth.  Of the three pictures in the RCTS book, two are captioned as being at Yarmouth; one (dated 1951) shows the cowcatchers removed but not the side plates, and the other (undated but probably late '30s) shows the "full set".

I believe the picture of 68225 on the W&U without skirts is one that has been used as a guide to one of the models. It seems W&U locomotives did get involved in some tussles with road vehicles (it's quite understandable given the narrowness of some of the roads in the area even now, and the crossings of waterways with road junctions close to bridges and having very restricted views). It is quite possible that No. 68225's side skirt (it may have had one on the other side) became damaged and the loco was needed on duty before it could be straightened and refitted. 68225 was, I believe (my reference books are all in Canada at present!) one of the last two operational J70s on the W&U. I believe, also, that it was the one involved in the incident where it ran low on water, the tank had already been removed, and Revs Awdry and Boston assisted in watering it with a garden hose! (CJL)

[Guest Midland Mole]

Edit: Original post deleted as I know how much people on here hate anyone airing views that are contrary to the popular opinion.

Alex

Edited June 28, 2017 by Midland Mole

[Edwardian]

Well, thanks to CJL for telling it straight.

 

As the magazine says:

 

"You will note that we've only covered LNER and BR ownership. If demand for GER liveries is high enough, we will consider this for future production runs.

 

To register your interest in a GER liveried J70 please email                 

 

modelrail@bauermedia.co.uk "

 

Now who wouldn't want a little blue and brown tram engine as the focus of a little dock-side micro layout?  

 

If anyone who wants to see these little engines in their heyday, now is the time to say so!

 

EDIT: From what I can see, I reckon that S Gauge example below is, in fact, a G15/Y6, but hey! 

Edited June 29, 2017 by Edwardian

[31A]

I believe the picture of 68225 on the W&U without skirts is one that has been used as a guide to one of the models. It seems W&U locomotives did get involved in some tussles with road vehicles (it's quite understandable given the narrowness of some of the roads in the area even now, and the crossings of waterways with road junctions close to bridges and having very restricted views). It is quite possible that No. 68225's side skirt (it may have had one on the other side) became damaged and the loco was needed on duty before it could be straightened and refitted. 68225 was, I believe (my reference books are all in Canada at present!) one of the last two operational J70s on the W&U. I believe, also, that it was the one involved in the incident where it ran low on water, the tank had already been removed, and Revs Awdry and Boston assisted in watering it with a garden hose! (CJL)

 

 

Thank you Chris for your input and clearing up a few points.  Sorry to hark on, but I seem to have become addicted to looking at pictures of tram engines!  In "Branch Line to Upwell" (Middleton Press, 1995) there is another picture of 68225 without cow catchers or side plates, outside the loco shed at Wisbech.  Apparently it was transferred there from Ipswich in 1949 and renumbered to 68225 in 1950.  The picture above it on the same page shows five tram engines outside Wisbech shed in 1946, of which one J70 is without cowcatchers and side plates, although it doesn't seem to be in steam.

[Edwardian]

Edit: Original post deleted as I know how much people on here hate anyone airing views that are contrary to the popular opinion.

Alex

 

I find that, in the phrase "received wisdom", only the first word tends to be true.  So I wouldn't worry about exhibiting independence of thought.

 

I take it you have emailed  modelrail@bauermedia.co.uk  and made your preferences known. 

[micklner]

This is a purely personal comment and entirely outside of my involvement with the J70 project, as I have not been involved in any way with the choice of liveries/quantities. With regard to the issue of a GER model (which could be included in a second batch, if sufficient support was forthcoming).

1) I did see the messages of interest as they came in and the original livery requests were heavily in favour of LNER or BR liveries.

2) At one time we thought we could do a single model that could be fitted with skirts supplied separately in the pack. This would have halved the number of detail variants and consequently a wider spread of livery variants would have been possible. The fact that we have to do at least two different models in order to do the skirted/unskirted/partial skirted versions, each in several different liveries/numbers with a minimum run of 500 each, means that something has to give, and it was the livery with the least support. 

3) Those who were interested in the GER livery were generally also interested in the coach. When the coach was dropped from the plans it may well have been felt that the level of interest in GER livery would reduce without the coach.

4) The choices have to be ratified by commercial people who are persuaded purely by commercial matters (ie quantities we can sell) and are not swayed by arguments about prettiness or the 'gut feelings' of Model Rail editorial staff.

5) Related to (4) above is the fact that we still have stock of the 'pretty' and 'gut feeling' USA tanks, while the BR-liveried ones have sold out. Presented with this argument, it's very difficult to put forward a proposal that we think a GER J70 might sell because it's blue. Personally, I'd love to see a GER one but we need the e-mails of support if we're to progress this. You can e-mail cj.leigh@bauermedia.co.uk and I'll make sure they get to the right person. (CJL)

 

Will this info/email re the GER version be printed in the magazine, GER Society/Forum etc. Any response from RMweb will be a obviously limited response.

Edited June 29, 2017 by micklner

[dibber25]

Will this info/email re the GER version be printed in the magazine, GER Society/Forum etc. Any response from RMweb will be a obviously limited response.

The full livery information for the first ten models is shown in the latest issue of Model Rail, together with the note reproduced in the comment by 'Edwardian' above. I don't have access to the other lines of communication which you mention. (CJL)

[Edwardian]

The full livery information for the first ten models is shown in the latest issue of Model Rail, together with the note reproduced in the comment by 'Edwardian' above. I don't have access to the other lines of communication which you mention. (CJL)

 

'dibber25', I echo MickLNER's suggestion.  Would it not make sense to approach the GERS with a view to canvassing their members' opinion?  Many will be modellers, though not necessarily MR subscribers or RMWeb members.  Commercial organisations pay money for lists of potentially relevant customers, and here is a target group already defined for you.  I am guessing that GERS is happy to promote the modelling of the line it supports, and, so, would be happy to pass the word in its periodical and online.

Edited June 29, 2017 by Edwardian

[J C Fenton]

This is a purely personal comment and entirely outside of my involvement with the J70 project, as I have not been involved in any way with the choice of liveries/quantities. With regard to the issue of a GER model (which could be included in a second batch, if sufficient support was forthcoming).

1) I did see the messages of interest as they came in and the original livery requests were heavily in favour of LNER or BR liveries.

2) At one time we thought we could do a single model that could be fitted with skirts supplied separately in the pack. This would have halved the number of detail variants and consequently a wider spread of livery variants would have been possible. The fact that we have to do at least two different models in order to do the skirted/unskirted/partial skirted versions, each in several different liveries/numbers with a minimum run of 500 each, means that something has to give, and it was the livery with the least support. 

3) Those who were interested in the GER livery were generally also interested in the coach. When the coach was dropped from the plans it may well have been felt that the level of interest in GER livery would reduce without the coach.

4) The choices have to be ratified by commercial people who are persuaded purely by commercial matters (ie quantities we can sell) and are not swayed by arguments about prettiness or the 'gut feelings' of Model Rail editorial staff.

5) Related to (4) above is the fact that we still have stock of the 'pretty' and 'gut feeling' USA tanks, while the BR-liveried ones have sold out. Presented with this argument, it's very difficult to put forward a proposal that we think a GER J70 might sell because it's blue. Personally, I'd love to see a GER one but we need the e-mails of support if we're to progress this. You can e-mail cj.leigh@bauermedia.co.uk and I'll make sure they get to the right person. (CJL)

 

Sensible suggestions from micklner and edwardian; if Model Rail wants to do things on a strictly commercial no risk basis, it needs to do what it can to go find customers.

 

Good to see this prototype in RTR, but I, too was surprised not to see it in GE blue n' brown.

 

I don't really buy the "GER modellers won't want the loco if they can't have the coach" conclusion.  Sounds like a suspect interpretation.  Did those folks really write in to say they'd only buy the engine if they could have the coach too?

 

Passenger service went on to 1927, so the point equally effects early (lined) LNER, but we are having one of those.

 

Since they worked plenty of places other than W&UT, a coach is not essential to go with any version, including the GE.

 

Shame about the coach, but I would still like a GE livery J70.  Thanks