Oxford N7

[Edwardian]

Note that the C in full Wainwright livery is incorrect for SECR days because goods engines had the domes painted too and not the polished brass in preservation. An SECR 'D' class as such would be correct however.

 

The Dean Goods will only be a debacle if the delays have not been due to Oxford correcting them. If they have, then there can be high hopes for the N7.

 

This old cheshnut. 

 

I am not at all sure you are correct there.

[JSpencer]

This old cheshnut.

 

I am not at all sure you are correct there.

If you have a photo of a C class in SECR days with a bright dome, I will be glad to see it.

 

Edit: ok found photoes in SECR days prior to 1910 with brass domes.

Edited May 5, 2017 by JSpencer

[Edwardian]

If you have a photo of a C class in SECR days with a bright dome, I will be glad to see it.

 

Edit: ok found photoes in SECR days prior to 1910 with brass domes.

 

Thanks, JSpencer.

 

I have seen Edwardian pictures of the Cs in the full-monty livery, and generally you can tell if a dome is painted or polished in B&W pictures, unfortunately, I could not find a picture to hand to respond to you.

[Pint of Adnams]

Why is this GE N7 thread now clogged with everything but? Surely debates about other models should be confined to the appropriate threads?

[GreenGiraffe22]

It's been nice that for once, a thread about a loco has travelled into the pre grouping era, as opposed to BR BR BR *yawn*

[Edwardian]

Why is this GE N7 thread now clogged with everything but? Surely debates about other models should be confined to the appropriate threads?

 

Yeah, the b*st*rds!

 

I was appalled by the number of non-Oxford N7-related posts I had to wade through in order to confirm that there was nothing new to say about the Oxford N7.  Seconds of my life I'll never have back again.

 

Hanging's too good for them!

 

It's been nice that for once, a thread about a loco has travelled into the pre grouping era, as opposed to BR BR BR *yawn*

 

Though there was a earlier post suggesting that lobbying Oxford would correct the aberration represented by releasing a pre-Grouping tooled version first.  Let's hope Oxford listen to this, so that we can help combat the terrible dearth in BR-era steam outline models. 

[Sasquatch]

Just looking at their website and noted that they quote "The model will feature accurate details to correctly represent this model during the LNER era "and "The model will feature accurate details to correctly represent this model during the early BR era" and am hoping this means they are planning on different fire boxes. It's possible to make different body parts as inserts like Hornby did with the J15's roof!

 

Time to dig out that Kirk Quint set and get to work on all those grab handles me thinks.

 

Nice one Oxford!

[Dunsignalling]

Just looking at their website and noted that they quote "The model will feature accurate details to correctly represent this model during the LNER era "and "The model will feature accurate details to correctly represent this model during the early BR era" and am hoping this means they are planning on different fire boxes. It's possible to make different body parts as inserts like Hornby did with the J15's roof!

 

Time to dig out that Kirk Quint set and get to work on all those grab handles me thinks.

 

Nice one Oxford!

The clever wording makes no such outcome certain. It all hinges on how your definition of "early BR" compares with Oxford's.

 

There were still several N7s in service with Belpaire fireboxes in the "early BR livery" (up to 1950, possibly into 1951) that Oxford have already announced.

 

If you model the middle or late 1950s, or want one of the more numerous LNER locos with round-top fireboxes for that matter, there's still nothing definite being promised.  

 

John

Edited May 17, 2017 by Dunsignalling

[Sasquatch]

Thanks for your reply John. Lately I like the thought of becoming more positive and firmly believe the "powers that be" actually read these threads. So maybe throwing the idea out there with the hope that the model isn't past the drawing board stage might just work (that's assuming that Oxford haven't already come up with that idea) .
If not then I can rest assured that at least I didn't sit back and say nothing!

 

Regards Shaun.

[Edwardian]

OK, if you chaps cause Oxford Rail to abandon its plans to produce the K85 as built (https://www.oxforddiecast.co.uk/collections/1-76/products/ger-k85-n7-0-6-2-no-1002-or76n7001)   ......

[Guest Midland Mole]

Doesn't that just sum up the world of model railways, a company announce a model in it's pre-grouping shape rather than later rebuild style and suddenly loads of people want it changed!

Lets just make every model post-1920s and be done with it, because as we know railways in this country did not exist before the Big Four.

 

Alex

[PaulG]

If you go onto the Oxford Rail web site and search: Oxford Rail BR (Early BR) N7 0-6-2 No 9621 Product Code: OR76N7003 and click on the drawing, not photo, it illustrates a round-top boiler. If you click on the drawing for: Oxford Rail GER K85 (N7) 0-6-2 No 1002

Product Code: OR76N7001, again click on the drawing, it appears to me to show a Belpaire firebox.

 

From what I can see from the very small drawings Oxford Rail are producing both boiler variations, what is not clear is what of the other variations have been chosen, left and right hand drive, bunker variations and so on?

 

Paul

[Guest Midland Mole]

That is interesting, and if it ends up happening, very welcome. Lets keep fingers crossed.

 

Alex

[Edwardian]

That is interesting, and if it ends up happening, very welcome. Lets keep fingers crossed.

 

Alex

 

The thing to do, always, is to hope for the best.

 

I am slightly haunted by my first contact with OR over the Dean Goods, when I was told that the tooling suite catered for all variants (i.e. including original round-top firebox).

 

What then emerged was an EP so riddled with error that it could not represent any member of the class at any stage of its career.  Moreover, the attempt to model 2309 was particularly egregious, as it was simply the wrong series/lot for the tooling (narrower frames, and curved steps come to mind).

 

Thus, I am apt to take these pronouncements with a pinch of salt. 

 

That said, NRM seem to be forcing improvements to the Dean and Oxford Rail might well be learning and applying lessons to forthcoming models.

 

So, they certainly have the benefit of any doubt at this stage from me.

 

Come on Oxford, shows us what you can do with the N7 (and produce a proper pre-Grouping version)!

[Dunsignalling]

Doesn't that just sum up the world of model railways, a company announce a model in it's pre-grouping shape rather than later rebuild style and suddenly loads of people want it changed!

Lets just make every model post-1920s and be done with it, because as we know railways in this country did not exist before the Big Four.

 

Alex

All it suggests to me is that a whole load of people would prefer the LNER built / rebuilt version, which was much more common in the more popular modelling eras and has long been hoped for and wish-listed, I am guessing by very many more LNER and BR(E) followers than purely GER ones.

 

The issue with the Belpaire version (commercially speaking) is that rebuilding by the LNER had already begun to make them something of a rarity before 1948. The remaining examples were converted fairly quickly by BR to bring them into line with the rest of the class. Logically, the most popular versions of this model will be in 1920s and 1930s LNER liveries.

 

The prototype only just qualifies as "pre-grouping"; just two were built in 1915 and no more until 1921, so they didn't emerge early enough to carry the sort of fancy pre-1914 livery that appeals to the collector market and, I venture to suggest, substantial numbers of pre-group modellers who also generally appear to favour the pre-WW1 era.

 

If Oxford are aiming to achieve good sales of a pre-group locomotive model, to those who have been known to buy them before, I just think there are other prototypes that might have been a better pick. In this case, I think they may be "preaching to the converted" modeller. It remains to be seen how many true converts are out there. 

 

I've stated, in earlier posts, that I think this is a rather brave commercial decision and nothing I've read since persuades me otherwise.  

 

John

Edited May 21, 2017 by Dunsignalling

[Edwardian]

On the other hand, GE grey with crimson coaches is a good look, if not up to the splendour of pre-war ultramarine.  I'll go for one, if Oxford makes a decent fist of it, and happily run an 'out of period' train to that extent.

 

The years either side of the 1923 Grouping were as fascinating and varied as anything that came before, and more so than much that came after; austere wartime liveries, the reintroduction by some companies of some of the pre-War splendour, the gradual introduction, often in a series of experimental efforts, of Grouping liveries.  Those interested in the years either side of 1948 should readily understand the attraction.

 

To be hard and fast over whether something is strictly or not strictly pre-Grouping seems to be rather missing the point, not least as early-Grouping, the first 10 years or so, has been almost as neglected as pre-Grouping.

 

Frankly, the dominance of Nationalised steam and Transition Era can be a bit much at times, and has gone on for far too long.  Whether the dog-days of steam will have sufficient appeal as a subject once they are no longer remembered is a moot point, but as an alternative to it, or to an equal dominance of blue diesels, I welcome the diversity represented by older periods.  Nothing wrong with blue diesels, of course, and many fine layouts have I enjoyed set in this era.  Yet, sometimes I find it hard to stifle a yawn at exhibitions, or on perusing a magazine, at yet another Transition Era layout.  They need to be really very good to hold my attention these days, where the period modelled is itself so commonplace.  I foresee a similar surfeit of blue diesel layouts in the near future. 

 

With nearly 200 years of railway history to choose from ....

 

So bully for Oxford Rail for offering a choice, at least, of an earlier period loco.

Edited May 21, 2017 by Edwardian

[Roy Langridge]

Are we not in a catch 22 situation though? Until there is a significant number of models for any particular era many people don't model it meaning little demand and until there is demand...

 

There must be a tipping point at which availability itself increases demand, but where that is I have no idea.

 

Roy

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...Frankly, the dominance of Nationalised steam and Transition Era can be a bit much at times, and has gone on for far too long... 

With nearly 200 years of railway history to choose from ....

 Just my opinion, but the transition period 'has it all', which will do much to sustain it. Infrastructure back to the dawn of railways in use unchanged, and everything built after; traction and stock designs well over a half century old still in routine service, and preserved 'oldies' allowed out for a run with no difficulty; and the new traction and stock designs that are still to be seen now, appearing and going into service, (and sometimes not long after to the scrap lines).

 

On the N7 I hope we get the full selection, Belpaire and round top, as the original material suggested. The Belpaire version may have been declining in numbers by the time BR came along, but they were in service, and variety (see above para.) is a major attraction for me.

[Edwardian]

 Just my opinion, but the transition period 'has it all', which will do much to sustain it. Infrastructure back to the dawn of railways in use unchanged, and everything built after; traction and stock designs well over a half century old still in routine service, and preserved 'oldies' allowed out for a run with no difficulty; and the new traction and stock designs that are still to be seen now, appearing and going into service, (and sometimes not long after to the scrap lines).

 

On the N7 I hope we get the full selection, Belpaire and round top, as the original material suggested. The Belpaire version may have been declining in numbers by the time BR came along, but they were in service, and variety (see above para.) is a major attraction for me.

 

Yes, it probably does. Over and over and over again!

 

Other periods have their own claims to immortality, though. 

 

The Big Four, when they got into their stride, gave us a Golden Age (late Twenties, probably, for the GW, late Thirties for the others),

 

The variety of late pre-Grouping and early Grouping I have touched upon already, as this is where the K85/N7 sits. 

 

The Great War saw some of the finest work put in by the pre-Grouping companies and their locomotive designs, with all sorts of interesting traffic and routings, though even the centennial anniversaries of these bleak years seem to have produced little more for the standard gauge modeller than an N Gauge tank train and a bogus ambulance train in OO. 

 

The Edwardian years, and those immediately before the Great War, saw the introduction of most of the pre-Grouping designs that are of interest to the BR modeller.  It was a fascinating time, as recognisably modern locomotive and rolling stock designs gradually supplanted older Victorian types, but it was the apogee of the peace-time railway system and has not been surpassed in variety, the opulence of the liveries or the gracefulness of design.

 

Soon we will have a top-link Victorian express locomotive in the form of the Stirling Single of 1874.  This, if you believe the complete tosh that is the Era/Epoch system, is not even "pre-Grouping", but "Pioneering".

 

There is much to celebrate.  But I would encourage accurate pre-Grouping RTR models over inaccurate, if pretty, Collectors' pieces, and I would encourage them out of the cabinet and onto the layout!

 

Are we not in a catch 22 situation though? Until there is a significant number of models for any particular era many people don't model it meaning little demand and until there is demand...

 

There must be a tipping point at which availability itself increases demand, but where that is I have no idea.

 

Roy

 

Yes.  I have always maintained that there is an element of "build it and they will come", but I suspect any given pre-1948 period will be a minority interest, the size of the minorities decreasing the further back we go. 

 

Then again, I suspect that the days when you could sell everyone in the mass market the same RTR products, in the same liveries and confined to the same narrow time periods may be behind us in any case. There have been many examples of shorter production runs and one niche has recently pulled itself, bit by bit, into mainstream RTR; OO9.  I don't believe OO9 will ever be anything but a niche.  A really great niche, and a rather larger niche as a result of RTR support, but a niche nonetheless.  Some of the earlier periods in standard gauge may develop, slowly, in a similar way.

 

There will never be the degree of comprehensive representation of an earlier period that there is with the Transition Era, particularly where stock is concerned, but I don't see that as a bad thing.  I'm all for a start in RTR, with RTR bashing and kit-building to supplement.  There will always be a need for non-RTR modelling in earlier periods, with the variety, individualism and gradual acquisition of skills that result.

 

Eschewing the look-a-like locomotive studs and carriage rakes of the BR-era RTR modeller undoubtedly takes a lot more time and some hard-to-acquire skill, and that will doubtless always be the case.  Thus some will always model with what is available, whether it was their first choice or no.  There is much to be said for this approach!

 

But, an individualistic collection of stock, while it takes time and developing skill, is frankly, going to be personally more satisfying and, I daresay, potentially more interesting!  More RTR support of earlier periods gives modellers that vital start in them and would, I expect, encourage more variety and originality in the choice of subject than we see at present.

Edited May 21, 2017 by Edwardian

[adb968008]

I'd be surprised if the N7 isn't being tooled to cover a maximum possible number of ranges, periods and appearances, and that the announcements so far is just the first of many.

Edited May 21, 2017 by adb968008

[Dunsignalling]

Yes, it probably does. Over and over and over again!

 

Other periods have their own claims to immortality, though. 

 

The Big Four, when they got into their stride, gave us a Golden Age (late Twenties, probably, for the GW, late Thirties for the others),

 

The variety of late pre-Grouping and early Grouping I have touched upon already, as this is where the K85/N7 sits. 

 

The Great War saw some of the finest work put in by the pre-Grouping companies and their locomotive designs, with all sorts of interesting traffic and routings, though even the centennial anniversaries of these bleak years seem to have produced little more for the standard gauge modeller than an N Gauge tank train and a bogus ambulance train in OO. 

 

The Edwardian years, and those immediately before the Great War, saw the introduction of most of the pre-Grouping designs that are of interest to the BR modeller.  It was a fascinating time, as recognisably modern locomotive and rolling stock designs gradually supplanted older Victorian types, but it was the apogee of the peace-time railway system and has not been surpassed in variety, the opulence of the liveries or the gracefulness of design.

 

Soon we will have a top-link Victorian express locomotive in the form of the Stirling Single of 1874.  This, if you believe the complete tosh that is the Era/Epoch system, is not even "pre-Grouping", but "Pioneering".

 

There is much to celebrate.  But I would encourage accurate pre-Grouping RTR models over inaccurate, if pretty, Collectors' pieces, and I would encourage them out of the cabinet and onto the layout!

 

 

Yes.  I have always maintained that there is an element of "build it and they will come", but I suspect any given pre-1948 period will be a minority interest, the size of the minorities decreasing the further back we go. 

 

Then again, I suspect that the days when you could sell everyone in the mass market the same RTR products, in the same liveries and confined to the same narrow time periods may be behind us in any case. There have been many examples of shorter production runs and one niche has recently pulled itself, bit by bit, into mainstream RTR; OO9.  I don't believe OO9 will ever be anything but a niche.  A really great niche, and a rather larger niche as a result of RTR support, but a niche nonetheless.  Some of the earlier periods in standard gauge may develop, slowly, in a similar way.

 

There will never be the degree of comprehensive representation of an earlier period that there is with the Transition Era, particularly where stock is concerned, but I don't see that as a bad thing.  I'm all for a start in RTR, with RTR bashing and kit-building to supplement.  There will always be a need for non-RTR modelling in earlier periods, with the variety, individualism and gradual acquisition of skills that result.

 

Eschewing the look-a-like locomotive studs and carriage rakes of the BR-era RTR modeller undoubtedly takes a lot more time and some hard-to-acquire skill, and that will doubtless always be the case.  Thus some will always model with what is available, whether it was their first choice or no.  There is much to be said for this approach!

 

But, an individualistic collection of stock, while it takes time and developing skill, is frankly, going to be personally more satisfying and, I daresay, potentially more interesting!  More RTR support of earlier periods gives modellers that vital start in them and would, I expect, encourage more variety and originality in the choice of subject than we see at present.

The current situation regarding r-t-r production batch sizes, combined with the fact that most of the more popular transition era prototypes (locos, at any rate) have already been done should encourage the manufacturers to cover more subjects from outside the established mainstream.  

 

That said, I would have expected Oxford, at this relatively early stage in their development, to pick a prototype with more general appeal at both ends of its existence. That would, for me at least, mean the possibility of an elaborate pre-WW1 livery, combined with survival fairly unaltered in goodish numbers into BR service (the later the better).

 

One doesn't need to look too far beyond the N7 to find types that fulfil both criteria; Classes J67, 68 and 69 spring very quickly to mind and they would also tap into the market for irresistibly cute small tank locos identified by the Pecketts and Adams Radials.   

 

I've never harboured any objection to Oxford making an early K85/N7, but I have thought from the word go that the particular sub-class chosen might not represent an optimum commercial decision for a firm trying to establish itself in model railways. Rather, it is something better contemplated from a fairly commanding market position.

 

As others have stated, a model of one or more of the round-topped firebox variants is almost certain to follow but, if the initial offerings don't sell quickly, such developments are likely to be slower. 

 

As for constructing a collection of models to satisfy ones own preferences, I feel much more inclined to do that in another scale where my efforts are less likely to be confused with (or unfavourably compared with) off-the-peg models.  

 

John

Edited May 21, 2017 by Dunsignalling

[GreenGiraffe22]

The early 40s seem to be getting a lot of attention at the moment, it is purely by chance I've gotten back into the hobby and chosen that era, has it become a popular era to model or is it just a fluke?

[Edwardian]

The early 40s seem to be getting a lot of attention at the moment, it is purely by chance I've gotten back into the hobby and chosen that era, has it become a popular era to model or is it just a fluke?

 

That's interesting.  I've noticed a lot of 1947 Great Western stuff.  Aside from Overlord and Kingswear, I don't recall seeing much early '40s stuff, but take your word for it.

 

The decade 1938-1947 is probably quite do-able RTR.  Before then, the earlier it gets the harder it gets.

 

I have been building up stock for a 1935 layout for some decades now.  Every single coach has had to be kit-built.  That was until Hornby released their new Colletts.  Now I have duplicates!

 

In RTR terms, even 1935 is Another Country!

[Andy Hayter]

Fluke I think.

 

We tend to latch on to those things that support our values (and not just modelling, but let's not go there please).

 

I returned to UK modelling some 4 years ago and met the wave of C Classes, LBSCR E4s, SECR Terriers, GNR Atlantics, LNWR coal tanks and to come a whole host of goodies.

When I left in the early 90s I had wanted to model pre-grouping so this seemed like the answer to a p®ayer.   But reality is that in the totality the number of models is miniscule - worse even than early 40's.

 

Ideas  and centres of excellence/encouragement change with time.   Sometimes a single layout can set the "standard" for many years.  Ashburton, The long drag, one of Tony wrights earlier former LNER mainline efforts spring to mind.  Strangely Buckingham which so many admire (and Me, Me, Me), did not create the same impact on rtr productions - or did it?  Did the City of Truro, GWR clerestory coaches, Caledonian and Midland singles result?

 

Make hay while the sun shines and enjoy it, for tomorrow there may be a dearth of new models. 

 

 

Edit:  Do you not just have to love Microscoff short cuts.

p®ayer was meant to be a clever combination of payer and prayer - as in p( r ) ayer

Edited May 21, 2017 by Andy Hayter

[No Decorum]

Fluke I think.

 

Edit:  Do you not just have to love Microscoff short cuts.

p®ayer was meant to be a clever combination of payer and prayer - as in p( r ) ayer

Perhaps it isn’t a fluke. Perhaps GreenGiraffe22 has just bought a lot of stuff and upset market research.

I wondered about the prayer. I thought it was a bit much to ban the word as fouling the “no religion” rule! As for Microsoft, I don’t think I’ve come across any software as hopeless as its grammar checker. Perhaps I haven’t looked hard enough.