Jump to content
 

Oxford N7


45568
 Share

Recommended Posts

This may add confusion to the grey livery discussion

 

https://www.gersociety.org.uk/index.php/locomotives/information-leaflets/ger-loco-grey

 

In the GERS Journal a full specification of grey livery was published, but sadly no colour photographs of GER locos taken in c1920!

 

I doubt we will ever know what is correct, but ......

 

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that searching all the 3D model websites every time something new came out is incredibly time-consuming and despite what people think, magazine staff members aren't numerous.

 

You've also got the issue of printing the models. The CAD renders look lovely, often the actual prints will look poor next to your nice injection-moulded loco. Worse still, the modeller still needs to assemble and paint the results. It's not unreasonable to suggest that building a conventional kit would be easier if you want to match the standard of finish.

 

That's the beauty of RMweb, this information can be crowdsourced.

 

The quality can be poor sometimes, however, things have been improving 3D Print wise. This was something a friend of mine bought from Smallbrook Studio's and it's turned out quite well   :) - But as you say, Phil, you've got a lot of things to be doing, as you have the DVD, modelling and then writing articles visiting shows and home layouts. You all do a lot for the model railway community :) 

post-32040-0-24316200-1548530046_thumb.jpg

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not just the cab I'm afraid. Oxford have said they will not release either of the first 2 locos as they would need to tool for a different boiler with the dome set further back.

 

I have come across some further information on the livery for this period from the RCTS volume 9A (so don't shoot the messenger!) it states:- "No. 1000 was turned out painted in light grey with black panelling and red lining. It had standard G.E.R. transfer lettering in gold with red shading. No 1001 however, received ultramarine blue livery with black edging and red lining. No. 1000 was never painted blue and worked throughout the 1914-18 war in the light grey colour until 1921 when it received a coat of shop lead grey. The ten engines built during 1921 were all finished in this shop lead colour. The cab fronts and boiler bands were black and the lettering was yellow, shaded black. At this time the quality of the blue paint could not be guaranteed and was four times the pre-war price. Cast brass numberplates were fitted. Later in 1921 train control was introduced on the GER and the lettering on the side tanks was painted out and replaced by the engine's number in 19in. high figures in middle chrome yellow. This was the livery in which Nos. 1000-11 entered L.N.E.R. stock"

 

The grey on the Oxford model is a rather light shade and I wonder if it should have been a darker 'lead' shade! One has sympathy for the manufacturers trying to work off photographs when everything was grey and the light would play tricks on the researcher. Certainly the yellow lettering would stand better contrast against a darker grey (perhaps something closer to the GWR wagon colour). Time was when a model was supplied with a loco crew. I can see the day when it comes with a set of platform figures of 2 people arguing about the colour scheme on the loco!

:no:

 

For what it is worth, the preserved J15 was painted in GER grey during the 1980's and it wasn't too far off the colour of the N7; perhaps a shade darker but nowhere near GWR grey!

The shade has always been described as "French Grey" and was previously used by the GER as an undercoat until 1915.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not just the cab I'm afraid. Oxford have said they will not release either of the first 2 locos as they would need to tool for a different boiler with the dome set further back.

 

I have come across some further information on the livery for this period from the RCTS volume 9A (so don't shoot the messenger!) it states:- "No. 1000 was turned out painted in light grey with black panelling and red lining. It had standard G.E.R. transfer lettering in gold with red shading. No 1001 however, received ultramarine blue livery with black edging and red lining. No. 1000 was never painted blue and worked throughout the 1914-18 war in the light grey colour until 1921 when it received a coat of shop lead grey. The ten engines built during 1921 were all finished in this shop lead colour. The cab fronts and boiler bands were black and the lettering was yellow, shaded black. At this time the quality of the blue paint could not be guaranteed and was four times the pre-war price. Cast brass numberplates were fitted. Later in 1921 train control was introduced on the GER and the lettering on the side tanks was painted out and replaced by the engine's number in 19in. high figures in middle chrome yellow. This was the livery in which Nos. 1000-11 entered L.N.E.R. stock"

 

The grey on the Oxford model is a rather light shade and I wonder if it should have been a darker 'lead' shade! One has sympathy for the manufacturers trying to work off photographs when everything was grey and the light would play tricks on the researcher. Certainly the yellow lettering would stand better contrast against a darker grey (perhaps something closer to the GWR wagon colour). Time was when a model was supplied with a loco crew. I can see the day when it comes with a set of platform figures of 2 people arguing about the colour scheme on the loco!

:no:

 

There's a nice pic of 1002 in unlined grey with GER on the sidetanks in 1921 on p55 of Yeadon's Register vol 27. Interestingly, there is a note which states, 'nos 1001 and 1002 to 1011 remained in grey after their first LNER repair'. It goes on to say that a small LNER number plate was substituted for the large GER one, which was one quite visible change.

 

Edited to remove references to details already discussed above.

Edited by Dick Turpin
Link to post
Share on other sites

Steam lasted on the Liverpool Street Suburban services until November 1960, In fact I think all official steam services to Liverpool St had finished by then. The only N7 ' s still operating beyond that date as far as I am aware were on the North Woolwich branch which remained steam operated until 1962, but even then the N7's were starting to be replaced by redundant L1's. Strangely, once steam finished in Liverpool St the North Woolwich branch was operated by crews from Enfield Town shed who had to travel to Sratford and back at the beginning and end of each shift.

 

When was the 'Woolwich Link' disbanded at Stratford?

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a nice pic of 1002 in unlined grey with GER on the sidetanks in 1921 on p55 of Yeadon's Register vol 27. Interestingly, there is a note which states, 'nos 1001 and 1002 to 1011 remained in grey after their first LNER repair'. It goes on to say that a small LNER number plate was substituted for the large GER one, which was one quite visible change.

 

Edited to remove references to details already discussed above.

Indeed a nice photo and one that shows the use of drop shading on the GER lettering to make it visible against a very light grey background. Over the page we see 2 photos, of 1003 and 1011, showing the 1921 'train control' numbers without drop shading. These stand out quite well against their grey background. This evidence supports the RCTS reference to a darker shade of grey being applied in 1921, perhaps in anticipation of 'train control'. If this is the case then it appears that Oxford have applied 1921 numbers on 1914 light grey. I am not complaining and I admire Oxford for venturing into the pre-grouping era before the widespread use of colour photography upon which to base accurate research.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The front coupling looks like it sticks out quite far.

The coupling and NEM pocket assembly is 'push fitted' into its slot at the front of the loco and lifts out very easily with no need for tools. It can always be pushed back into place if running bunker first in which case it is hidden behind the leading vehicle of the train. No big deal for me anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I should note that a 3d printed quint-art set (including shell, chassis and interior, requiring plundering bogies from Hornby Railroad Gresley carriages) is currently under development for a Model Railway Club layout. As with all 3d printed items, it will be more like a kit than a ready to run item, but will hopefully at least be easier to assemble than an etched brass kit.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

d

 

The front coupling looks like it sticks out quite far.

It does. The rear coupling is better, but visually estimated neither end has the coupler pocket face set to the suggested NEM position behind the furthest protruding structure on the vehicle ends.

 

I think its been mentioned the design of the prototype means that there is little room for the NEM pockets.

There's ample room at the front, if the designer had 'buried' the coupler pocket mount inside the keeper plate moulding, concealed between the representations of the frame plates. One look at Bachmann's 57xx 0-6-0T which shares a similar distance (scale for 7') from leading axle to buffer faces shows what their designer did to achieve correct coupler pocket position. The compromise is that the securing screw by which the mechanism is attached to the body is then concealed underneath the coupler pocket.

 

This kind of know how shows that experience pays, and breaking into this product market isn't quite as easy as some imagine. I'll be making my own mod to get a Kadee correctly positioned once I have the model; possibly guided by someone demonstrating what they have done on the GER release?

 

The real problem is at the rear of this model, where the rear truck axle (centred just four and a half feet behind the buffer faces) will foul the 'swallow tail' of the coupler, if the coupler pocket is correctly positioned. A small 'nudge' of the coupler pocket position outboard will fix this, and those of us willing to trim the coupler pocket face and the tails of the coupler can easily move our chosen coupler inboard to the desired position with an off-standard mod.

 

(There is an alternative NEM mounting to solve this type of problem, but to date only the now extinct Hobbyco/ViTrains models of classes 37 and 47 have had this fitting in OO, and apart from their couplers with these locos, none of the commonly used OO RTR couplers have the matching fitting, so really a non-starter.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

(There is an alternative NEM mounting to solve this type of problem, but to date only the now extinct Hobbyco/ViTrains models of classes 37 and 47 have had this fitting in OO, and apart from their couplers with these locos, none of the commonly used OO RTR couplers have the matching fitting, so really a non-starter.)

 That comment keeps on cropping up and with a knife and a file it is perfectly possible to make any NEM362 coupling fit a NEM363 socket

Link to post
Share on other sites

 That comment keeps on cropping up and with a knife and a file it is perfectly possible to make any NEM362 coupling fit a NEM363 socket

While that's true, show me the business willing to tell its customers 'with a knife and a file it is perfectly possible to make any NEM362 coupling fit a NEM363 socket' as the route to add a coupler, were that fitting provided.

 

Either an effort to make matching fitting couplers available, or don't bother from a commercial perspective. This is RTR product.

Link to post
Share on other sites

While that's true, show me the business willing to tell its customers 'with a knife and a file it is perfectly possible to make any NEM362 coupling fit a NEM363 socket' as the route to add a coupler, were that fitting provided.

 

Either an effort to make matching fitting couplers available, or don't bother from a commercial perspective. This is RTR product.

As no one currently uses a NEM363 on UK models its hardly an issue but their have been a couple of models at least recently where such a mount would be of benefit and being  a RTR product then that would obviously be supplied with NEM363 tension locks as Vi Trains did - the issue arises when fitting other couplings like Kadees but most Kadee users are adept at adopting / modifying to fit models.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/27/2019 at 9:32 PM, Londoner said:

 

When was the 'Woolwich Link' disbanded at Stratford?

I don’t know. I am guessing here, but  when steam finished in Liverpool St Stratford must have been closed as a Steam shed. Steam had been running down at Stratford for a couple of years since all the GE line Britannia’s had been allocated to Norwich, and then the Clacton line was fully electrified. There was hardly any point in keeping those facilities for a handful of N7’s on the Woolwich branch.

I don’t know if anyone has any more accurate information.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

In September 1962 Stratford had an allocation of about 50 steam locos, including J15, V3, B1, 57xx, L1, J69, Class 4 2-6-4T, Class 2 2-6-0 as well as N7. All regular steam in East Anglia finished on 9 September 1962, except at March which closed 25 November 1963.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, PaulG said:

In September 1962 Stratford had an allocation of about 50 steam locos, including J15, V3, B1, 57xx, L1, J69, Class 4 2-6-4T, Class 2 2-6-0 as well as N7. All regular steam in East Anglia finished on 9 September 1962, except at March which closed 25 November 1963.

First time I've seen mention of Pannier's allocated to Stratford - not doubting you, just new to me! What were they used on? Only previous mention I've seen is of a 94xx that was trialled at Temple Mills. There's doubt as to whether those 2MT's actually did anything as they were there so briefly. I've only ever seen a shot of one light engine at Stratford Low Level. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, NXEA! said:

First time I've seen mention of Pannier's allocated to Stratford - not doubting you, just new to me! What were they used on? Only previous mention I've seen is of a 94xx that was trialled at Temple Mills. There's doubt as to whether those 2MT's actually did anything as they were there so briefly. I've only ever seen a shot of one light engine at Stratford Low Level. 

 

I understood 9401 was allocated to Stratford 1/57 to 8/57 for trials in Temple Mills Marshalling Yards, London and this is what I quote in my East Anglian 4mm Modelling document. But BRDatabase (where I quickly abstracted above) quotes "57XX class 9400 was allocated to Stratford 9/1962." I would be interested to know more.

 

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PaulG said:

 

I understood 9401 was allocated to Stratford 1/57 to 8/57 for trials in Temple Mills Marshalling Yards, London and this is what I quote in my East Anglian 4mm Modelling document. But BRDatabase (where I quickly abstracted above) quotes "57XX class 9400 was allocated to Stratford 9/1962." I would be interested to know more.

 

Paul

Ah you're the person that put that document together! It's both a blessing and a curse as you could use it to justify all kinds of weird and wonderful traction that you don't actually need...  :D 

 

It appears its a typo - having just checked the same source, condensing Panniers 9700/01 were based at Stratford from 1950-1963/61 respectively. I assume they were based there for working over some LT lines - I doubt they would've worked onto the Central Line as that was a J15 job, so I suspect they were shedded there for Smithfields-Stratford/Temple Mills transfer freight (only my supposition). Why Stratford I don't know, as the others were based at either Old Oak Common or Southall. To be honest, I'm not sure there was any direct freight between Smithfields and Stratford, as I'd always understood freight from Smithfields went via the Circle Line to the Western, and there's no obvious route between the two. Getting a bit off topic now! 

 

 

Edited by NXEA!
Link to post
Share on other sites

Still off topic but 9401 was also tried by 30A on the Hertford suburbans where it performed ok but was tight on water. A whole load of "dead" GW engines also passed through Stratford in the early 60s (mostly from Old Oak Common) en route to Plaistow where they were cut up by Mumfords. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Interesting that Panniers were tried and tested in so many places, and ultimately adopted by LT too.

 

i guess had it not been for the class 08, the Pannier would have become BRs standard shunting loco... that must have grated in the LMS orientated design team, perhaps that’s why the 08 was adopted in such haste ahead of anything else diesel powered.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

 

1 hour ago, Gilwell Park said:

The RCTS books quote that 78023 worked a special goods on the Chingford branch on 2/8/62.I do not believe that any 57xx were ever allocated to 30A, although I would love to be proved wrong.  Roger

 

 

And I’m pretty damn sure none of the 97xx variants were either. Where does this weird notion come from?

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...