Jump to content

RTR North Eastern Railway Locomotives - A discussion.


Recommended Posts

Hi All,

 

I thought I'd start a thread about the prospects for NER locos to be produced RTR. I've done this in the Hornby forum, as said manufacturer is the only one to date to produce a locomotive of NER origin for the RTR market, but the arguement applies to all manufacturers. I know Bachmann will be producing an NER designed loco (J72) soon, but I'm not having a thread in each forum!

 

I am an avid fan of all things Southern, but even I feel that (as one of the larger pre-grouping companies) the NER is in need of more models, in much the same way as Scotland. I know of one vocal exponent on here, and I imagine there are others who are (like myself, despite the fact I'm unlikely to model it!)  rooting for the NER to finally get an RTR model. I think most people are agreed that a J21 would be a good thing.

 

The Southern has been blessed recently, which is fair enough: the companies have seen it as profitable, and there are good reasons for that, but I think (as a Southern modeller!) that the NER and Scotland need their turn now whilst we save up to pay for all the goodies.

 

Finally, another thing; as a Southen modeller I have no interest in any of Hornby's announcements this year beyond some NCB wagons and being overjoyed for modellers of the NBR and also Scottish Railways in general! I have slightly more interest in Bachmann's (That H1 is beautiful!), but anything post 1923 (beyond the NCB wagons) is of little interest to me at present!

 

I'll leave it there: discuss to your heart's content!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As a Scottish modeller who also happens to have a strong interest in the NE’s Northern Division in BR days I’m inclined to agree that some more NE RTR would be nice and it is worth exploring. The J21 is certainly a good choice given it’s wide range. They could be seen in Scotland on the Eyemouth branch and right up the Tweed Valley to St Boswells and from the other direction up the Border Counties to Hawick.

On the other hand. The last years of NE steam are now very modellable and only the J27 is required to complete motive power requirements for the 1962-67 era.

 

D4

Link to post
Share on other sites

RTR NER steam would be great- as far as I am aware Bachmann's upcoming J72 is the first (accurate) RTR available in pre-1923 condition. I would have thought Bachmann might be more likely to do the J21 (in fact I consider it a likely prospect for next year if J72 sales are strong) but I would like a J27 as well of course. A D20 or an Atlantic would be really nice but whatever they do I hope they do them in pre-1923 as well as LNER and BR liveries. The NER Green livery is simply gorgeous and oddly I find it looks better than LNER even though they are nearly identical.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be lovely to see a nice cross section of the NER originating rolling stock produced. As you have mentioned the J72 (E1) is great but it doesn't cover the first batch. The Q6 (T2) is again a lovely NER beast . The J21/ J24  (C and P's, or is that the other way round?) are similar but the differences in the wheel base and the splasher size but the J26/J27 (P2/P3) are brutish in the same way as the Q6. This covers a fair bit of mid sized locos until you start to look at the B16 (S1?) arrangements. The D20 is also a nice loco! I think if we received these in RTR the cup would overflow'th 

 

I rather like the look of the NER coaching stock. I have collected a small selection the Clerestory coachs and some others which I think gets away from the express long haul duties which the RTR companies tend to look for, though I think this is slowly changing. The Rails dynano coach does suggest that it would be possible for Rapido to look at the standard run clerestories as changing the under frame and bogies to the standard would be easier than the specialized one they have done (also a lot of the paneling is similar so the CAD work would be reduced) I just hope they look to do this in the future to expand the ranges that are available. 

 

The wagons tend to be similar to every one elses except my vote for the RTR pole each year is the timber 20T hopper wagon which was so iconic of the NER and I can see a market in NER, LNER, BR and NCB liveries. The other smaller hoppers do look interesting through and the research is fairly well easily accessible through HMRS and other document holders! 

 

So yes I believe there is rich seam of RTR models possible. Also the market has been tapped by Hornby and Bachmann to access the enlarged market of modelers interested in the North east and Scotland! as it shows that NER locos and stock moved across to Carlisle, north to Edinburgh, south to Peterborough let alone Leeds, and no doubt further afield as excursion and access allowed!  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Being interested in the GCR, I too would very much appreciate an A5!  Similar to the D11 in that you have two versions over 2 regions, would certainly be another type that would probably fit Bachmann's to do list well, but at this point I'm unsure if we'd see any other Great Central types, only reason we got a J11 was due to Bachmann wanting to use the tender tooling a third time.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Q663389

I also believe the Robinson A5 covered a large geographical location. For me they were found on the Saltburn branch and at Darlington.

A5/2's, my uncle drove them and A8's on this service for years.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would add the following to those listed above.  LNER numbers quoted, NER in brackets.

 

A G5(O)  0-4-4t for branch line work and some suburban. Either a N8(B) and N9 (N) 0-6-2T. The small but nimble Y7/Y8(H/K) 0-4-0T and possibly the Electrics, EE1, EF1/EB1 and ES1.

 

Y7 and ES1 preserved.  The G5 being a new build at the moment. 

 

Then there are the Thompson rebuilds.  Probably unlikely, but you never know.

 

But for end of LNER and BR modellers there are a number of ready to run models. 

Peppercorn A1 and A2, Gresley A3 and A4, B1, D49 though Railroad, J36, J39, J72, K1, L1, Q6, V2, V1/V3 and EM1.  Other LNER locos wandered into NER/Sc territory and even Castle's and Hall's just to name 2 I know of.

 

I for one am hoping for a J21 next, otherwise its a hunt to find a kit.

 

Mark in Oz

Link to post
Share on other sites

...B16 (NER S3) ...  NER locos and stock moved across to Carlisle, north to Edinburgh, south to Peterborough let alone Leeds, and no doubt further afield as excursion and access allowed!  

 This class I feel is a natural fit for Hornby's 'big engine' penchant. Much the same type of machine as the Southern's S15, and I should guess considered over its working lifetime the NER loco design that accumulated more miles off the NER section than any other. They were regular visitors on through freight to KX and Neasden to the end of steam operation on ER, and worked West onto LMR too.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Most 

 

So yes I believe there is rich seam of RTR models possible. Also the market has been tapped by Hornby and Bachmann to access the enlarged market of modelers interested in the North east and Scotland! as it shows that NER locos and stock moved across to Carlisle, north to Edinburgh, south to Peterborough let alone Leeds, and no doubt further afield as excursion and access allowed!  

Most of the pre group railway companies provide a rich seam for the manufacturers. And therein lies the problem for those that rely on the RTR producers. What do you choose to produce? I believe the answer is clearer than than many who indulge in wish lists may realise. 

 

The preferred approach to producing a new RTR  model appears to be based upon scanning the prototype to create the data required. So that limits you to those that have been preserved. That also means a prototype that lasted from the 1910's or earlier, through the Big Four and into early BR. Great, all those variations of liveries, etc. that can be produced from one basic model to spread the development costs. But how often are new models introduced (ignoring livery variations)?.

 

The kit manufacturers have already mined that seam, but working from GA's photographs, etc. and usually with a personal interest in the prototype, period, etc. hasn't restricted them to what they have produced.Many of the locos listed in this thread are available as kits.

 

So wishing for a particular model will probably be pretty fruitless. Unless the prototype is preserved and the RTR manufacturers increase their rate of new introductions significantly, then the only likely way to get a particular model is still going to be to build it from a kit or commission someone to do that for you. The likelihood on just one or two of them coming out of a Chinese factory in a blue, red or green  box (other low cost production economies and cardboard colours are available) is fairly slim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had a LNER lined apple green  liveried J72 as a DCC model for years. I chipped it myself as a rather tricky split motor chassis model to deal with and very little space for the chip.

Does the split chassis spec mean it was a Bachmann product? I bought it cheaply s/h.

 

I'd always hoped to be brave enough to tackle a DJH Z Atlantic (the best looking of all British Atlantics) they ran the ECML northwards from York to Waverley.

And of course the fabulous "racing Q" with that raunchily stylish clerestory cab. It seemed the Victorian equivalent of nowadays wearing a US Baseball cap.

 

dh

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

The J27 is preserved—and so is a J21 (if not in especially good condition at present); the G5 is the subject of a new-build. The others would be more problematical.

 

I'd have thought it unlikely that Hornby would do the J21—it's quite similar in appearance to the J15 (both were designed by the elder Worsdell).

 

The J27 and D20 have been offered in 'N' gauge by Union Mills.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The J27 and D20 have been offered in 'N' gauge by Union Mills.

 

Which rather proves a point. Union Mills are effectively a kit producer and assembler, as are OO Works.

 

Perhaps an approach to the latter might bring about what people want, if you can come to a reasonable consensus.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most 

 

 

Most of the pre group railway companies provide a rich seam for the manufacturers. And therein lies the problem for those that rely on the RTR producers. What do you choose to produce? I believe the answer is clearer than than many who indulge in wish lists may realise. 

 

The preferred approach to producing a new RTR  model appears to be based upon scanning the prototype to create the data required. So that limits you to those that have been preserved. That also means a prototype that lasted from the 1910's or earlier, through the Big Four and into early BR. Great, all those variations of liveries, etc. that can be produced from one basic model to spread the development costs. But how often are new models introduced (ignoring livery variations)?.

 

The kit manufacturers have already mined that seam, but working from GA's photographs, etc. and usually with a personal interest in the prototype, period, etc. hasn't restricted them to what they have produced.Many of the locos listed in this thread are available as kits.

 

So wishing for a particular model will probably be pretty fruitless. Unless the prototype is preserved and the RTR manufacturers increase their rate of new introductions significantly, then the only likely way to get a particular model is still going to be to build it from a kit or commission someone to do that for you. The likelihood on just one or two of them coming out of a Chinese factory in a blue, red or green  box (other low cost production economies and cardboard colours are available) is fairly slim.

I can't help but think this analysis is overly pessimistic. There are no K3s, P2s or J11s, Patriots or Unrebuilt Merchant Navys preserved but all have these have been done by the major manufacturers over the last few years. There is a factor of "if it can't wear BR livery it's not worth doing" but even this unfortunate affliction has been ebbing away lately. They say people model what they remember, but I don't think that's true and i think the people saying 'oh well Hornby should make a Class 375/180/91 because youngsters will want to buy what they see' have got it all wrong. I can't remember BR steam, I was born over 20 years after it finished and I don't really want to model the immediate post-privatisation period. I'd much rather model the period from about 1900 up to 1950, particularly pre-war in fact because that was when (personally) the railways were at their peak.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Which rather proves a point. Union Mills are effectively a kit producer and assembler, as are OO Works.

 

Perhaps an approach to the latter might bring about what people want, if you can come to a reasonable consensus.

 

Very feasible, however I imagine that a good proportion of those doing the shouting will then start moaning about the price.

Bernard

Link to post
Share on other sites

For me it’s less wishlisting than trying to build a reasonable case for production of one or two relevant models.

 

D4

 

I'd like to think that I have been trying to build the case for production and the reasons behind it for some time. A lot of this has come from analysis of several sources of information, as well as comparing the releases of various other engines for regions against the available information on those for the North Eastern Region.

 

For many of the introductory engines for the Region to be made, one of the first ways to approach the issue is to think of the area as North East Region, rather than North Eastern Railway. The Region returned as a stand alone area during British Railways, which shows its importance in operation as a geographical area. The other reason for this, is that in order for models to be made engines should have operated during the British Railways period, thus you can run it against other grouping engines, BR standards and other transition diesels and units. Many of these engines have already been made to serve the wider LNE Grouped area. Express Top link engines A1 to A4 are all done, as are group standard engines like V2, B1, K1, O1, L1 which saw use across the main system. A lot of these later examples have been done as Hornby ploughed onwards towards the Great Eastern area, but there were examples that obviously ran elsewhere, including North Eastern. Both Transition diesels and DMUs were also catered for with Bachmann occupying the sector here with a range that has substantially grown. All that was needed was the native North Eastern locomotive power.

 

Thus, NER engines can run in guises from grouping to the end of steam and with many livery variations and periods to market to the buyer, they are all attributes that companies like to see in a model for it to go into production.

 

A lot of this has been covered during discussions before and it was the reasoning I pushed for Q6 to be the engine that would be the vanguard for a new range of engines to serve the area. Yes, Bachmann had inherited a J72 as part of their range, but there was basically no NE Region engine indigenous to the area that had been made since the Merchant Navy model, brought the step change in production methods and new levels of detail and performance.

 

What was needed was an engine that had size, power and status to represent the best of the engineering and longevity that some of the designs that lasted till the end of steam achieved. Q6 was that engine, and raising its profile on forums and debates pushed the issue to gain traction and its popularity grew. Hornby were for me partly a surprising choice, I assumed Bachmann would move for it given their track record in engines such as Super-D, S&DJR​ 7F. However, Hornby were the ones that brought Q6 into RTR and did a great job on the model. Its initial reaction was something of a surprise, as it was ahead of the DJ Models attempt that had already been announced and was later abandoned. The reaction when the latter attempt was made was proof that such a model was really wanted. Threads lit up with ecstatic responses as people rejoiced at the news. All this from one model announcement for an area that just promised one model. When Hornby lifted their Catalogue from the boxes at Warley, people were shocked but pleased, the reaction somewhat muted as one Q6 had been promised. It wasn't that it wasn't wanted, far from it. If anything the hope is that Hornby can expand the range in NER territory further.

 

But the reasons why Q6 could be the start of others to follow still remain true. While, as I've mentioned, other engines such as J21/25, J27, B16/1, B16/2, B16/3, G5, A8 all have the same ability to transcend the period from grouping to North Eastern Regions end of steam - that is not the only evidence that they would be excellent candidates for their inclusion in a range and would make a good business case.

 

I will endeavour to do this (as time and work allows), across a number of posts, to help debate and invite the opinion of others.  I'm grateful for the support that sem34090 has shown in his opening remarks that highlight the issue that some areas are served strongly and others less so. Hopefully I can put forward the reasoning as to why it would make sense to redress this balance, but also that it could apply to other areas equally less well served, like Scotland. This isn't a case of passion over reason, its a case of combining the two and proving that the idea for an NER range is sound and could be profitable. Q6 has made a start, Bachmann's J72 will follow, but as for why more will work - I'll do my best to explain that soon.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The J27 is preserved—and so is a J21 (if not in especially good condition at present); the G5 is the subject of a new-build. The others would be more problematical.

I'd have thought it unlikely that Hornby would do the J21—it's quite similar in appearance to the J15 (both were designed by the elder Worsdell).

The J27 and D20 have been offered in 'N' gauge by Union Mills.

It could make the J21 an easy project for Hornby considering the similarities to the J15.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to register my support for NER RTR.

 

I do so with some caution, because, the tendency of manufacturers to confine their efforts to types and conditions that were seen on the Nationalised system means that there may be nothing down the line for me.

 

Clearly BR and LNER versions are a given, but if pre-Grouping, particularly pre-Great War, versions can be accommodated, I would be pathetically grateful. 

 

A show-stopper express locomotive is often a good bet.  I suppose the Atlantic would be a strong candidate, but, for me, a M Class 4-4-0 would be an ideal choice, allowing a tie-in with the National Collection.

 

I always tend towards more modest, workaday, types, as I find these simply more useful. 

 

My own NER loco wish-list (not specifically RTR wish-list, as one day I hope to have the skills for advanced kit and scratch builds), contains a number of prototypes that almost certainly would never be tackled by an RTR manufacturers, but also several that might:

 

Fletcher 901 Class 2-4-0.

Fletcher 1440 Class 2-4-0

Tenant 1463 Class 2-4-0 - another NRM tie-in

Bouch 1001 Class 0-6-0

Fletcher 398 Class 0-6-0

TW Worsdell C Class 0-6-0 (J21)

W Worsdell P Class 0-6-0 (J24)

W Worsdell P1 Class 0-6-0 (J25)

Fletcher G6 0-4-4BTP

TW Worsdell Class A 2-4-2T (F8)

TW Worsdell Class B 0-6-2T (N8)

 

In terms of rolling stock, I would suggest that some of the mineral hoppers would be a good idea and, for coaches, I would prefer the ubiquitous bogie clerestories.  Later types would be more limiting.

Edited by Edwardian
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to register my support for NER RTR.

 

I do so with some caution, because, the tendency of manufacturers to confine their efforts to types and conditions that were seen on the Nationalised system means that there may be nothing down the line for me.

 

Clearly BR and LNER versions are a given, but if pre-Grouping, particularly pre-Great War, versions can be accommodated, I would be pathetically grateful. 

 

A show-stopper express locomotive is often a good bet.  I suppose the Atlantic would be a strong candidate, but, for me, a M Class 4-4-0 would be an ideal choice, allowing a tie-in with the National Collection.

 

I always tend towards more modest, workaday, types, as I find these simply more useful. 

 

My own NER loco wish-list (not specifically RTR wish-list, as one day I hope to have the skills for advanced kit and scratch builds), contains a number of prototypes that almost certainly would never be tackled by an RTR manufacturers, but also several that might:

 

Fletcher 901 Class 2-4-0.

Fletcher 1440 Class 2-4-0

Tenant 1463 Class 2-4-0 - another NRM tie-in

Bouch 1001 Class 0-6-0

Fletcher 398 Class 0-6-0

TW Worsdell C Class 0-6-0 (J21)

W Worsdell P Class 0-6-0 (J24)

W Worsdell P1 Class 0-6-0 (J25)

Fletcher G6 0-4-4BTP

TW Worsdell Class A 2-4-2T (F8)

TW Worsdell Class B 0-6-2T (N8)

 

In terms of rolling stock, I would suggest that some of the mineral hoppers would be a good idea and, for coaches, I would prefer the ubiquitous bogie clerestories.  Later types would be more limiting.

 

Any of the above would be nice.

 

Also these please. !!.

 

Aerolite perfect for a NRM special with a nice Inspection Saloon in tow.

 

A7 and a T1  heavy weight freight power

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who lived in Murton, Co Durham as a kid And who played both on the colliery lines and the main east-west line through Murton Town station, I confess I cannot remember the (basically two) types of loco I saw apart from the colliery saddle tank hauling coal and a larger passenger train loco. I think green but probably black.

 

I have tried Google but still nothing rings a bell, as in ‘yes thats definitely the one’.

 

Rob

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
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.