Rails of Sheffield/Dapol/NRM Announce OO gauge Stroudley A1/A1X

[ianmaccormac]

Chimney tops in phosphor bronze?

[G-BOAF]

The safety valves protrude too far out of the dome. While the valve arms are curved, the shouldn't stick out from the top so much. Compare with this picture of Stepney (in the 1960s, so mechanically more or less ex-BR)

 

 

[Edwardian]

This is excellent news.  I remain very happy with my pre-orders and will now be adding a few more!

 

The samples look crisp and refined. As samples, clearly there are still some minor decorative issues, but we are assured that they are in hand.  Previous changes show the Rails-Dapol partnership react well to feedback and changes have been made.  Frankly, we're down to the level of fettling that I would not hesitate to undertake myself, knowing that I'd already got a better model than the alternative. Rails' SE&CR 751 just makes Hornby's spoiler loco entirely redundant.  Waiting pays.

 

Particularly welcome for me is 643 in the 1905 umber livery, perfect for motor train working and sits well with the Bachmann LB&SC locos.

 

A balloon trailer anyone?

[Edwardian]

1 minute ago, G-BOAF said:

The safety valves protrude too far out of the dome. While the valve arms are curved, the shouldn't stick out from the top so much. Compare with this picture of Stepney (in the 1960s, so mechanically more or less ex-BR)

 

 

 

Well I think that is an adjustment that any modeller could make.  At least the balance springs are a prototypical shape and colour.  I will take them over the little gold sticks available elsewhere. 

[JSpencer]

7 hours ago, mikesndbs said:

 

Excellent news, I may then weaken and order 32650 then  shhhhhhhh

 

Me too.…. (Edit: though maybe I will go for Fishbourne - its the exact same loco, which is preserved).

 

Good to see they have now included the steam blower pipe on the SECR version (as per photos). This was the only item missing which Hornby's actually has.

 

Surprised there is no Fenchurch in A1 condition as she is currently preserved.

 

Edited September 13, 2019 by JSpencer

[mervyn]

 That was a nice surprise in my e mail this afternoon . Just ordered an IOW version ,nice to see that this version is being done looking forward to it 

[Miss Prism]

6 hours ago, woodenhead said:

My only small criticism might be the plain black chimneys - couldn't they have been a single piece instead of having the separate top, the join is very obvious.

 

They could not be moulded as a single piece, they have to be two pieces. Whether the join can be improved is another matter.

 

[Miss Prism]

Comments on livery of GWR No 6  (comment based on what is portrayed in the Rails advert)

 

The red line inside the (printed I assume) numberplate perimeter should not be present. The Westinghouse pump should I think be green (there's no reason for it to be black). The safety valves and their levers, the lubricators, side clacks, lance cock, condenser pipes, and the plumbing for the Westinghouse pump should not be bare brass/copper, but should be green or black (according with the colour adjacent on the body). Edit: however, I understand the tank tops were black when the GWR took these locos over, and that now inclines me to think the condenser pipes would probably be wholly black.

 

I think the cab spectacle plate surrounds would be painted (green). Probably the only thing in bare metal would be the whistles. Tank top recess, tank fillers and steam exhausts would normally be black, but the one-off nature of these locos means they could have continued the green on the rounded top of the tanks, so I wouldn't want to be picky over the matter. Again, given that these areas were black when the GWR took over the locos, there is no reason to think they continued to be anything other than black.

 

Cab interior should be green, even the lower half of the rear face, because it is contiguous with the upper half. The brake handle should be black, not red.
 

Edited September 14, 2019 by Miss Prism
post edited, somewhat messily, in the light of info on the state of the engines before being absorbed by the GWR

[PaulRhB]

19 hours ago, Oliver Rails said:

 

The DCC Ready and fitted versions will come with a speaker pre-fitted so should sound ever be required it is simply a case of adding a decoder.

Oliver, what make of decoder is it in the DCC fitted Terriers please?

[CF MRC]

Very pretty little engines, but unfortunately not quite there yet.

 

The smokebox door and chimney / dome are the ‘features’ of a locomotive.  Looking at the photos very closely it appears that the chimney itself tapers in very slightly at the top to meet the slightly undersized cap, which is still smaller than the chimney itself.  It really should be parallel and the cap fractionally bigger than the chimney.  

The safety valves levers are sitting too high for them to control the pressure on the valves themselves: they should connect over the top of the dome. 

 

Both of these are fixable, especially the latter, but if not there will be a market for an improved chimney.  I could be tempted to purchase one for my collection of shelf queens if the chimney was better. 

 

Tim

Edited September 14, 2019 by CF MRC
Adding picture

[Oldddudders]

1 hour ago, PaulRhB said:

Oliver, what make of decoder is it in the DCC fitted Terriers please?

Dapol's own brand presumably?

[RodneyS]

From the pictures it look as though all the chimneys are the same height.

The Marsh cast iron ones were 3'' shorter and (to my eyes at least) this does show on a model.

They were also a bit fatter at the base and more tapered than the Stroudley one.

For me that rather spoils 32650.

Rodney

 

[Edwardian]

17 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

Edit: however, I understand the tank tops were black when the GWR took these locos over, and that now inclines me to think the condenser pipes would probably be wholly black.

 

I think the cab spectacle plate surrounds would be painted (green). Probably the only thing in bare metal would be the whistles. Tank top recess, tank fillers and steam exhausts would normally be black, but the one-off nature of these locos means they could have continued the green on the rounded top of the tanks, so I wouldn't want to be picky over the matter. Again, given that these areas were black when the GWR took over the locos, there is no reason to think they continued to be anything other than black.

 

 

We agree.

 

No.6 was WC&PR No.4, also among the new announcements, which was supplied by the Southern without a repaint, so it's still in Maunsel lined olive with the SR markings painted out and WC&PR lettering added.

 

In this livery, the recessed tank tops would be black, as would the tank-top fittings. In fact, I do not believe any livery involved finishing the tank tops in a livery colour.  It was a working era, that no doubt could be stood upon, and the surface can appear a little rough on some examples when compared with the painted and varnished liveried areas. In other words, the tank top is a surface more akin to the footplate than to the livery-bearing areas. 

 

When it was repainted to GWR livery, sometime in the 1940-1942 period, it seems to me most unlikely that the GWR would paint these areas green.

 

The comment "they could have continued the green on the rounded top of the tanks" overlooks the fact that the rounded top of the tanks is in fact the curve of the tank outer cladding, behind which the tank top is located, sitting lower down than the top of the cladding.  Only on the Hornby Terrier are the curved cladding and the tank top contiguous, with the result that the tank filler rises out of the curved cladding, rather than based lower down behind it.  

 

 

 

 

[Nick C]

On 13/09/2019 at 11:44, Oliver Rails said:

We are pleased to share below images of the model samples recently received from the factory.

As before please be aware the models shown are only samples from the factory and is not final production models. (Any Errors or issues have been reported to the factory)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It might just be an optical illusion, but it looks like the coal rails don't go right to the back of the bunker, which to my eye looks very odd (compare with the photo of 32678 above). It also looks to me like the numberplate on the BR examples sits too high? It ought to be centred on the top hinge (again, see the photo of 32678 which shows this quite clearly)

[Edwardian]

On 14/09/2019 at 18:31, Edwardian said:

 

We agree.

 

No.6 was WC&PR No.4, also among the new announcements, which was supplied by the Southern without a repaint, so it's still in Maunsel lined olive with the SR markings painted out and WC&PR lettering added.

 

In this livery, the recessed tank tops would be black, as would the tank-top fittings. In fact, I do not believe any livery involved finishing the tank tops in a livery colour.  It was a working era, that no doubt could be stood upon, and the surface can appear a little rough on some examples when compared with the painted and varnished liveried areas. In other words, the tank top is a surface more akin to the footplate than to the livery-bearing areas. 

 

When it was repainted to GWR livery, sometime in the 1940-1942 period, it seems to me most unlikely that the GWR would paint these areas green.

 

The comment "they could have continued the green on the rounded top of the tanks" overlooks the fact that the rounded top of the tanks is in fact the curve of the tank outer cladding, behind which the tank top is located, sitting lower down than the top of the cladding.  Only on the Hornby Terrier are the curved cladding and the tank top contiguous, with the result that the tank filler rises out of the curved cladding, rather than based lower down behind it.  

 

 

 

 

 

Have been conferring with the Western Brethren.

 

The emerging consensus is that, while the GWR was quite capable of painting tank fittings etc green, the WC&PR twins probably retained black tank tops and fittings. This appears to be confirmed by a picture of No.5, looking fairly freshly painted in 1940, where the difference between green and black in these areas appears clearly discernible.

 

 

I am very grateful to the two RMWebbers with whom I have conferred for their learned input.  

 

There are differences of opinion in a couple of areas, demonstrating quite how hard it is to be sure of some of the details.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 17, 2019 by Edwardian
spelling!

[truffy]

I see a line there between the chimney and its cap, but the cap seems to be the same colour as the stem, suggesting that the cap and chimney weren't one smooth piece even in all black.

Edited September 17, 2019 by truffy

[RodneyS]

The chimney on No. 5 is a one piece cast iron Marsh replacement.  The 'step' between the barrel and the cap is decorative. 

The Marsh chimney tapers out more at the bottom and looks a lot more 'chunky' than the Stroudley one, emphasised by the fact that it is 3'' shorter.

Many drawings show both chimneys to be the same height.  However I have measured the Marsh chimneys on 'Fenchurch' and 'Martello' and they are both 3'' shorter than a Stroudley one.

Incidentally, Ashford Works had the habit of grinding away the step on a 'Brighton' chimney and the Bluebell's  'Birch Grove' still carries it's Ashfordised version.

Rodney

 

 

 

[Edwardian]

The one-piece cast Marsh chimney certainly gives the impression of a separate cap.  One of my interlocutors today, quite reasonably, took it for a painted over copper cap. 

 

At some angles it is hard to distinguish the two, at least I have found it so.  At others the fact that the shorter Marsh chimney starts getting stouter further from the base seems obvious.  Put them side to side and the differences are clear. 

[Edwardian]

13 hours ago, RodneyS said:

 Ashford Works had the habit of grinding away the step on a 'Brighton' chimney and the Bluebell's  'Birch Grove' still carries it's Ashfordised version.

 

 

 

I had no idea about that;  absolutely fascinating detail, and I will try to spot this on Birch Grove.

[Nick C]

18 hours ago, Edwardian said:

The one-piece cast Marsh chimney certainly gives the impression of a separate cap.  One of my interlocutors today, quite reasonably, took it for a painted over copper cap. 

 

At some angles it is hard to distinguish the two, at least I have found it so.  At others the fact that the shorter Marsh chimney starts getting stouter further from the base seems obvious.  Put them side to side and the differences are clear. 

Of course many of the Isle of Wight terriers had either locally made Wheeler & Hurst chimneys (with a wider, flatter cap) or Drummond ones (of the pattern created, I believe, for the B4 dock tanks) with the characteristic four holes in the top rim. Neither had a step between cap and barrel.

[Dogmatix]

Any word yet on how the NEM coupling pockets are attached - i.e. on close-coupling cams (excellent), on simple pivots (oh, well) or unmovably fixed to the frame (disaster)?

[burgundy]

Has any one yet tried to convert one of these locos to EM or P4 please?

Best wishes 

Eric 

[mozzer models]

1 minute ago, burgundy said:

Has any one yet tried to convert one of these locos to EM or P4 please?

Best wishes 

Eric 

as there not been released yet No one has one to hand to do so

[burgundy]

Sorry - my mistake. 

After 22 pages of this thread, I thought that they had been released into the wild...….

Best wishes 

Eric 

[mozzer models]

3 hours ago, burgundy said:

Sorry - my mistake. 

After 22 pages of this thread, I thought that they had been released into the wild...….

Best wishes 

Eric 

Not yet but the Hornby one has