Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Oliver Rails said:

Thanks for your very constructive comments and we do of course welcome those. Thanks also for your positive comments. It is always nice to have such a balanced approach.

 

The samples you have seen are the very first EP’s and we have a list of corrections which we are reviewing today. This is perfectly normal at this stage. They only arrived from China late last week so this is the first chance we have had to take a detailed look. You will be pleased to hear that the balance weights are already on our list of things to look at and amend along with the cab windows, buffers and the chimney fit.

 

Thanks for taking the trouble to write in and we’d be pleased to hear if you have any other major concerns. Please just remember that sometimes at 4mm : foot we have to make some compromises when there are so many detailed variations over such a long life of the real locomotives. However we will strive to make this the best model we possibly can and still make a small profit!!

 

Oliver

Thanks Oliver, great to hear and I think we all appreciate this communication from you highlighting areas you are addressing.

 

What about the cab roof/rear wall interface seam? I also note that the rainstrip/surround of the cab roof is a different depth on the roof moulding from the back sheet moulding (according to the KESR image above), so given this needs fixing, can the join be re-engineered/repositioned to get rid of the seam?

 

I'd also rather pay £10 more for a better model if this solves the profit problem!

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oliver,

Thank you for your very positive response to this. I'm one of those who wants to be able to buy the definitive Terrier, without wanting to hack about a brand new RTR model to achieve that. 

I also hope that at some stage in the future you'll consider offering an LBSC Umber locomotive.

  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny enough, while working on 32650 yesterday, I took photos of all 4 of her buffers. That's not to say they are typical Terrier buffers, all 10 survivors are almost individual classes of loco in their own right! Anyway, first 2 are the front pair, then the back.

WP_20190324_17_20_42_Pro.jpg

WP_20190324_17_21_04_Pro.jpg

WP_20190324_17_22_30_Pro.jpg

WP_20190324_17_22_41_Pro.jpg

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello

 

I'd like to wade into this debate on detailing. I have already commented on A1X smokebox rivets but there is something else that has not (to my knowledge) been touched on. This is the arrangement of air brake pipes and vacuum brake pipes.

 

Very noticeable on the real thing, particularly the dual braked locos, is the arrangement of air brake pipes and vacuum pipes on the front and rear buffer beams. The dual fitted A1Xs tended to have the vacuum pipes on the right hand side of the front buffer beam (as you look head on) and the air brake pipe on the left hand side. The vacuum pipe being in a lower position than air brake pipe on the front buffer beam and the vacuum pipe higher than the air pipe on the rear. It is noticeable that the Hornby representation of these features show a vacuum pipe only on the left hand side of the front and rear buffer beams of both BR representations (to reduce costs no doubt). Rails model of 32661 also shows the vacuum pipe on the left hand side (head on) which is incorrect for this loco. Neither model show any representation of the pipework along / under the running plate that connect these pipes to either the vacuum ejector or the air pump. This is maybe due to the Rails model being a 1st EP(?) and the Hornby model to keep costs and price down.

 

However, and this is another detail minefield, 32670 (formally KESR Bodiam), is a vacuum only fitted loco and at some point (I guess when sold by the LBSCR) was vacuum fitted with a vacuum pipe on the left hand side of the buffer beam (as you look head on). 32655 (formally Stepney) which ended up as vacuum only fitted also appears to have this arrangement. It would also appear that post preservation, 32678 (formally Knowle), has had the brake pipe arrangement changed from that carried in SR / BR days. I'm sure that there are other variations of brake pipe arrangement and don't envy the manufacturers in getting every variation correct for their chosen prototypes. The fact remains (and this is my point) that there is a significant amount of pipework associated with the train brakes. This also makes the front and rear buffer beams look quite cluttered on the dual brake fitted locos.

 

Both the Hornby and Rails models have their merits and omissions but I do tend to be swayed towards purchasing Rails models. Even with the issues regarding cab spectacles and the chimney (which are to be addressed) I think it captures the essence or a Terrier better than the Hornby model.  I wish them luck with their enterprise.

 

Regards

 

Andy.  

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Mark Carne said:

.

WP_20190324_17_20_42_Pro.jpg

WP_20190324_17_21_04_Pro.jpg

WP_20190324_17_22_30_Pro.jpg

WP_20190324_17_22_41_Pro.jpg

So the NRM,Rails,Dapol one has recessed buffers, Hornby’s stick out and these photos are half n half!  Are both models correct for some and neither match this? ;) 

 

On the photos I prefer the Rails tanks, dome, cab handrails, bunker rails, roof and chassis below the running plate. 

 

Hornby I prefer the cab interior, cab windows, running plate sides depth and lining out. 

 

So far with the amendments noted by Oliver the Rails one is fractionally ahead for me so I’d say they are equal value for money but my dad will still buy the Hornby one as he’s a Yorkshireman and blowed if he can tell! ;) 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Oliver Rails said:

Thanks for your very constructive comments and we do of course welcome those. Thanks also for your positive comments. It is always nice to have such a balanced approach.

 

The samples you have seen are the very first EP’s and we have a list of corrections which we are reviewing today. This is perfectly normal at this stage. They only arrived from China late last week so this is the first chance we have had to take a detailed look. You will be pleased to hear that the balance weights are already on our list of things to look at and amend along with the cab windows, buffers and the chimney fit.

 

Thanks for taking the trouble to write in and we’d be pleased to hear if you have any other major concerns. Please just remember that sometimes at 4mm : foot we have to make some compromises when there are so many detailed variations over such a long life of the real locomotives. However we will strive to make this the best model we possibly can and still make a small profit!!

 

Oliver

 

Thank you for replying, Oliver, much appreciated. It's good to know that our concerns were already being addressed before we even saw the livery samples.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
12 hours ago, Oliver Rails said:

The samples you have seen are the very first EP’s and we have a list of corrections which we are reviewing today. This is perfectly normal at this stage. They only arrived from China late last week so this is the first chance we have had to take a detailed look. You will be pleased to hear that the balance weights are already on our list of things to look at and amend along with the cab windows, buffers and the chimney fit.

 

I think this is fantastic! It's awesome to see a manufacturer getting so involved in the discussion, and taking points on board.  May I ask though, are the current buffers sprung and if so, (it may be too early to answer) if you change them will they still be?

 

Cheers!

 

12 hours ago, Edwardian said:

 

It seems that there are no perfect matches, so far, given the combinations of features found on your selected prototypes!

 

Late condition/IOW Terriers are a bit out of my comfort zone, but here goes ... 

 

2635 - As No.635, to A1X in 1922, re-numbered as 377S August 1946 and to 32635 January 1959. Withdrawn 1963.

 

She became the Brighton works shunter from August 1946, so liveried black with "LOCO WORKS BRIGHTON" on the tanks, but, June 1947 saw her in IEG with number 377S on the bunker and "BRIGHTON WORKS" on the tanks.  

 

Rails/Dapol's 32661 should be a very good match, as the correct rivets combination is on the smoke-box, but note that Dapol has not tooled for the flush face. 

 

377S had retained her Westinghouse, but I don't think either of Dapol's 32661 or 32655 did. 

 

Thank you very much! I am impressed and slightly jealous of your intimate knowledge of the class.  Maybe I will bide my time and hope that 'BRIGHTON WORKS' appears in IEG, alternately i'll consider a repaint/tweak of 2422. 

 

Jack

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, PaulRhB said:

Hornby I prefer the ... cab windows .... 

 

At first I thought you were referring to the fact that Hornby used a single mould of clear plastic within the cab. It's only when I re-read that I realized what you really meant :blush:

 

Actually, the clear plastic blob is the one thing that let's the Hattons P down (IMO). Seeing the Rails/Hornby approaches, I'm tempted to fettle....

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I'm undecided but leaning slightly towards the Hornby one at present - the finish on parts of the Dapol model leaves some things to be desired. If the Rails one will have properly painted wheels in Improved Engine Green livery (i.e. green wheel centres and balance weights, with IEG false spokes) that will help a lot. The bright yellow cab interior of the Dapol model also catches the eye somewhat - should not the splasher tops be black, and the floor another colour (certainly not bright yellow!). Yes, this can be rectified with a paintbrush, but it means dismantling the model and there's a lot of filigree work in the cabs of both models, with the Hornby model looking to steal the show here too.

There's still something about the lining on the Dapol Boxhill model, too - I'm not convinced by the very large in-tick on the corners of the white lining - photos show it's there on Boxhill, but it's subtle. Most other photos seem to show it coming to a right angle, rather than ticking inwards.

There also appears to be one problem in common with both models - how is the fireman supposed to get the coal from the bunker? There's no hatch to let him access the bunker from inside the cab!

 

With the corrections mentioned by Oliver, however, I could be swung back the other way...

Edited by Skinnylinny
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
17 hours ago, Oliver Rails said:

Thanks for your very constructive comments and we do of course welcome those. Thanks also for your positive comments. It is always nice to have such a balanced approach.

 

The samples you have seen are the very first EP’s and we have a list of corrections which we are reviewing today. This is perfectly normal at this stage. They only arrived from China late last week so this is the first chance we have had to take a detailed look. You will be pleased to hear that the balance weights are already on our list of things to look at and amend along with the cab windows, buffers and the chimney fit.

 

Thanks for taking the trouble to write in and we’d be pleased to hear if you have any other major concerns. Please just remember that sometimes at 4mm : foot we have to make some compromises when there are so many detailed variations over such a long life of the real locomotives. However we will strive to make this the best model we possibly can and still make a small profit!!

 

Oliver

 

Thanks Oliver. I think that covers most of the issues raised. I've gone cross-eyed looking at spectacle plates, trying to spot the differences! I dont mind waiting a little longer to see a Terrier done well. 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, PaulRhB said:

So the NRM,Rails,Dapol one has recessed buffers, Hornby’s stick out and these photos are half n half!

 

Whooo-hooo !!

 

Someone else can see what I see !!

 

It is abundantly clear that there is very little difference between the thickness of the buffer base and that of the bufferbeam.

 

So, both models are wrong.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Link to post
Share on other sites

These are later buffers, so not an apt comparison.

 

When you look at the K&ESR pair, you need to compare with original A1 condition buffers, as seen in the pictures of Boxhill.

 

I know that, John, that you are entitled to your point of view, but, as you confess, this is not a model you're interested in buying, and I fear that you have succumbed to the temptation of criticism as sport. Unfortunately, you are simply muddying waters that were perfectly clear.     

 

There are a number of issues with this model. I daresay that, in correspondence with the owner of the picture you posted, you might, by now, be aware of some of them, but this buffer point is a complete non-issue.  

 

I have heard all sorts of tosh advanced in relation to the supposed faults of the model. It has been asserted to me, for instance,that the balance weights should not be proud of the spokes. Yes, they should. This model has been criticised in my hearing for not having bolt heads on the buffer casting.  This, too, is nonsense.  If there was a rivet, it was flush. Protruding bolts in general would not be seen until the buffers were raised.

 

We can play this game all day, but  we're well into fake news with buffer-gate.   

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Skinnylinny said:

Personally, I'm undecided but leaning slightly towards the Hornby one at present - the finish on parts of the Dapol model leaves some things to be desired. If the Rails one will have properly painted wheels in Improved Engine Green livery (i.e. green wheel centres and balance weights, with IEG false spokes) that will help a lot. The bright yellow cab interior of the Dapol model also catches the eye somewhat - should not the splasher tops be black, and the floor another colour (certainly not bright yellow!). Yes, this can be rectified with a paintbrush, but it means dismantling the model and there's a lot of filigree work in the cabs of both models, with the Hornby model looking to steal the show here too.

There's still something about the lining on the Dapol Boxhill model, too - I'm not convinced by the very large in-tick on the corners of the white lining - photos show it's there on Boxhill, but it's subtle. Most other photos seem to show it coming to a right angle, rather than ticking inwards.

There also appears to be one problem in common with both models - how is the fireman supposed to get the coal from the bunker? There's no hatch to let him access the bunker from inside the cab!

 

With the corrections mentioned by Oliver, however, I could be swung back the other way...

 

We must constantly remember that what we have seen is a sample. I consistently made that point when considering the Hornby Stepney sample, though that did not save me from the fanboy's cries of 'negativitiy'.  

 

I cannot be any less fair, then, to Rails.

 

You mention the interior colour. I can quite see it being this colour, though in service it would have had the edge taken off it!

 

The cab interior colour is described as "golden brown", as opposed to "golden yellow" for IEG. 

 

Here is the sample ....

 

1983752930_LocomotionTerrier2.jpg.6060111c9b0be2935e0afbc0a3e3b311.jpg.70b9d59a0a7c145a5946c34563ccda95.jpg

 

And and the real Boxhill ...

 

1617740507_DSCN8616-Copy.JPG.48add3e66a47ca66480c434a2d7f3b63.JPG

 

Whether, when shade is taken into account, there's any difference between the interior colour and IEG, it's hard to say.  Note, though, that the  splasher top is in the golden colour, not black

 

On Bodiam it looks a little stark, and perhaps could be toned down, though it is not not helped by the fact that the cab floor, which would be a rather grubby and distressed natural wood, is also in the yellow.

 

As to the use of the colour on Bodiam's cab, I suggest that this is entirely reasonable.  When the two K&ESR locos were sold, the Brighton repainted them blue for their new owners. It is reasonable to suppose, in the absence of any evidence of a change, that they retained the "golden" colour for the cab interiors.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

There was also a quote somewhere about the Hornby cab interior having a more detailed representation of the back of the boiler and dials etc - Edwardian's image shows that the interior was quite simple like the Rails version shown and perhaps the Hornby interior which was on a BR period model may be more complex because over the years more was added to the loco.

  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

There was also a quote somewhere about the Hornby cab interior having a more detailed representation of the back of the boiler and dials etc - Edwardian's image shows that the interior was quite simple like the Rails version shown and perhaps the Hornby interior which was on a BR period model may be more complex because over the years more was added to the loco.

 

I believe that's right, there are features of the BR cab not present on the original condition A1.

 

And I am quite content with what you get in the Rails/Dapol cab.  I like the way it is executed; the raised dials have brass surrounds and printed dials, and they look all the better for the decision to separately glaze the spectacles.  

  • Like 2
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

There was also a quote somewhere about the Hornby cab interior having a more detailed representation of the back of the boiler and dials etc - Edwardian's image shows that the interior was quite simple like the Rails version shown and perhaps the Hornby interior which was on a BR period model may be more complex because over the years more was added to the loco.

 

Or looking at the fireman's side which doesn't have as many controls/dials/etc?

 

I also expect the Rails model to have the drivers name and details written in the cab. ;)

 

Too many of these comparison photos aren't comparing like for like.

 

 

Jason

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Having seen the Terriers at the Bluebell, I remember being rather surprised to go to the NRM and see Boxhill's somewhat sparce cab. So yes it seems there are differences over time. I'm guessing vacuum brakes, steam heat (extra gauges) for starters.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, G-BOAF said:

Having seen the Terriers at the Bluebell, I remember being rather surprised to go to the NRM and see Boxhill's somewhat sparce cab. So yes it seems there are differences over time. I'm guessing vacuum brakes, steam heat (extra gauges) for starters.

No .... no starters ! .... you use an oily rag an' a match ..............

  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Funny 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, woodenhead said:

There was also a quote somewhere about the Hornby cab interior having a more detailed representation of the back of the boiler and dials etc - Edwardian's image shows that the interior was quite simple like the Rails version shown and perhaps the Hornby interior which was on a BR period model may be more complex because over the years more was added to the loco.

If the Rails example is just a sample, then perhaps the 'missing' in-cab detail is something else that the final production models will have?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Captain Kernow said:

If the Rails example is just a sample, then perhaps the 'missing' in-cab detail is something else that the final production models will have?

 

it was on one of the pre-grouping livery locos

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

By the time a couple of crew figures have been added I think the interior will be pretty crowded.

One aspect that I'm uncertain about is what I'd describe, in my ignorance, as the 'manual parking brake' that sits in the rear of the cab. On the Rails model it looks as if the handle part is too large so as to ensure that it doesn't make sense from an engineering perspective.

 

I also think that the Boxhill model chimney tapers very slightly too much.

Edited by Anglian
  • Informative/Useful 1
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.