RevolutioN announce 56xx in N

[Revolution Ben]

 

Hello all,

 

Here are some more images not shown on our website.  Miss Prism - thanks for the corrections.  My knowledge of steam locos is admittedly low!  Is it the case then that the wheels and bodyshells should be transposed; ie smaller balance weights on the black body?

 

I think we decided the toolbox was going to be a customer-fit, but I will double check.

 

 

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

[Miss Prism]

2 hours ago, Ben A said:

Is it the case then that the wheels and bodyshells should be transposed; ie smaller balance weights on the black body?

 

I can't see the detail in those graphics, they are far too murky.

 

The small balance wheels are appropriate for locos in their early build state. The larger balance weights came later. I do not know when the transition took place, but the larger balance weights were certainly in place by early BR times.

 

[Revolution Ben]

 

Hi Miss Prism,

 

My understanding is that you drew attention to the balance weights - the shaped inserts in the wheels - and the safety valve cap which is the gold coloured bit half way along the top of the boiler between the chimney and the cab.

 

On the images posted the green one has the shorter cap, while that on the black one appears to be taller.  Yet the black loco has the heftier balance weights in the wheels.  So are you saying we should swap the chassis over?   That is simple to do.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

[Miss Prism]

If 'the green one' is supposed to be a GWR representative, then I suggest it is fitted with the smaller balance weights. Assuming 'the black one' is supposed to be a BR(W) representative, then I suggest it is fitted with the larger balance weights.

 

The type of safety valve cover is not related to either era or balance weight size.

 

I do not know the range of prototypes being planned by RevolutioN. I assume there is someone at RevolutioN who has considered the matter.

   

[Mike Harvey]

2 minutes ago, Miss Prism said:

 

I do not know the range of prototypes being planned by RevolutioN. I assume there is someone at RevolutioN who has considered the matter.

   

There is an outline in post #1 if it helps you.

[Miss Prism]

12 minutes ago, Mike Harvey said:

There is an outline in post #1 if it helps you.

 

Thanks. I had not forgotten that sentence, but it underlines the ambiguity in Ben's use of 'the green one' , which could be GWR or BR(W).

 

 

 

Edited March 13, 2019 by Miss Prism

[Richard E]

Safety valve bonnet size seems to vary, as Miss Prism said, without any real date cut off. I have a picture of 5697 at Reading in 1950 and it has the revised balance weights but still has a short bonnet. Yet 6631 sported a tall bonnet as long ago as 1930 and 5636 did so in 1928. It looks, from the pictures I have, that the bonnet was painted, not polished. Also none of those pictured are fitted with the tool box as far as I can tell.

 

In a similar fashion the buffers (original build were taper, later parallel), spectacle plate and the rear of the bunker changed (it was changed to recessed from flat in November 1934 and retrofitted as locos went through the works) as did location of the steam and vacuum pipes as they did not always run along the valance. I would, however, think that such 'niceties' should be down to the purchaser to modify if they are going to need that sort of fidelity to real life.

 

As always it is a case of the modeller having to refer to photos of their intended prototype rather than rely on the manufacturer to cater for every variation in the original. Provided the balance weights are appropriate, roughly, to the 'era' then most folk should be satisfied.

[Revolution Ben]

19 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

No.

 

Try:  "When built the locomotives had tall safety valve covers and small balance weights. Later, the locomotives were fitted with larger balance weights and a short safety valve cover."

 

 

Hi Miss Prism,

 

The colours are just CAD renders.  The green loco has the smaller balance weights and shorter safety valve cover, the black one has the larger balance weights and taller safety valve cover.

 

Is this correct, or do we need to move these details around?

 

Revolution is two people and neither of us knows much about steam engines.  So any help here is gratefully received.

 

The liveries and running numbers to be produced has not yet been finalised.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

[Miss Prism]

Are the CAD colours supposed to signify anything?

 

[bingley hall]

5 hours ago, Richard E said:

As always it is a case of the modeller having to refer to photos of their intended prototype rather than rely on the manufacturer to cater for every variation in the original. Provided the balance weights are appropriate, roughly, to the 'era' then most folk should be satisfied.

 

Simple logic would make one think so, but sadly around here that is often not the case.

[Karhedron]

On 12/03/2019 at 13:37, Miss Prism said:

I note the CADs still show the rare toolbox on the front rhs,

 

I don't think the toolbox was all that rare. A brief search turns up several examples in various liveries.

 

 

 

 

On the N Gauge Forum, Ben mentioned the possibility of offering the toolbox as a part in a bits bag for modellers to fit themselves or leave off as appropriate. This would certainly seem like a good solution to me.

[Miss Prism]

4 minutes ago, Karhedron said:

On the N Gauge Forum, Ben mentioned the possibility of offering the toolbox as a part in a bits bag for modellers to fit themselves or leave off as appropriate. This would certainly seem like a good solution to me.

 

That has always been my view.

 

 

[Revolution Ben]

Helo all,

 

The CAD images are to illustrate the basic tooling differences, not any specific livery/combinations.

 

Forum members will see the black loco has the taller valve cover and tapered buffers while the green has the shorter cover and straight buffers, while the chassis under the black has the heavier balance weights and the green has lighter.

 

Research done so far suggests that The Swindon built 56xxs had a tall safety valve cover while those built by Armstrong Whitworth had short.  All locos seem to have entered service with original wheel sets with small balance weights. During WW2 the wheelweights on many, but not all, locos were modified.

 

 

Switching components during the working lives of the 56xxs seems to have been a common occurrence, more so towards the end.

 

 

Because the details on the models can all be switched around similarly, specific combinations and liveries will be selected according to photographs.

 

Thanks to all for the help with this.

 

I am not really a steam man but am starting to develop a soft spot for these little locos!

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

 

Edited March 13, 2019 by Ben A

[MGR Hooper!]

18 hours ago, Ben A said:

 

Hi Miss Prism,

 

The colours are just CAD renders.

 

Ben A.

 

18 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

Are the CAD colours supposed to signify anything?

 

The answer is just above your post. The CAD has nothing to do with the actual locos in terms of a livery/era.

[Kris]

There is now a photo of the first EP on Revolutions website. Looks like it will be a cracking model. 

http://www.revolutiontrains.com/news/

Edited April 3, 2019 by Kris
typo

[Mr chapman]

Had a quick skim through and I couldn't see it... What is the minimum radius curves this will run on? Will it go around 9" ones? Cant tell if there is any side play in the rear truck. 

[AlfaZagato]

24 minutes ago, Kris said:

There is now a photo of the first EP on Revolutions website. Looks like it will be a cracking model. 

http://www.revolutiontrains.com/news/

I imagine it would look better painted.   Definitely looks better than the old whitemetal kit.

[Karhedron]

That looks cracking for a 1st EP. I was planning to get 1 already, do I get a second? 

[Revolution Ben]

 

Hello all,

 

The model is specified for 12" curves but I suspect it will manage 9" at a push.   The rear pony pivots.

 

cheers

 

Ben a

[DavidLong]

Ben,

 

Does the 56xx have the split chassis/brass bearings style like the current Farish steam locos and the coming NGS Hunslet? As usual my question relates to 2FS conversion. This would be the ideal for 2FS people as it is the simplest form of conversion. As with the Hunslet I appreciate that we are not going to be only a small part of the market for the model but it would certainly be a 'nice to have' feature.

And we could fit our own balance weights . . .

 

David

[Roy L S]

Hi David

 

See Ben's previous post (no. 64). It will have similar pickup arrangement to latest Farish.

 

Regards

 

Roy

[DavidLong]

4 hours ago, Roy L S said:

Hi David

 

See Ben's previous post (no. 64). It will have similar pickup arrangement to latest Farish.

 

Regards

 

Roy

 

Thanks, Roy. I had missed that exchange between Jerry and Ben. Pleased to have the clarification.

 

David

[Les1952]

On ‎04‎/‎04‎/‎2019 at 11:28, Ben A said:

 

Hello all,

 

The model is specified for 12" curves but I suspect it will manage 9" at a push.   The rear pony pivots.

 

cheers

 

Ben a

 

The "norm" for double-track roundy-roundies appears to be R2 inner (11.5") and R3 outer (12").  Radius 4 is a little too new for most people to have it on their layouts yet.

 

Might be better to ensure the loco can manage R2 - it is a small loco so would be likely to sell to people with smaller layouts.

 

Les

 

Just as a thought I have 2-10-0 locos of Continental origin which can manage R1 and a little tighter comfortably - Fleischmann R1 is tighter than UK R1.

Edited April 9, 2019 by Les1952

[Revolution Ben]

 

Hello all,

 

I understand that the model will cope with curves down to a radius of 228.5mm, which is a fraction under 9 inches.

 

cheers

 

Ben a

[Karhedron]

5 hours ago, Ben A said:

I understand that the model will cope with curves down to a radius of 228.5mm, which is a fraction under 9 inches.

 

That is good news as that means it should handle 1st radius curves and Peco set track points without issue.

 

Thanks for clearing this up.