Hornby - New tooling - Large Prairie

[WisTramwayMan]

My 6145 arrived a day ago, courtesy of Derails.

 

Superb service, checked by retailer, well packed, 24hr delivery by DPD, loco A1. No bits detached, broken or missing (unlike a friend's recent experiences with a large retailer's canine commission).

 

How a purchase SHOULD be.

 

Looking forward to giving it a good run now...

[Hroth]

8 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

I might have missed this along the way but could someone who has already got one of these please tell me what type of decoder it needs? Is it 8-pin? I ask because deep in the mists of history I'm sure I read that it would need a NEXT-18.

 

Thanks.

 

I don't think Hornby have ventured beyond 8 pin sockets, ever.  They've done small models with 4 and 6 pin decoder sockets, but the normal run is 8 pin.

 

Its listed as having an 8 pin decoder socket.

 

(I see the Q has been answered above!)

 

 

 

Edited June 20, 2020 by Hroth
update

[St Enodoc]

4 minutes ago, melmerby said:

The picture above shows an 8 pin, also says 8 pin in the seller's descriptions.

So it does, Keith. I couldn't see it for looking. Thanks.

 

Some suppliers' details (including Hornby's) just say DCC Ready while others' do say 8-pin. I just wanted to be sure as I intend to buy a decoder before the loco arrives.

[WisTramwayMan]

6 minutes ago, melmerby said:

The picture above shows an 8 pin, also says 8 pin in the seller's descriptions.

Also in the operating instructions that come with the model it shows it as an 8-pin socket.

[gwrrob]

32 minutes ago, WisTramwayMan said:

Looking forward to giving it a good run now...

 

Yes please, the suspense is killing me. We want to know its haulage capacity and does it possess slow running also please.

[dibber25]

It should be remembered that a photograph marked 'Copyright' means that you need to ask the copyright holder if it is OK to reproduce the photograph. Merely posting it or reposting it with the copyright holder's name, without asking for permission, still infringes copyright. Much depends on the agreement that the copyright holder has with the photographer. (CJL)

[The Johnster]

13 hours ago, robmcg said:

edit, maybe I'll re-number 6145 to a 51XX or 41XX to suit South Wales , if they ever got that far!

Plenty 41xx series 5101s in South Wales right up to the end of steam in the area in 1965, including the last locos of the class, built by BR.  Not so many of the older 51xx series 4160, which is to be one of the Hornbys IIRC, was a South Wales loco. 
 

 

[Ian Hargrave]

7 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

Plenty 41xx series 5101s in South Wales right up to the end of steam in the area in 1965, including the last locos of the class, built by BR.  Not so many of the older 51xx series 4160, which is to be one of the Hornbys IIRC, was a South Wales loco. 
 

 

 
They were a fixture on The Vale Of Neath line in the 1950’s .Neath ( 87A ) also used an 81XX....8104...regularly on an early morning passenger turn to Pontypool Road..

[The Johnster]

Sadly, 8104 cannot be represented with the Hornby or the upcoming Dapol large prairie as the driving and leading pony wheels are 2" diameter smaller; the boiler is thus a lower 'pitch'.  It sounds like an easy conversion by replacing the driving wheels, but the loco will then 'sit' too low and buffer height will not match other stock.  

 

I am interested in another variant, the Collett 31xx, which had a no.4 boiler pressed to 225psi, piston bore increased by an inch, and 5'3" wheels, the 'ultimate' GW large prairie design.  Collett seems to have fiddled around with the Churchward 5'8" driver concept as well as the boiler pressure; he clearly thought the design had potential for improvement.  The 61xx's higher boiler pressure was apparently worth the extra construction and maintenance cost on the London suburban services, and the 81xx were apparently to be a further improvement on them, the smaller wheels giving better acceleration at the cost of a lower 'range' on a full bunker of coal and the need for more water stops.  Only 10 were built, and they made little impact.

 

The 31xx was a Collett tweak to the Churchward 3150, which was originally considered a heavy mixed traffic design and had been useful as a banker.  The driving wheel diameter was reduced and tractive effort increased with a view to using the locos at Severn Tunnel as bankers, and only 5 were built, or rather rebuilt from 3150s.  Two of these found themselves useful on the Porthcawl-Cardiff commuter service, 3100 at Tondu and 3105 at Canton.  My plan is an old fashioned style kit bash using parts from Dapol/Kitmaster 61xx and CoT, with a modified Hornby or Dapol mech; the biggest issue will be getting the height relationship between the cylinders, running plate, and the boiler centre line right, essential for the general look of the thing but cheap construction kit donors will allow for some experimentation.  Cylinder height on GW Churchward style locos is determined by the height above the railhead of the driving axle centres; all GW locos look, irritatingly nearly but not quite, the same!

 

One is a little surprised that Collett seems not to have considered a 2-6-4T with the no.14 Manor boiler and frames, but in the event the war intervened and more 5101s were ordered; of course he retired in 1941 and his successor seemed less interested in developing the 'perfect prairie', perhaps influenced by wartime restrictions and the need to get proven reliable locos into service quickly.  The use of the standard no,2 and no,4 boilers restricted development of the large prairies into 2-6-4Ts IMHO, and the small c conservatism of Swindon, which considered that development was not necessary since the existing locos were satisfactory probably didn't help.  

 

I rode behind 80080 on it's Merthyr excursion in the early 90s, 4 on and the 1 in 36 of Abercynon bank from a standing start; the loco performed superbly and proved that a 2-6-4T would have been very useful for Valleys passenger work.  The line speed of 50mph above Quaker's Yard was easily achieved on the adverse gradient, and the loco was opened out to the 70mph line speed from Radyr to Crockherbtown on the return run.  The BR standard 4MT tanks proved good performers on the LT&S and Glasgow heavy suburban work and something like them would have been useful on the WR as well. 

[melmerby]

2 hours ago, dibber25 said:

It should be remembered that a photograph marked 'Copyright' means that you need to ask the copyright holder if it is OK to reproduce the photograph. Merely posting it or reposting it with the copyright holder's name, without asking for permission, still infringes copyright. Much depends on the agreement that the copyright holder has with the photographer. (CJL)

Isn't linking to a copyright picture OK as you are not actually reproducing it but merely directing to where it is published (hopefully legally)?

[Henry 84F]

4 hours ago, gwrrob said:

 

Yes please, the suspense is killing me. We want to know its haulage capacity and does it possess slow running also please.

 

Slow running on DC very good. I had it hauling a six carriage train - three Hornby Colletts and three Hornby Staniers - on a simple oval with no noticeable strain.

 

Henry 

[Ian Hargrave]

1 minute ago, Henry 84F said:

 

Slow running on DC very good. I had it hauling a six carriage train - three Hornby Colletts and three Hornby Staniers - on a simple oval with no noticeable strain.

 

Henry 

 

Prototypical. The big Prairie was in any case a powerful machine,perfectly capable of heavy stock movements as at Paddington or even express passenger loads over relatively short distance. 

[petrox]

Just received my loco from Hattons today - so far about 20 minutes running-in light engine - very quiet, a little stiff to start with, but improved after a couple of laps - more running with a load later. One sandbox detached when i opened the box but will re-attach it along with drain pipes / brake gear / crew / lamps etc when running in complete.

[Torn-on-the-platform]

Please can I double check that it wouldn't be inappropriate to re-number the forthcoming BR green 4160 as 4117 with a simple change of number + shed plates?

 

Thanks in advance!

 

Edit: Secondary question removed as managed to answer it myself!

Edited June 20, 2020 by Torn-on-the-platform

[The Stationmaster]

1 hour ago, Ian Hargrave said:

 

Prototypical. The big Prairie was in any case a powerful machine,perfectly capable of heavy stock movements as at Paddington or even express passenger loads over relatively short distance. 

They were allowed the same loads as 78XX, Standard 75XXX, and 43XX so depending on gradients they could work some fairly big trains - 10 coaches on some routes was well within their permitted load

[PJT]

8 hours ago, Hroth said:

I don't think Hornby have ventured beyond 8 pin sockets, ever.  They've done small models with 4 and 6 pin decoder sockets, but the normal run is 8 pin.

 

For DCC ready and DCC fitted I'd agree with you; however for the earlier factory fitted sound locos (i.e. all the ones with ESU Loksound, not the TTS fitted ones), 21 pin was used.  It caught me out some years ago when I went to transfer the factory sound decoder from one Hornby Class 50 to another.

 

Pete T.

 

[melmerby]

3 hours ago, Ian Hargrave said:

 

Prototypical. The big Prairie was in any case a powerful machine,perfectly capable of heavy stock movements as at Paddington or even express passenger loads over relatively short distance. 

 

2 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

They were allowed the same loads as 78XX, Standard 75XXX, and 43XX so depending on gradients they could work some fairly big trains - 10 coaches on some routes was well within their permitted load

 

Like so:

 

Looks like about 8 on.

 

Power class 5 for the 61XX from 1953 onwards and class 4 for the 41XX & 51XX

Edited June 20, 2020 by melmerby

[robmcg]

10 hours ago, dibber25 said:

It should be remembered that a photograph marked 'Copyright' means that you need to ask the copyright holder if it is OK to reproduce the photograph. Merely posting it or reposting it with the copyright holder's name, without asking for permission, still infringes copyright. Much depends on the agreement that the copyright holder has with the photographer. (CJL)

 

 

Ok I'll remove it.   Thanks for the clarification.  My apologies.

 

edit, oh I see the mods have already done it.

 

Here is a link to the photo.  Is that allowed? My intention was to show the model in the condition it is in shop advertising, I also mentioned Rails, both retailers use good photos.  At the time, no one had shown the model as shops were selling them.

 

Using your rules you should also suggest removal of tomharryparry 's reply to my post.

 

Do you think we should go after the many retailers and especially web-sellers who use Hattons' photos to make money?   Where my infringement was for education, not profit? 

 

http://www.kernowmodelrailcentre.com/p/61872/R3723-Hornby-Class-61xx-Large-Prairie-2-6-2T-Steam-Loco-6145

Edited June 20, 2020 by robmcg

[Roy Langridge]

56 minutes ago, robmcg said:

 

Do you think we should go after the many retailers and especially web-sellers who use Hattons' photos to make money?   Where my infringement was for education, not profit? 

 

Eh? “We” are not going after anybody. I have had my company’s material stollen from our website before, and it is a right pain at times when people get confused about ownership etc. That is why copyright law is there. 
 

If retailers are using Hattons photos without permission, that is for Hattons to address, not RMWeb.

 

Roy

[Henry 84F]

Just a few more images to keep the thread focused.

 

The prairie has had a pretty thorough play on my temporary oval while I am 'between layouts'. It runs really well both forwards and backwards and hauled six carriages happily in both directions. 

 

It's light and maybe a little lighter than I expected. I don't have an exact weight for you however I don't think its weight is a detriment to its performance. Alongside an older Bachmann Fairburn, however, I thought there was a noticeable difference in weight (I appreciate that the Fairburn is larger!)

 

All detail is crisp and fine. The black paint is a lovely finish. The leading and trailing wheelsets roll and pivot freely. I don't have any pointwork so I cannot comment on its performance on that particular matter. 

 

The prairie does not have a firebox flicker which I am, personally, happy with. Flickers are a bit of a gimmick but that is simply my opinion.

 

The only minor I've had was the front steps which were angled quite strangely outwards. I gently eased these back in to straighten them up: they didn't snap off! The model has a much more robust feel about it than previous models. I thought the same about the recent Princess Royal. 

 

Well done, Hornby! I hope these are popular. They deserve to be.

 

Henry

 

[robmcg]

Thanks Henry, it looks to be an outstanding model and I look forward to receiving mine, (from Kernow as it happens).

 

Apologies to any readers who thought the labelled copyrighted image was confusing or improperly submitted 36hrs ago (now removed), and apologies to Kernow and the photographer.

 

I repeat that it was the great photography by Kernow and Rails which 'sold' the model to me. Congratulations to Hornby too.

[tomparryharry]

10 hours ago, The Johnster said:

Sadly, 8104 cannot be represented with the Hornby or the upcoming Dapol large prairie as the driving and leading pony wheels are 2" diameter smaller; the boiler is thus a lower 'pitch'.  It sounds like an easy conversion by replacing the driving wheels, but the loco will then 'sit' too low and buffer height will not match other stock.  

 

I am interested in another variant, the Collett 31xx, which had a no.4 boiler pressed to 225psi, piston bore increased by an inch, and 5'3" wheels, the 'ultimate' GW large prairie design.  Collett seems to have fiddled around with the Churchward 5'8" driver concept as well as the boiler pressure; he clearly thought the design had potential for improvement.  The 61xx's higher boiler pressure was apparently worth the extra construction and maintenance cost on the London suburban services, and the 81xx were apparently to be a further improvement on them, the smaller wheels giving better acceleration at the cost of a lower 'range' on a full bunker of coal and the need for more water stops.  Only 10 were built, and they made little impact.

 

The 31xx was a Collett tweak to the Churchward 3150, which was originally considered a heavy mixed traffic design and had been useful as a banker.  The driving wheel diameter was reduced and tractive effort increased with a view to using the locos at Severn Tunnel as bankers, and only 5 were built, or rather rebuilt from 3150s.  Two of these found themselves useful on the Porthcawl-Cardiff commuter service, 3100 at Tondu and 3105 at Canton.  My plan is an old fashioned style kit bash using parts from Dapol/Kitmaster 61xx and CoT, with a modified Hornby or Dapol mech; the biggest issue will be getting the height relationship between the cylinders, running plate, and the boiler centre line right, essential for the general look of the thing but cheap construction kit donors will allow for some experimentation.  Cylinder height on GW Churchward style locos is determined by the height above the railhead of the driving axle centres; all GW locos look, irritatingly nearly but not quite, the same!

 

One is a little surprised that Collett seems not to have considered a 2-6-4T with the no.14 Manor boiler and frames, but in the event the war intervened and more 5101s were ordered; of course he retired in 1941 and his successor seemed less interested in developing the 'perfect prairie', perhaps influenced by wartime restrictions and the need to get proven reliable locos into service quickly.  The use of the standard no,2 and no,4 boilers restricted development of the large prairies into 2-6-4Ts IMHO, and the small c conservatism of Swindon, which considered that development was not necessary since the existing locos were satisfactory probably didn't help.  

 

I rode behind 80080 on it's Merthyr excursion in the early 90s, 4 on and the 1 in 36 of Abercynon bank from a standing start; the loco performed superbly and proved that a 2-6-4T would have been very useful for Valleys passenger work.  The line speed of 50mph above Quaker's Yard was easily achieved on the adverse gradient, and the loco was opened out to the 70mph line speed from Radyr to Crockherbtown on the return run.  The BR standard 4MT tanks proved good performers on the LT&S and Glasgow heavy suburban work and something like them would have been useful on the WR as well. 

 

One point to keep in focus, is that the Western was a business, pure & simple. Putting on a new 'model' wouldn't happen without a need. Large prairies were still leaving Swindon, so why change; what's the advantage? Existing stock was still working through its book value, and not really falling due for replacement until the late 60's- early 70's. In reality, Collet didn't need to make a super-prairie; the business case (as I see it) wasn't required.

 

I hope my little observation doesn't detract from Hornbys' model. 

 

 

Edited June 20, 2020 by tomparryharry
Reply clean-up.

[Miss Prism]

3 hours ago, robmcg said:

Here is a link to the photo.  Is that allowed?

 

Yes.

 

[The Johnster]

My thinking was that it is apparent that Collett wasn’t happy with the 5101s, or by the look of things the 3150s either, even if the bean counters, and the loco crews and shed fitters were, and it occurred to me, if not to him, that with the the Manor boiler and engine parts, he had the makings of a very good 2-6-4T.  
 

Your observation certainly won’t detract from Hornby’s model, which is at least of a prototype that existed, still does actually.  Whereas my imagined 2-6-4T never did, even apparently in Collett’s head, or if it did he never mentioned it!

[Miss Prism]

2 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

that with the the Manor boiler and engine parts, he had the makings of a very good 2-6-4T.

 

Ugh, Why use a lightweight 14 if the loco weight is already in the red category (primarily because of the sidetank capacity, which I guess would have been upped to 2500g)?

 

The Manors were that comparatively rare GWR thing - a failure, It was't until their draughting was improved in the mid-1950s that saw a reasonable improvement, by which time it was arguably all a bit too late.