Jump to content
 

Oxford Rail announce J27 at Toy Fair


Andy Y
 Share

Recommended Posts

Fantastic news! I'm so pleased someone has finally bitten onto making the J27! Can't like this enough.

 

Only slight regret is that they haven't done 65894, but either its tucked back as a special edition, or I renumber one of the offerings. 

 

So happy! 

 

Paul. 

Suggest you wait and see if it is a later release. Whatever you do don't renumber one of the offerings. There are traps aplenty with this class. All 4 of the first round of releases could have the same type 57 boiler rather than the later 57A carried by the preserved example. The 57A had the dome positioned further away from the smokebox. Even the 'late crest' version which carried the 57A reverted to a '57' during the 'late crest' period so it is possible that Oxford are trying to represent all eras with a common set of tooling. They are also likely to have tooled for the 57A but may release this later. Their N7 has 2 types of firebox in the first round of releases but the cab is of the early 'GE series' type. Oxford have tooling for the later N7 cab for later release so it is likely the J27 will appear with other variations in future.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

The nascent LNER only decided the new liveries in May 1923. By September 1923 the ampersand was dropped.

 

How many of any class would have gone through the shops and had that extremely short-lived version applied? For the very few that did, it would not have lasted more than about 3 years.

 

That means that version of the locomotive could only really be run with pre-Grouping rolling stock in a pre-Grouping context.

 

So almost as useful as Hornby's first LNER Q6 with a 1946 number?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

The proposed wagons interest me. I do hope they make a reasonably accurate representation of whichever/whatever livery they choose. Companies like Powell Duffryn and Nixons Navigation are a bit of a straight bet, but things like the Cambrian Combine sometimes needs research, as it covers 2 eras.

 

Remember also that a different valley will have a different grade of coal, and a different company that specialised in that type of coal. A degree of additional research will be required to match the wagon to the valley. I look forward to seeing what Oxford can produce. So far, so good.

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

 

Edit: I've just seen a photo of the 7-plank, ex PO wagon via facebook. It looks quite good, but I do wish Oxford would put some 'other' P numbers on their wagons. Still, they're getting 3-link couplings anyway...

Edited by tomparryharry
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Suggest you wait and see if it is a later release. Whatever you do don't renumber one of the offerings. There are traps aplenty with this class. All 4 of the first round of releases could have the same type 57 boiler rather than the later 57A carried by the preserved example. The 57A had the dome positioned further away from the smokebox. Even the 'late crest' version which carried the 57A reverted to a '57' during the 'late crest' period so it is possible that Oxford are trying to represent all eras with a common set of tooling. They are also likely to have tooled for the 57A but may release this later. Their N7 has 2 types of firebox in the first round of releases but the cab is of the early 'GE series' type. Oxford have tooling for the later N7 cab for later release so it is likely the J27 will appear with other variations in future.  

 

Thanks Tramshed,

 

if it is just a re-position of the dome, that shouldn't be too onerous. We'll see though, 

 

Paul. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Tramshed,

 

if it is just a re-position of the dome, that shouldn't be too onerous. We'll see though, 

 

Paul. 

 

Just that?

There are variations on the piano front/frame extensions between rebuilt saturated and superheated versions. There are composite and plain buffer beams. There is a difference between the tender underframes between the early and later batches. Then they swapped tenders in later life, so the preserved late build example looks as far as I can make out in photos to now have an early type tender. It looks to me very much a case of wait and see what Oxford will offer. Take the nearest to the one, or more, that you want and get the saw ready is probably the best policy. As for chimney heights and what they did to achieve a lower height for lines that had restrictions. Best not to go there at present. 

Bernard  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just that?

There are variations on the piano front/frame extensions between rebuilt saturated and superheated versions. There are composite and plain buffer beams. There is a difference between the tender underframes between the early and later batches. Then they swapped tenders in later life, so the preserved late build example looks as far as I can make out in photos to now have an early type tender. It looks to me very much a case of wait and see what Oxford will offer. Take the nearest to the one, or more, that you want and get the saw ready is probably the best policy. As for chimney heights and what they did to achieve a lower height for lines that had restrictions. Best not to go there at present. 

Bernard  

 

Hi Bernard,

 

Honestly, and this is just my own approach, no one else has to agree or subscribe to it, I'm not going to get too stressed about it. There are lots of variation in details on a class of engine so long lived, and beyond crawling over the original (which isn't too far from me anyway), there is always going to be some discrepancy. Tender under-frames and minor height differences in chimneys aren't exactly identifiable when its trundling around a layout. Recently I was looking over a separate loco to use as a base for creating a Robinson Q4 (the Bachmann O4), and some are concerned about the difference in boiler dia 4'9" vs 5', 1mm at our scale, and as it is, the Bachmann boiler is underside for the O4 anyway. Above all else, a 1mm variation there, is considerably less then the 2.3mm or so discrepancy in our track gauge....... 

Paul. 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Don't think so. The Q6 was withdrawn with this tender, it being the same one that has been substantially rebuilt during preservation. Notice the D shaped frame cut outs.

 

6458946361_d7affa74e6_b.jpg63395 Seaton Bank 4.9.67 by George Woods, on Flickr

 

comparatively easy way to spot a Q6 with an Atlantic tender is look out for the deeper valance but be careful as some had the valance removed. Then there is the oval cutouts. 

 

Take a Look at Aurthur K's phot of 63344 in this post.

 

Notice the similarity to this?

 

attachicon.gif2198_1936Sm.jpg

 

but not this type Atlantic tender:

 

30865197975_b9c6090eef_b.jpgN1000_19660716_Sunderland_SouthDockShed_23 by Tom Young, on Flickr

 

... and then there is the atlantics that didn't have Atlantic Atlantic tenders if you get my drift. These tenders eventually finding their way back to loco's of other classes.

 

https://mikemorant.smugmug.com/Trains-Railways-British-Isles/LNER-and-BRE-and-BRNE/LNER-pre-grouping-locomotives/NER-locomotives/i-XBzdgVH/A

 

Finally 63395 definitely not fitted with an Atlantic tender.

 

http://southpelawjunction.co.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/63395_1964-05-30_Consett-ROS-5-492-ZF-7256-87812-1-003.jpg

 

Sorry, you only get 1/10 for your chosen subject of Q6 tender recognition, (for effort) but I have to admit to it not being an easy subject.

 

So back to J26/7's

 

Not a J27 yesterday:

 

5982126523_67090f9433_b.jpgR0227  65772 Thornaby 28Jun1960 by Ron Fisher, on Flickr 

 

Porcy,

 

Great pictures - especially the Atlantic.

 

Atlantics were built with tenders with both D-shaped and oval (the last 10 Zs) frame slots.

 

As you say the depth of the angle iron below the footplate is no guide, as these were altered in some cases to suit the depth on the Atlantic locomotives.

 

Our (NELPG's) Q6 was completed in December 1918, so had a tender with oval frame slots - so we can say with confidence that the current tender is not the original and that, though the tank is new, it matches the proportions of the one at withdrawal. No tender of those proportions (I do not say exact dimensions) particularly of height of tank, with continuous coal rails around the tender rear, originated other than on NER Class V, V09 and Z Atlantics, except for the 10 R1 Class tenders, which all seem to have gone to J39s.

 

So I think it is very likely that the current frames on 63395 are from an Atlantic.

 

Small consolation for the lack of a Z in preservation.

 

Look out for a change of livery in 2238/63395's Centenary Year!

 

Regards,

 

Roy

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

J27 !   :sungum:

 

Edit* 

 

OR76J27002- BR (Early) No.65837 - Even better a 50G based loco  :sungum: 

 

Unfortunately, at least for some of us, No 65837 was not based at Whitby. I assume this information was obtained from the BRDatabase website. The shed allocation history shown on this site for 65837 I believe should apply to 65857 (the allocation history shown for this loco is also incorrect). No 65837 was based at Percy Main from 8/50 to 11/62 according to the book 'Shed by Shed - part 3' by Tony Walmsley. A quick check through a few ABC locoshed books confirms this.

 

Ken

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/24/2019 at 9:44 PM, R Marshall said:

 

Porcy,

 

Great pictures - especially the Atlantic.

 

Atlantics were built with tenders with both D-shaped and oval (the last 10 Zs) frame slots.

 

As you say the depth of the angle iron below the footplate is no guide, as these were altered in some cases to suit the depth on the Atlantic locomotives.

 

Our (NELPG's) Q6 was completed in December 1918, so had a tender with oval frame slots - so we can say with confidence that the current tender is not the original and that, though the tank is new, it matches the proportions of the one at withdrawal. No tender of those proportions (I do not say exact dimensions) particularly of height of tank, with continuous coal rails around the tender rear, originated other than on NER Class V, V09 and Z Atlantics, except for the 10 R1 Class tenders, which all seem to have gone to J39s.

 

So I think it is very likely that the current frames on 63395 are from an Atlantic.

 

Small consolation for the lack of a Z in preservation.

 

Look out for a change of livery in 2238/63395's Centenary Year!

 

Regards,

 

Roy

 

I did do a bit of digging about 63395's tender for Dave Jones when his Q6 model looked likely..

 

There are dated photos of it with at least three different-shaped (slots, box height, coal rails)  tenders during its BR life, the final two differently shaped tenders apparently being the same tender as no tender swap was recorded.

 

Late on in the life of the Q6 and J27 (ie post-end of 1962) there was a limit on what could be spent on overhauling and repairing old steam locos, so some repairs and rebuilds were unrecorded to keep the accountants quiet.  The nearest I can get is that 63395's tender MAY have had its top half renewed either at shed or most likely in Gateshead works, either with new platework (unlikely) or the top half of a withdrawn tender of another Q6 that was going for scrap.  

 

There isn't much else that can explain a change of tender height and shape without a change of works number- other than a works plate swap at shed if a condemned Q6 had a tender that was in a lot better condition than 63395s - what authority doesn't know about the shedmaster doesn't get it in the neck about.....  As exactly what happened is unrecorded I suspect we will never know.

 

All the very best

 

Les

Link to post
Share on other sites

On differences between J26s and J27s in BR days.  Source, the RCTS green guide and Willie Yeadon.

 

There were 50 J26s, all of which were saturated and built with circular cab lookouts.  The J27 had slight frame differences at first to accommodate a slightly different boiler- all J26s later carried J27-type boilers, the last modified being in 1958.   

 

All J27s built up to 1909  had circular cab lookouts.  The 1921 to 1923 batches had shaped loookous to the cab front and were superheated (65860 to 65894 in BR money).

Apart from five locos these all had superheaters removed. 

 

All of the J27s with circular cab front windows were rebuilt with shaped lookouts, as were 22 of the 50 J26s, leaving 28 with round spectacles. 

 

The superheated locos were built with balance weights on the centre wheels only.  All other J26 and J27 were built without.  SOME saturated locos also got balance weights but not all,  Some also acquired balance weights on the first and third pairs of driving wheels, and some that had had balance weights lost them in the works overhaul wheel swapping that went on.  You need a photo of the engine you want at the time you want it to be correct here.

 

To summarise-

in BR days.

 

If a loco was still superheated it was a J27.

If a loco had balance weights to the wheels it was a J27

If a loco had round cab spectacles it was a J26.

If it had shaped cab spectacles, no superheater and no balance weights it could be either!  The running number is the confirmation.

 

If you want to turn your J27 into a J26 check it has no balance weights on the wheels and pick one of the 22 to renumber it to.

 

Les

(with three J27s and two each of J26 and J25 on Hawthorn Dene, modified Union Mills ones.)

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, The Johnster said:

The Bachmann 94xx is taking longer than some of the locos were in service for; 2 years isn't that bad!

 

Some of those were on order for longer than they were in service for- and scrapped when due for their first General overhaul (as were some of the last batch of 16xx).  The D95xx had a tradition to follow.

 

A prototype for everything....

 

At least the J27 lasted a long time in service - the shortest being 65886 at 36 years and 2 months with 65789 managing 61 years and about a month.

Les

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

The 94xx were ridiculously short lived; as you say some were scrapped before their first overhaul.  It is easy to dismiss them as an irrelevant example of BR's shortsightedness, but that isn't quite fair.  They should be regarded as the GW regarded them, the final part of Collett's plan to modernise the absorbed and constituent South Wales engines.  This dated from the grouping, of course, and initially comprised of the GW taking stock of it's newly acquired fleet and assessing it's condition.  Many locos were scrapped almost immediately, but the more modern ones and those in better condition were subjected to a rolling program of rebuilding with Swindon standard boilers and fittings, though some of the Rhymney R class and similar Stephonson 0-6-2s for the Brecon & Merthyr and the Neath & Brecon lasted until withdrawal into the 50s in unrebuilt condition.

 

The TVR A and 04 classes were all rebuilt and 'modernised' in this way, and an entirely new class, the 56xx, produced to cover the South Wales shortfall.  57xx'/8750 panniers replaced the smaller engines, but by 1947 a new loco was needed to take over from the As, 04s, and other smaller 0-6-2Ts, and this was the 94xx.  They were, in the event, by no means confined to South Wales work, though, and were spread across the Western Region.  

 

The D95xx were very much to have been the 94xx's replacement, but the trip and transfer freight work they were intended for was drying up even as they were being built; South Wales only really needed the EE type 3s and some 08s.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Well, here’s a photo’ of, I think the name is Alexander kit, of the J27, which I built about 10 years ago. It’s not perfect, but I hope to purchase a few OR examples to keep it company. The photo’ was taken on my layout about five years ago. It’s hauling a scratch built Cravens NER breakdown crane, the 25 ton example, along with the mess and tool vans which are the D&S kits.

 

Best regards,

 

Rob.

AE6C3324-60AF-48E3-9FC5-D38E364A2294.jpeg

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, The Johnster said:

The 94xx were ridiculously short lived; as you say some were scrapped before their first overhaul.  It is easy to dismiss them as an irrelevant example of BR's shortsightedness, but that isn't quite fair.  They should be regarded as the GW regarded them, the final part of Collett's plan to modernise the absorbed and constituent South Wales engines.  This dated from the grouping, of course, and initially comprised of the GW taking stock of it's newly acquired fleet and assessing it's condition.  Many locos were scrapped almost immediately, but the more modern ones and those in better condition were subjected to a rolling program of rebuilding with Swindon standard boilers and fittings, though some of the Rhymney R class and similar Stephonson 0-6-2s for the Brecon & Merthyr and the Neath & Brecon lasted until withdrawal into the 50s in unrebuilt condition.

 

The TVR A and 04 classes were all rebuilt and 'modernised' in this way, and an entirely new class, the 56xx, produced to cover the South Wales shortfall.  57xx'/8750 panniers replaced the smaller engines, but by 1947 a new loco was needed to take over from the As, 04s, and other smaller 0-6-2Ts, and this was the 94xx.  They were, in the event, by no means confined to South Wales work, though, and were spread across the Western Region.  

 

The D95xx were very much to have been the 94xx's replacement, but the trip and transfer freight work they were intended for was drying up even as they were being built; South Wales only really needed the EE type 3s and some 08s.  

 

 

… and to bring this full circle and back on topic part of the reason for the J27s surviving into 1967 was that the batch of EE type 3s that were supposed to replace them in 1965 were diverted to the Western Region, leaving Gateshead works (long closed but still extant as the repair shop for the shed) doing full General overhauls (called unclassified to keep the accountants happy) on Q6s and J27s including boiler changes to keep them running.  

 

Les

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

I've just looked at the proposals for the J27 numbers and realised I already have 65817....

 

IMG_3506.JPG.91ffc665df804cf5e592096573821c54.JPG

 

Union Mills N-gauge J27 with swapped tender and some upgrading, including balance weights.  DCC fitted.  Posed on Hawthorn Dene.

 

Les

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, OOgaugeJaf said:

Absolutely fantastic news for North East modellers. Just preordered via a local Preservation group helping to support their restoration project.

 

I heard a rumour today and that these could arrive as early as December. Is this correct?

 

I've heard a similar date, but I think a better estimation may be made by the lead times on previous Oxford projects.

 

Paul.

  • Like 2
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...