Jump to content
 

PTA/JTA/JUA, By Accurascale (NOW WITH ADDED BSC INNERS!)


Recommended Posts

For the ARC rakes, you might also want some of the later build PXA/JXA wagons which had a slightly different body style (and mostly on Schlieren bogies although there were 3 build codes for the 16 wagons built!):

 

 

IMG_4021_web.jpg

Edited by lyneux
  • Like 8
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

To answer that question, I'd have to ask you which British steel flow are you talking about as the ratio of buffered to unbuffered varied by flow.

 

Broadly speaking, the rakes included multiple 'cuts' of wagons, each cut bounded by buffered 'outer' wagons, with between 3 and 8 unbuffered 'inner' wagons.

 

some examples (O=outer, I=inner):

 

O-I-I-I-O-O-I-I-I-O-O-I-I-I-O

 

O-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-O-O-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-O

 

Make sense?

 

Guy

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, lyneux said:

To answer that question, I'd have to ask you which British steel flow are you talking about as the ratio of buffered to unbuffered varied by flow.

 

Broadly speaking, the rakes included multiple 'cuts' of wagons, each cut bounded by buffered 'outer' wagons, with between 3 and 8 unbuffered 'inner' wagons.

 

some examples (O=outer, I=inner):

 

O-I-I-I-O-O-I-I-I-O-O-I-I-I-O

 

O-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-O-O-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-O

 

Make sense?

 

Guy

 

Do you know what the ratio was for the Hunterston to Ravenscraig flows generally? or what the cuts of wagons used were there?

 

I had thought those only had a single all-grey outer and all the others were always aligned the same way (orange end at the same side).

 

Edited by GordonC
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi 

 

As far as I can remember and is highlighted on the wagon chart on p1 the Hunterston to Ravenscraig rake had only one grey wagon with buffers in it. I think one of the grey and orange wagons was fitted with buffers at one end. Tom Smith maybe able to provide some photographic evidence of this or not. To stop any confusion. This rake was in grey and orange livery without any wording ie British Steel. There was also the Mossend to Hardendale quarry rake of eight or nine wagons that were used for transporting lime to Ravenscraig. Accurascale must be rubbing their hands at all these prospective sales.

 

Stephen 

Edited by ayrmrg
Updated info.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not wishing to dampen anyones froth, but the diagrams at the Start of the thread give some excellent examples of rakes.

 

Maybe to avoid sidetracking off the subject of the Accurascale product, it may be worth opening up a separate couple of threads to deal with the traffics - i.e. British Steel, Mendip Activities, Misc PTA/JTA/JUA Activities.  That way everyone can reference useful material relevant to the wagons they are interested in acquiring, without going through pages of this thread.

 

Certainly, the missing link would appear to be sets of inners for the British Steel livery(ies)?  Does the blue/orange livery need them as well?  Personally, I would be happy to go for a pack of inners, as I am sure most modellers purchasing the British Steel sets would, if it is going to make the rakes more prototypical.

 

I suppose the next question is, what type of coupling are Accurascale going to put on the wagons?  And will they have to be spilt in say "fives?", or what will be the options when operating them?

 

Likewise (someone is bound to ask), with the wagons (from looking on the internet) being circa 12.4m long, then the model should be circa 16.4cm, making 10 vehicles around 1.64m.  Now from a personal note - Is 10 enough or do I need to go for 15?

 

Regards,

 

C.

 

P.S.  Would really like to see some more photos of the excellent model of "Whatley".  Superb modelling! 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
40 minutes ago, dogbox321 said:

I suppose the next question is, what type of coupling are Accurascale going to put on the wagons?  And will they have to be spilt in say "fives?", or what will be the options when operating them?

 

Likewise (someone is bound to ask), with the wagons (from looking on the internet) being circa 12.4m long, then the model should be circa 16.4cm, making 10 vehicles around 1.64m.  Now from a personal note - Is 10 enough or do I need to go for 15?

 

 

 

- Every wagon features a 'kinematic' (cloud coupling) mounted NEM socket. We are providing mini tension locks on outers and knuckle couplers on inners, but you can very easily replace with your coupler of choice

 

- The wagons are indeed 165mm over couplers

Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, McC said:

 

- Every wagon features a 'kinematic' (cloud coupling) mounted NEM socket. We are providing mini tension locks on outers and knuckle couplers on inners, but you can very easily replace with your coupler of choice

 

- The wagons are indeed 165mm over couplers

 

Thanks. 

 

Will it have "cosmetic" couplings and hooks too for the outers, as per the instanters on the PCA?

 

Regards,

 

C.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

hi C,

 

The Outer wagons will have conventional coupling hooks, and we will most likely supply some dummies in the accessory bag, along with hoses, etc.  (One outer per pack also features a flashing tail light)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Gents. Please can you confirm the coupling style for the inner wagons?

 

The coupling should be centred through the fretwork as per below:

 

10457927943_b1a14da19c_c.jpg

 

I note from the CADs that this would appear not to be the case although the artwork shows the couplings at the correct height. I'm confused?

 

Guy

 

1870486549_ScreenShot2019-06-27at22_03_59.png.3722f7f8fbe9306b6fece5c44f58e7bf.png

Edited by lyneux
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Hi Guy,

 

We have it as per the CAD render above, at correct NEM height. This is a tough one, as we know people will purchase outer packs only, go to couple to stock or locos already on their layout and find height is way off, and complain. Personally we would rather do it as per real thing, so are currently on the fence. What do people think?

 

Cheers!

 

Fran

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

If you’re going to put a coupling at the correct height surely it’s going to be a knuckle so is it possible to fit a fixed NEM pocket in there too for a kadee? It leaves the choice for prototypical couplings if your layout has easier curves but pleases the mass market too. To be honest I find on large rad points that solid body mounted coupling pockets are fine for kadee NEM couplers and I’ve got 159’s running over crossovers with it that have far more overhang than these wagons. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Accurascale Fran said:

What do people think?

 

Hi Fran,

 

Please don't compromise! Leave them at the prototype height. Given that you're selling them in packs, I don't think people will get this wrong. There is no need to couple an inner wagon to anything other than an inner wagon.

 

If you look at what Dapol are doing on their JHA inners, they are leaving them at the correct height.

 

Just doing some more digging on the Ravenscraig and Port Talbot wagon rakes. Findings to be published in a moment...

 

Guy

Edited by lyneux
  • Like 3
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Have the outers at the right nem height, have the inners at the correct height.

 

From a stock perspective, make more with outers.. everyone needs that to get started.

 

if tooling practicalities dictates one of the other, why not make a pocket fitted coupling bar in a stretched “z” shape, going from prototypical height to NEM height for the outers,

 

if it was a straight choice of one of the other, then go prototypical, i’ll make the “z” bar to couple it to the loco myself.

 

 

Edited by adb968008
  • Like 1
  • Agree 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, PaulRhB said:

If you’re going to put a coupling at the correct height surely it’s going to be a knuckle so is it possible to fit a fixed NEM pocket in there too for a kadee? It leaves the choice for prototypical couplings if your layout has easier curves but pleases the mass market too. To be honest I find on large rad points that solid body mounted coupling pockets are fine for kadee NEM couplers and I’ve got 159’s running over crossovers with it that have far more overhang than these wagons. 

 

We are talking about the inner wagons here. There is no need to couple an inner to anything other than another inner so no need to swap or replace couplings. The couplings on my tipplers are at prototype height, body mounted and will go round train set curves so no need to compromise on this. For all of those reasons, I'm not sure that a NEM pocket makes any sense whatsoever for the inner couplings. There is another reason too: you can't get the end of a kadee through the etched fretwork (if it is made to scale).

 

Guy

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Fran mentioned the outer packs in his post ;) and that’s the ones I’d suggest a compromise kadee option at correct height. 

For the inners I’d agree scale height makes sense as they shouldn’t couple to anything else. They could be listed as inner wagon extension sets?

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
47 minutes ago, Accurascale Fran said:

Hi Guy,

 

We have it as per the CAD render above, at correct NEM height. This is a tough one, as we know people will purchase outer packs only, go to couple to stock or locos already on their layout and find height is way off, and complain. Personally we would rather do it as per real thing, so are currently on the fence. What do people think?

 

Cheers!

 

Fran

NEM height at the outer end and in the correct place on the inners please.  Just looks very strange having them in the wrong place and will be a lot of work to fix 

  • Agree 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, The Fatadder said:

NEM height at the outer end and in the correct place on the inners please.  Just looks very strange having them in the wrong place and will be a lot of work to fix 

 

Agree with all above.

This is what we should be getting from manufacturers, actually requesting, listening and acting on feedback! Well done Accurascale (provided you change the inner couplings to the prototype height ;) )

  • Agree 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, GordonC said:

 

Do you know what the ratio was for the Hunterston to Ravenscraig flows generally? or what the cuts of wagons used were there?

 

I had thought those only had a single all-grey outer and all the others were always aligned the same way (orange end at the same side).

 

 

Ok, I've done a bit more research work with the Metro book, some magazine articles, videos and photos.

 

The 'cuts' as mentioned above are correct for Mendip Stone. In a rake of 20 there are usually a 2-3 cuts of wagons. The cuts can be as short as just a single pair of outers but are more usually 8-10 wagons.

 

Regarding the BSC traffic:

On Port Talbot to Llanwern the wagons were as follows.
102 x JU003A (inners)
6 x JT003B (outers)
6 x JT003C (outers)

These were then made up into 4 rakes of 27, each consisting of 25 inners and two outers (one JT003B, one JT003C). There were then 6 spare wagons: two inners (JT003A), two of each type of outer (JT003B and JT003C). This gives the total of 114 wagons (26564 to 26677).

On the Ravenscraig flows the wagons were as follows.
101 JU004D (inners)
11 JT004E (outers)
11 JT004F (outers)

I've less evidence for how many rakes of each length were used here but the rake lengths for each are correct as per the Accurascale chart.

Hunterstone to Ravenscraig, - 21 wagons (19 inners and 2 outers - one of each type) 
Hartendale to Ravenscraig - 11 wagons (9 inners and 2 outers - one of each type) 
Thrislington to Ravenscraig - 9 wagons (7 inners and 2 outers - one of each type)

If the rakes were 4x21, 1x11 and 2x9 that would then leave the following spares:
2x JU004D
4x JT004E
4x JT004F

 

I hope that helps!

 

Guy

Edited by lyneux
  • Like 4
  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Accurascale Fran said:

Hi gents,

 

Happy to say that I had a chat with our design team and the outers will have NEMs with tension locks at correct height, while the inners will have knuckles in the prototype position. 

 

So, crisis averted. Sorry for the panic. 

 

Cheers!

 

Fran

 

 

That's great news... thanks for listening Fran!

 

Guy

  • Like 4
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...