'Genesis' 4 & 6 wheel coaches in OO Gauge - New Announcement

[jukebox]

8 hours ago, Vistisen said:

As one of the bible bashing brigade ( I'm a liberal. I only use the paperback edition) I wonder about the significance of the name of the project

 

Project Genesis - the original coach before they mutated and evolved? ( I really am liberal, and I certainly don't believe these coaches will take just six days to make)

But this could mean we can look forwards to other projects

 

Project Exodus:  a APT-P with all 13 coaches for £10 quid, mind you though it will take them 40 years wandering about between CADS and EP.

Project Numbers :  It will just be a tubular diesel with a set of different number 37, 47, 52, 33  and so on, take your pick (they all look the same anyway).

Project Judges: something for the rivet counters, ONE of the rivets has 7 sides not 6. Go on find it  This will be their first 'N' gauge project.

Project Kings: .... noooh perhaps not!

 

 

And the old Triang Battlespace Range could get a reworking under the Book of Armaments...

[JCL]

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

Can the assembled body of knowledgable persons compile a list of known 4 and 6 wheelers (types, not individual carriages!) that remained in service to the end of the 1920s or beyond on The Big Four (light and independent railways are covered neatly in one Oakwood Press book), to help their fellow modellers?

 

I've already mentioned the fairly large fleet of ex-LC&DR ones on the SR.

 

The ex-North London out of Broad Street was a big user of four-wheelers until at least the late 1930s on trains that went to places off the electrified network, but their coaches were incredibly distinctive, so probably out of the running here.

 

There were four wheelers on ordinary services (as opposed to workmen's trains) in South Wales, on, I think, ex-Midland lines.

 

Six wheelers on the LNER in North Norfolk and on the ex-GER suburban lines, I think.

 

GWR 4 wheelers, but of the "Ratio Type", so again out of the running.

 

Where and what else?

 

We all like excuses, however feeble, to run what we like.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The LNER did a 1938 special behind No.1. There were seven 6-wheel coaches in ECJS livery - full brake, 3rd, 1st/3rd comp, 1st, 1st, 1st/3rd comp, full brake. I also have some photos of 6 wheelers (1st, 2nd and 3rd) in LNER livery. No dates on them though, I'm afraid.

 

That was quite the slog, but I'm caught up now.

[barrymx5]

14 hours ago, Legend said:

 

Yes but I bet most people run them as a generic "old time coach"  I know I've seen one YouTube channel where they were bought to run with NBR "Maude" because they are a similar vintage. I think they've also appeared from Hornby in Midland Crimson to run with their old compound , again demonstrating that while they were based on a specific GWR coach , they are mainly being used in a generic fashion.

 

Guilty as charged! Yes I use the “Midland “ clerestories on my S&D layout when running as 1923ish.  I do have the odd kit built LSWR coach (PC and Roxey) to go with my LSWR locos - M7, T9, Adams Radial, Terrier etc. But may well be tempted by both blue S&D and LSWR salmon & pink or green 6 wheelers from Hattons. 
I am also pleased to see Dave from Hattons seems to have taken on board suggestions for a full brake. Yes please. 
An earlier post also mentioned the need to get the running reliable on 6 wheeled vehicles and I endorse that. I too had one of the LMS Stove 6 wheelers and returned it. Similarly my Palethorpes Van is not always great. So however good the livery and appearance is I will not be buying if the running is not reliable. And I am sure I am not alone. 
Barry in Somerset 

[wombatofludham]

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

Can the assembled body of knowledgable persons compile a list of known 4 and 6 wheelers (types, not individual carriages!) that remained in service to the end of the 1920s or beyond on The Big Four (light and independent railways are covered neatly in one Oakwood Press book), to help their fellow modellers?

 

I've already mentioned the fairly large fleet of ex-LC&DR ones on the SR.

 

The ex-North London out of Broad Street was a big user of four-wheelers until at least the late 1930s on trains that went to places off the electrified network, but their coaches were incredibly distinctive, so probably out of the running here.

 

There were four wheelers on ordinary services (as opposed to workmen's trains) in South Wales, on, I think, ex-Midland lines.

 

Six wheelers on the LNER in North Norfolk and on the ex-GER suburban lines, I think.

 

GWR 4 wheelers, but of the "Ratio Type", so again out of the running.

 

Where and what else?

 

We all like excuses, however feeble, to run what we like.

 

 

 

 

 

I've just had a quick gander through CC Green's venerable Ian Allan book "Cambrian Railways Album 2" which deals with the Great Western years (and which I use as a reference for future plans for Dolgellau) and it seems about 50 Cambrian 6 wheelers remained in service in 1930 but all seem to have gone by 1935.  Photos of some of the stock seem to match reasonably well the Hatton's designs, with straight ends, simple lower panelling (as per the latest suggested images by Hatton's) and general roofline, but were painted in GWR livery.  The last remaining four wheelers were all ex GWR designs (of the "Ratio Type", I'm not a GWR expert, I come out in hives thinking about the railway) used on services on the Llanfyllin branch (using an ex Cambrian tank which we have a model of on Dolgellau!) and the lightly laid routes to Kerry and Dinas Mawddwy.
 

Although it seems the GWR were in a bit of a hurry to get rid of non-bogie stock, transferring in a lot of Dean clerestories to replace them, there appear to have been a number of six wheelers still trundling up and down the Cambrian lines as well as the Ruabon-Barmouth line, so I suspect at some point a GWR Dean Goods with noise and a rake of generic GWR livery six wheelers with lights might be purchased for Dolgellau to entertain the visitors, none of whom will have the slightest clue whether the coaches are remotely like the ex-Cambrian stock!

Also, I'm sure I've seen a 1949 picture of somewhere in East Anglia with a small GE tank and a rather rag bag collection of non-bogie coaches in a book somewhere.  I'll have to have a rummage and see if I can find it.  They must have been some of the last fixed wheel coaches still in revenue service on the main network, but there again the LNER was notorious for not spending a penny when a farthing would do, unless on the main Anglo-Scottish lines.

[Darryl Tooley]

1 hour ago, wombatofludham said:

Also, I'm sure I've seen a 1949 picture of somewhere in East Anglia with a small GE tank and a rather rag bag collection of non-bogie coaches in a book somewhere.  I'll have to have a rummage and see if I can find it.  They must have been some of the last fixed wheel coaches still in revenue service on the main network, but there again the LNER was notorious for not spending a penny when a farthing would do, unless on the main Anglo-Scottish lines.

Both the Kelvedon & Tollesbury and the Mid-Suffolk Light Railway used six-wheelers until the Autumn of 1951.  'Tank engine' and 'rag bag collection' suggest the Tollesbury line.

 

D

[uax6]

Having looked at the amended drawings, the things that stick out to me are:

 

The ends show that details for a vacuum pipe, curved up to be above the drawhook, but the underframe is Westinghouse air fitted (horizontal brake cylinder rather than the vertical vacuum one). Oh, and that vac pipe run needs to be on the right hand side on one end and the left on the other, both curving to be central above the drawhook, not to one side..

 

If you are persisting with the horizontal cylinder the train hoses need to be at buffer beam level hanging down. But by doing this you are seriously restricting the areas that the vehicles can represent, the majority of companies being vacuum ones...

 

All underframes could do with J hangers adding to the springs, not forgetting that the middle axle j hangers were often longer than the outer axles. Are you going to have any crown plates over the axleboxes on the solebar?

 

I would also remove any hint of ventilators on the roof. These tended to only be placed above smoking compartments. I also note that all the drawings now have Pot lamps (and is that small thing next to the pot the bung in its parking position?), have you decided not to have gas fitted vehicles now?

Are you going to have any rainstrips on the roof?

 

Both ends would generally have steps to roof level. And not many pre-grouping vehicles had guards compartments at the ends with end windows, usually the luggage portion of the van was at the end, with duckets provided for the guard towards the middle of the vehicle. Also most guards duckets of this period were curved to the body top and bottom, the lamp was often in a little cutout in the top curve.

There appears to be no train alarm tell tales, nor connection to the vac standard for communication chain.

 

The 6wh lav still has odd waist panelling. I would have expected that to be one long panel (or actually two, with a single join in the middle under the lav window. This would also be copied in the cantrail panel too).

 

The header at the top of the end panels (of the ends of the carriage) looks very tall, I would expect it to be narrower, maybe with a second beading strip right under the roof (to pull the canvas tight). Also loose the cross beading on the ends, vertical beading only being far and away much more common.

 

The full brake is a good addition, but I feel that the luggage doors are too close to the ends. I would suggest shuffling the doors inboard one panel, so that you have 3 panels, luggage doors, 3 panels, ducket, guards door, 4 panels, luggage doors, 3 panels.

The luggage doors also appear to be missing the 'hanging down' handles for the second door. (this applies to all the luggage doors across the range)

 

Are you going to add bolections to the windows? These are a very distinctive feature of this time period in coach building terms.

 

What style of ventilator hood are you proposing to add above the door windows?

 

 

Sorry its a bit of a list, but these alterations would make a world of difference to a generic type vehicle.

 

Andy G

 

Edit: I've just thought of one other thing that I've been trying to put my finger on since I saw the designs.... A lot of pre-grouping carriages had turnunders on the ends of the carriages. So imagine the tumblehome on the side of the carriage, that curve was also on the ends of the bodies. The triang shorties had it, and that was something that really made it a bit more generic. It would be a really good thing to add to these.

 

feel free to PM me if you need anything explaining better!

Edited October 10, 2019 by uax6

[PatB]

5 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

Can the assembled body of knowledgable persons compile a list of known 4 and 6 wheelers (types, not individual carriages!) that remained in service to the end of the 1920s or beyond on The Big Four (light and independent railways are covered neatly in one Oakwood Press book), to help their fellow modellers?

 

I've already mentioned the fairly large fleet of ex-LC&DR ones on the SR.

 

The ex-North London out of Broad Street was a big user of four-wheelers until at least the late 1930s on trains that went to places off the electrified network, but their coaches were incredibly distinctive, so probably out of the running here.

 

There were four wheelers on ordinary services (as opposed to workmen's trains) in South Wales, on, I think, ex-Midland lines.

 

Six wheelers on the LNER in North Norfolk and on the ex-GER suburban lines, I think.

 

GWR 4 wheelers, but of the "Ratio Type", so again out of the running.

 

Where and what else?

 

We all like excuses, however feeble, to run what we like.

 

 

 

 

 

Unfortunately I seem to have mislaid my book on the North Sunderland Railway, but ISTR they were using ex-GER 6-wheelers, converted to 4-wheelers right up to the end c1952ish. Others may be better placed to confirm exact details.

 

Whilst nominally independent, the NSR wasn't a light railway as such, and certainly saw locos in Unicycling Lion livery. I think it would be quite reasonable to postulate a similar line using the Hattons coaches in BR crimson in the early 50s.

[trevor7598]

I totally agree with those who have suggested that one accurate prototype in lots of liveries

is preferable to generic, which are neither one thing or the other.

The GNR, for example, built vast quantities of 4w & 6w coaches for suburban and main line, and they

lasted for a long time, many ending up as departmentals.

 

I would certainly buy an accurate model, whatever company, but generic, no way.

[Mark Saunders]

10 hours ago, Martin S-C said:

I think the argument that these will sell well to average modellers, freelancers and those who rate historical accuracy lower than #1 on their list while an accurate model to one particular company's design would sell fewer units is probably the most compelling one.

 

If accuracy is not important then those who are not bothered would not notice or even know!

 

Mark Saunders

[BMacdermott]

Hello everyone

 

As noted earlier in a reply to Nearholmer – which is about 1.37 million postings back in this thread now () – the 00 Wishlist Poll Team was looking into the content of the Hattons announcement and has now had a chance to evaluate it.

 

Within the 00 Poll, we list a number of 4- & 6-wheel carriage types but – having looked at the Hattons images – we aren’t able to delete any of them for 2020 (and it would have been too late for 2019 anyway as we ‘go live’ on Monday 14 October. See RMweb banner headline at top of the page). As a number of contributors have said, these are generic models showing what might be called ‘traditional British panelling’.

 

We have looked at them from the perspective of ‘if it looks like a duck, it probably is a duck’ but we can’t realistically delete any item because of the numerous differences compared with our listings.

 

That is not designed to take any glory away from Hattons. We congratulate them on what is looking to be a very good idea and we wish them every success with the project…which is both bold and adventurous to say the least. A number of contributors have raised the topic of a Full Brake and Hattons are to be commended for having listened attentively.

 

We know of some LMS non-passenger-carrying vehicles (NPCCS) which had a 10ft 6in + 10ft 6in wheelbase, so would concur that it would be welcomed for Hattons to either consider a specific vehicle or perhaps offer the underframe as a separate item.

 

At least four of the 9-man 00 Poll Team will be buying some of the items from the wide range.

 

Brian (on behalf of The 00 Wishlist Poll Team)

[Martin S-C]

9 hours ago, melmerby said:

This is quite an interesting thread, complete with input from Hattons Dave.

Maybe it should be re-titled "Design a Coach with Hattons"?

While Hattons Dave is this open mood someone needs to suggest we need an LNWR 2-2-2 Problem class...

[Oldddudders]

12 minutes ago, BMacdermott said:

Within the 00 Poll, we list a number of 4- & 6-wheel carriage types but – having looked at the Hattons images – we aren’t able to delete any of them

 

At least four of the 9-man 00 Poll Team will be buying some of the items from the wide range.

 

Perfect response, Brian. Those who seek greater fidelity should still be able to support their chosen prototype, and as others have said, the Hattons product range will increase interest in early coaches of all companies. Everybody wins.

[Craigw]

4 minutes ago, Martin S-C said:

While Hattons Dave is this open mood someone needs to suggest we need an LNWR 2-2-2 Problem class...

 

Surely a generic 2-2-2 would fit the bill, after all "average modellers, freelancers and those who rate historical accuracy lower than #1 on their list while an accurate model to one particular company's design would sell fewer units is probably the most compelling one."

[Mark Saunders]

1 minute ago, Oldddudders said:

Perfect response, Brian. Those who seek greater fidelity should still be able to support their chosen prototype, and as others have said, the Hattons product range will increase interest in early coaches of all companies. Everybody wins.

 

Can you imagine the outrage if a company announced a range of generic Mk l stock?

 

Mark Saunders

[franciswilliamwebb]

I'm another plus one for the pick-a-prototype and don't go down the generic route, I'm afraid.

 

I'd buy an accurate coaches in fictitious liveries, but never anything generic - a compromise too far.

[Mark Saunders]

Just now, Craigw said:

 

Surely a generic 2-2-2 would fit the bill, after all "average modellers, freelancers and those who rate historical accuracy lower than #1 on their list while an accurate model to one particular company's design would sell fewer units is probably the most compelling one."

 

This is a retrograde step having eventually got Hornby to produce full length Gresley and Mk lll coaches and in effect going down the extension of the Thomas the Tank Engine & Ivor the Engine route!

 

Mark Saunders

 

 

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

7 hours ago, wombatofludham said:

... I'm sure I've seen a 1949 picture of somewhere in East Anglia with a small GE tank and a rather rag bag collection of non-bogie coaches in a book somewhere.  I'll have to have a rummage and see if I can find it.  They must have been some of the last fixed wheel coaches still in revenue service on the main network, but there again the LNER was notorious for not spending a penny when a farthing would do, unless on the main Anglo-Scottish lines.

The LNER was the largest user of such stock among the Big 4. This was a simple consequence of the poor financial state of the business for most of its existence. (North London commuters could ride in what were still in essentials pre-group carriage interior designs as late as 1965, the last of the Quad-art sets only withdrawn in 1966; improvement by articulation resulting in a better ride, but did not enlarge the compartment sizes!)

 

Hattons are missing a trick on the 4W types, a close coupled set can have a Jinty and race with the big engines out on the ECML as far as Potters Bar, representing the pre-WWII NLR operation.

[Nearholmer]

As I said earlier, the NLR coaches, even the late-built ones from Wolverton, were highly distinctive, outliers when compared with the middle-ground that the generics capture, but maybe a creative individual will be able to work the trick.

 

Which prompts thoughts about after-market twiddly bits.

 

The 3D printers and resin-casters should be able to have fun with birdcages, cove roofs, clerestories, and a hundred other things.

[Oldddudders]

21 minutes ago, Mark Saunders said:

 

Can you imagine the outrage if a company announced a range of generic Mk l stock?

 

Mark Saunders

But Mk 1 stock had far fewer different variants, all of which, I assume, are very well documented, not to mention many being available for scanning etc. 

 

And I imagine that until relatively recently generic Mk 1s were all the market offered, anyway.....

 

I do find the idea that Hattons are somehow committing an act of gross effrontery with their product rather curious. Other manufacturers will watch sales, and if these rush off the shelves, the chances are there will be more coaches of the era - but almost certainly prototype-specific.

[Edwardian]

4 hours ago, uax6 said:

Having looked at the amended drawings, the things that stick out to me are:

 

The ends show that details for a vacuum pipe, curved up to be above the drawhook, but the underframe is Westinghouse air fitted (horizontal brake cylinder rather than the vertical vacuum one). Oh, and that vac pipe run needs to be on the right hand side on one end and the left on the other, both curving to be central above the drawhook, not to one side..

 

If you are persisting with the horizontal cylinder the train hoses need to be at buffer beam level hanging down. But by doing this you are seriously restricting the areas that the vehicles can represent, the majority of companies being vacuum ones...

 

The inclusion of the Westinghouse gear with the central air cylinder reinforces my view that Hattons have been looking at Brighton drawings. I accept this leads to an inconsistency, though I don't much mind; where I want vac braked coaches (e,g, West Norfolk), I'll just bodge a vac cylinder.

 

In fact, it is a combination of features that screams "Brighton" to me.  Stroudley was an early adopter of this panelling style in the early 1870s.  It's this early adoption that makes it combination with oil lighting credible (Stroudleys had gas and Stones electric lighting also).  So the combination of this panel style, oil lamp covers, Westinghouse and the standard lengths of 26' and 32' is very suggestive of Stroudley 4-wheelers and Billinton 6-wheelers.  

 

 

4 hours ago, uax6 said:

All underframes could do with J hangers adding to the springs, not forgetting that the middle axle j hangers were often longer than the outer axles. Are you going to have any crown plates over the axleboxes on the solebar?

 

I would leave this:

 

- For the 4-wheelers, I don't think spring hangars would be typical, so these should be left as they are.

 

- For the 6-wheelers, it's more varied. Some lines, e.g. GWR and LSWR, would have 'J' hangars on all springs.  Others, e.g. GER and MR Claytons, would have 'J' hangars only on the centre springs.  Billinton 6-wheelers had spring hangars, on all springs, but not of a 'J' pattern.

 

A more important issue, IMHO, are brakes to the central wheels.  In most cases, the centre wheels are unbraked.  I have hesitated to mention this in case it leads to extra cost to Hattons; it would be simple to snip off the central brake hangars and shoes. 

 

4 hours ago, uax6 said:

I would also remove any hint of ventilators on the roof. These tended to only be placed above smoking compartments.

 

Good point

 

4 hours ago, uax6 said:

I also note that all the drawings now have Pot lamps (and is that small thing next to the pot the bung in its parking position?),

 

Yes, rather splendidly, Hattons have included the bung.  The bung would be inserted where the lamps had been removed, so Hattons show the fittings as if the lamps are present, which is sensible.

 

4 hours ago, uax6 said:

have you decided not to have gas fitted vehicles now?

 

 I hope not.  Gas would be the most useful and representative lighting system for this coach style.

 

With an eye to avoiding cost and complexity - the £30 price point needs to be maintained, IMHO - I would hesitate to suggest gas cylinders.  These are easily fabricated, as are gas pipes on the coach ends.

 

4 hours ago, uax6 said:

Are you going to have any rainstrips on the roof?

 

Good idea, suggest single rainstrip

 

4 hours ago, uax6 said:

Both ends would generally have steps to roof level.

 

Not necessarily.  I have seen plenty of examples of steps at one end only.  However, the arrangement of 3 steps, on one side of both ends, seems very common. e,g, LB&SC, MR, LSWR, so, perhaps this more representative than 6 steps at one end only? 

 

4 hours ago, uax6 said:

And not many pre-grouping vehicles had guards compartments at the ends with end windows, usually the luggage portion of the van was at the end, with duckets provided for the guard towards the middle of the vehicle. Also most guards duckets of this period were curved to the body top and bottom, the lamp was often in a little cutout in the top curve.

 

There are plenty of examples of both end and mid-body lookouts.  End lookouts were used, for example, by LB&SCR, LSWR, GER.

 

I understand that Hattons plan both flat top lookout, e.g. GNR, and curved topped.  The latter often did not have a lamp cut out, so I wouldn't do that.

 

4 hours ago, uax6 said:

 

There appears to be no train alarm tell tales, nor connection to the vac standard for communication chain.

 

The 6wh lav still has odd waist panelling. I would have expected that to be one long panel (or actually two, with a single join in the middle under the lav window. This would also be copied in the cantrail panel too).

 

No.  The cantrail panel has a vent hood above the lav. window. It should have a vent (it's a loo!).

 

It is logical to mirror this in the way the waist panels are divided. 

 

Returning to the Brighton genesis of Project Generic, see Billinton's lav. comp to Dia.71.

 

 

 

 

4 hours ago, uax6 said:

 

Are you going to add bolections to the windows? These are a very distinctive feature of this time period in coach building terms.

 

 

 

Good point

 

 

In relation to clerestory roofs mentioned by several, these were relatively rare for non-bogie coaches and surely would require different bodies to accommodate the tri-partate roof profile that would be required.  This would strike me as a huge extra costs for not much gain.

 

[JSpencer]

I wonder what the comments on here would have been like if Hornby had made the announcement.

[sem34090]

Aren't MK1s generic anyway?

 

*Runs for cover, dons tin 'at...*

[mozzer models]

5 hours ago, uax6 said:

 

 

The ends show that details for a vacuum pipe, curved up to be above the drawhook, but the underframe is Westinghouse air fitted (horizontal brake cylinder rather than the vertical vacuum one). Oh, and that vac pipe run needs to be on the right hand side on one end and the left on the other, both curving to be central above the drawhook, not to one side..

 

If you are persisting with the horizontal cylinder the train hoses need to be at buffer beam level hanging down. But by doing this you are seriously restricting the areas that the vehicles can represent, the majority of companies being vacuum ones...

 

 

horizontal  cylinder is mostly a gas tank for lighting & not for the brakes 

[Edwardian]

Just now, mozzer models said:

horizontal  cylinder is mostly a gas tank for lighting & not for the brakes 

 

No, what is drawn here is not a gas cylinder concerned with lighting, but a Westinghouse air cylinder concerned with brakes. 

 

[PaulRhB]

49 minutes ago, Mark Saunders said:

 

Can you imagine the outrage if a company announced a range of generic Mk l stock?

 

Mark Saunders

Oh yes  but there’s enough market to support the mk1 variants because they did appear in multiple liveries. 

What is the actual market for a 4 wheel LNWR coach in comparison though? Probably a fiftieth or less, the same applies to Metropolitan and even the ‘big’ name liveries are probably a tenth at best. So they simply aren’t viable as custom models. The only other option was an accurate model of one in assorted liveries and Hattons have decided that has as many pitfalls. 

The overwhelming response has been ok we accept that compromise on stock as our focus is more on locos or operation. It may pave the way to more period stock if they find certain liveries are popular enough to support a dedicated run. This is a relatively low risk way to establish that. 

I will admit to just buying a few mk1’s and not worrying if I’ve got a typical set that ran on my local line because operation is my interest not that the right number of seats are there for the 1/76 punters. 

I’m not decrying the total scale approach just that these aren’t aimed at that segment of the market because it’s not viable for Hattons.

I know some are worried about the impact on the kits but I’d suggest there are more chances of people buying a few of these then getting a couple of bogie coaches made to go with them. It may lead to more sales because there’s an easy introduction and they can afford two handbuilt coaches to go with them but not four so these bulk out the train while funds allow. 

I did the same in HO for a coal train the first 15 wagons were Athearn Genesis hoppers at £20 each with separate handrails as they appeared in photos of the locos but I bulked out the train with the cheaper moulded detail Atlas ones at £9 each for the next twenty wagons