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

[Compound2632]

2 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

P coaches?

 

Take the sides of al Ratio Midland suburban third and a brake third,  a razor saw, a craft knife, and small files.

 

OK, it probably won’t be exact, but better for the job than a big birdcage, possibly.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Those carriages are square-panelled. If I recall correctly from the P thread, they're ex-LCDR stock. Out with the microstrip, I say!

[The Johnster]

I'd normally be the first to criticise anything as generic as this, but I doubt that much hard information in the way of scale or accurate drawings exist for many of these coaches, which were not dissimilar to each other, so I can see what Hatton's are getting at with them.  If I saw a period 2 or 3 liveried loco hauling them, I'd be convinced enough.  They look amenable to being styled differently, for instance with fillets in the corners to take away the square window look, or rain strips over the whole length or just above the doors.  Perhaps one could put louvre ventilators in the top of the door window reveals, and there are probably plenty of other ways of making them look a little different.

 

As supplied they look to me a bit like Ashburys.  They are no doubt amenable to cut'n'shutting into bogie or 8-wheelers from a slightly later period as well.

Edited October 11, 2019 by The Johnster

[Compound2632]

2 hours ago, 57xx said:

 

Yes only two type of chassis, 7 different basic body styles from what I could see (unless I missed some more announcements buried in the 28 pages), the 6 originally announced plus the full brake. My point was that they were not going to be making dozens and dozens of physically different variations of those 7 body types whilst churning out "larger quantities" of chassis to go under them.

 

From my conversation with Hattons, my understanding of the way these are being designed is that the sides are separately made from the ends. So in principle it would be possible to introduce sides with different panelling styles, e.g. LNWR or Scottish three-layer, at a later stage but that's not in the current plan. I suppose any such move would depend on how sales go of the initial version in all liveries. However, with the proposed design, one is stuck with the 32' length, so any authentic LNWR, Midland, or S&DJR carriages (to list but three examples) are out of the question. So for the time being I will have to avert my gaze when plum and spilt milk is mentioned!

 

To reiterate, my view is that if it were done when tis done, then 'twere well it were done well.

Edited October 11, 2019 by Compound2632

[Compound2632]

2 hours ago, uax6 said:

 

I'm not sure that the 4 or 5 small panels actually looks any better than the 3 larger panels that the latest Hattons drawing has. Actually from a generic point of view the three larger panels probably matches the other coaches rather better than these smaller ones.

 

 

Fair comment - the 5 panels was a bit OTT but easiest to do with the bits I'd cut and pasted! It's not so much the details of the panelling I wanted to focus on, so much as the way the position of the double doors etc. was dictated by the internal layout.

 

Many thanks for posting the drawing of the GSWR brake - I don't think I've seen a drawing of a 'Sou West carriage of any description before. I've long thought those Highland carriages with the three-layer panelling look particularly handsome.

Edited October 11, 2019 by Compound2632

[ben racey]

Evening all!

 

Up thread, someone mentioned the use of these vehicles for irish prototypes. We're having a chat about that on the IRM forum here(I linked it through earlier this week when the announcement was made before the full brake was announced:

 

https://irishrailwaymodeller.com/topic/7970-new-generic-4-and-6-wheel-coaches-in-00-what-can-we-use-them-for/

 

Given the generic design (Which I'm fine with for the price and aim of getting something that's well decorated, running), there's at least one GNRi 6 wheel vehicle, and the LNWR livery is a nightmare to do well, isn't it!? so a few DNGR vehicles might also work. There's also a rather nice DNGR bogie third which would be a good bash from the all and brake third on a new chassis.

 

The full brake might be interesting, some 6w full brakes made it into the 60's into the CIE era in the up to date colour scheme, so certainly some possibilities.

 

The width is different, of course, about 4mm too narrow for the irish loading gauge, but it's definitely something to work with!

 

Many thanks to Hattons for providing the dimensions and engaging with the forum to improve the design, looking forward to seeing them in due course!

 

Cheers for now.

 

Richard. 

[Gareth Collier]

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

Oddly enough, I’ve never seen a picture of a P hauling four or six wheelers, except possibly on the KESR. Cue torrent of pictures .......

I've only photos in books unforunately but the SECR used the P with 3 coach push pull sets comprising of 6 wheelers. Simon Dawson has them available through Shapeways: https://www.shapeways.com/product/QV5K5EMAG/o-76-secr-6w-pushpull-coach-brake-third-1?optionId=64069433&url=login%2Fjson-shapeways&url=forward

[Miss Prism]

2 hours ago, melmerby said:

 

Note the trick commonly used on the GWR of inverting the lower left-hand step, to make room for a lamp.

 

Which begs the question as to where on these Hattons things the lampirons will be. The Bluebell pic is interesting, but looks like it a stepladder would be required to put the lamp on if the coach wasn't in a platform. (Which seems a bit silly to me.)

 

Edited October 11, 2019 by Miss Prism
tried to re-insert the picture, but despite the text editor's instruction, the software cocks it up again

[Dunsignalling]

2 hours ago, PenrithBeacon said:

Very true, there is some evidence that they were never really up to pushing and pulling the two coaches shown in your photo. The loco is even smaller than the Terrier.

 

The market for the Southern Railway RTR has been gradually expanded over the last 15 years or so and I view this venture as a missed opportunity for further expansion. There is an enormous range of pre-group Southern-related coaching stock all with a wide variety of liveries available which should get the cash registers ringing for a supplier willing to do them. Having said that,  I do wonder if this concept of 'generic coaches' is really intended to reduce to next to zero the expense of researching a range of prototypes while profiting from the latent demand for this class of vehicle.

 

Regards 

Not entirely next to zero, but certainly less (in terms of time as well as money) than developing five accurate coaches based on the vehicles of one railway, which would then attract almost as much opprobrium if Hatton's had the audacity to offer them in other companies' liveries.  

 

However, with the honourable exception of Bachmann with their Birdcage stock, nobody else seems to have been willing to risk making anything even allegedly more authentic in the way of pre-group r-t-r coaches in OO since..... Well, since the Tri-ang  clerestories and their printed-panelling Hornby successors, I suppose. (Bearing in mind that the "ex-LSWR" offerings from Kernow and Hornby depict vehicles as altered/reconstructed in the 1930s).

 

At least Hatton's are having a go (within limits) and it seems that most of us appreciate that what's been announced probably represents a greater commitment to the pre-grouping era than any other r-t-r manufacturer is currently willing to make.

 

John

Edited October 11, 2019 by Dunsignalling

[Nick Holliday]

2 hours ago, uax6 said:

And for air braked stock the air bag is always on the buffer beam, so for dual fitted the arrangement is as in the drawing of the HR van above.

 

Interestingly I've been through my archive of carriage drawings from all over the country, and the only drawings that show an offset vac standard and bag is one for LBSCR stock (the SER had their's like every one else mounted over the drawhook)....

Edit: There is even a photo that confirms its offsettedness, and the other drawings for other companies show piccies of centreness.)

 

Andy G

A bit off topic, but can you explain "the air bag is always on the buffer beam"?

There are plenty of drawings and photos of LBSCR stock in the volumes on their carriages by Ian White, Sheina Foulkes and Simon Turner. Bearing in mind it was a Westinghouse braked line, the majority of the coaches had an air brake standard to the left of the drawhook, and on the dual braked vehicles they somehow contrived to have both standards to the left, with the vacuum pipe closer to the centre. The connecting pipes were obviously more flexible than many think.

[Joseph_Pestell]

10 hours ago, Hattons Dave said:

Morning all,

 

I've been reading through the feedback we've received and have made several more improvements, including:

 

• Roof overlap
• Full length footboards (on 6 wheelers)
• Coach ends - vertical beading only
• Brake pipe centered and handed on each end
• 4w 5 compartment has had the compartments re-spaced
• 6w brake has had the compartments re-spaced and duckets centralised
• Full brake doors re-spaced
• Rain strips added
• Vac pans added (in lieu of air cylinder)
• Emergency brake equipment added
• Buffers changed to more realistic length and design
• Drawbar hook plates added
• J hangers added
• Oil pots on roof moved to more prototypical positions

Gas and electric lighting will also be included on relevant liveries with associated gas tanks/battery boxes.

 

Cheers,

 

Dave

 

 

 

 

 

I can't put my finger on it. But the 6-wheel coaches look so much more "right" than the 4-wheel. Can anyone say what it is?

[Compound2632]

On Midland carriages of this period, the vacuum brake pipe and hose is bang on the centreline - the brake pipe comes through a hole in the headstock above the drawhook. On the dual-braked Midland Scotch Joint Stock, as far as I can make out there is one pipe either side of the drawhook and it is the taller upstand that is always on the right - is that the AVB pipe?

[Compound2632]

The earlier version of the 4-wheel 5-compartment third is preferable. I haven't measured it up but I suspect that this morning's version will turn out to have negative end wall thickness if the compartments are all assumed to be of the same width! I think @Miss Prism's comment on the panelling has been misinterpreted - see my long post.

Edited October 11, 2019 by Compound2632

[uax6]

Not being familiar with the LBSC (or other air companies) the normal arrangements for dual fitted stock of this time period is to have the vac pipe and bag up high on the centreline of the drawhook and the air pipe and bag on the headstock. 
Now as I discovered earlier tonight it appears that the LBSC had its vac pipe and bag up high and over to one side (or could that standard actually be their air pipe and bag? I didn’t notice anything hanging off the headstock), so possibly they had their own arrangements....

 

Andy g

[Nile]

1 hour ago, Gareth Collier said:

I've only photos in books unforunately but the SECR used the P with 3 coach push pull sets comprising of 6 wheelers. Simon Dawson has them available through Shapeways: https://www.shapeways.com/product/QV5K5EMAG/o-76-secr-6w-pushpull-coach-brake-third-1?optionId=64069433&url=login%2Fjson-shapeways&url=forward

Like this?

[phil_sutters]

From the photos I have of S&DJR coaches, the pipe comes through the buffer beam to the left of the draw hook, as you look at the end, and it is then cranked over at an angle and then is cranked back to the vertical on the centre line. As long as the bags on adjoining carriages are long enough, it shouldn't matter which side they are on, as long as they are close to the centre. If they are all on the same side they will connect diagonally above the coupling. 

Edited October 11, 2019 by phil_sutters

[phil-b259]

On 10/10/2019 at 12:54, RLWP said:

 

I'm still finding the reaction here rather odd. Put out a Genesis BR carriage because they all look the same and they'd be torn to pieces

 

 

If you sit down and draw up a list of the number of different types of mk1s ( terms of external body style), it would probably only get to around 20 odd designs.

 

If you sit there and list the number of different designs of 5 compartment 3rd class coaches produced by all the pre grouping railways in the UK, I would wager that list would be getting on for 50+ designs  - and that's just the equivalent of the SK on the BR list - never mind composites, brake vehicles, etc

 

THAT is the fundamental reason why accurate Mk1 (or indeed some of the 'big 4' designed) coaches are an economically viable proposition for a manufacturer, but an accurate range of 4 & 6 wheeled sock is not viable.

 

RTR model manufacturers primary duty is to make money for their shareholders - not to go out of business attempting to cater for the vast number of pre-grouping coach designs which existed in the UK. Nor is it the duty of manufacturers to make accurate renditions of only one or two pre grouping companies stock only to have it sit round on shelves or years due to an oversupply and thus tieing up capital that could be used on more profitable ventures.

 

Yes model railways might be a 'hobby' - but that does not somehow make it immune for the usual business and financial norms evident in other sections of the economy.

 

Hence if a manufacturer wishes to take advantage of the resurgence of interest in the re-grouping era being fuelled by some of the lovely loco releases over the past few years, they really have no economic choice other than to go down the 'generic - but detailed' route. Anything else simply does not make financial sense - regardless of what the purists / doomongers say on here or elsewhere.

 

I personally very much welcome this initiative by Hattons - I have some ornately lined SECR locomotives and as good as they are, Bachmanns long birdcage coaches just don't look right with most of them due to their length. Some short 4 wheelers on the other hand would look just right - as occurs in real life on the Bluebell Railway!

[phil-b259]

1 hour ago, Miss Prism said:

 

Note the trick commonly used on the GWR of inverting the lower left-hand step, to make room for a lamp.

 

Which begs the question as to where on these Hattons things the lampirons will be. The Bluebell pic is interesting, but looks like it a stepladder would be required to put the lamp on if the coach wasn't in a platform. (Which seems a bit silly to me.)

 

 

The lamp brackets on the coach in question are in the same place they were when the coach was first built over a century ago - and the LCDR must have found a way to cope without having a platform handy

 

The most obvious method is to use the lower footstep (hidden by the platform) and the handle on the ducket to climb up onto the stepboard, then hang the lamp on the bracket.

 

Simples!

Edited October 11, 2019 by phil-b259

[Miss Prism]

51 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

The most obvious method is to use the lower footstep (hidden by the platform) and the handle on the ducket to climb up onto the stepboard, then hang the lamp on the bracket.

 

Yes, and I was being a bit flippant about the stepladder, but my point is that generally, and therefore in pursuit of genericity, lamp brackets had come down to somewhere nearer the headstock.

 

Edited October 11, 2019 by Miss Prism

[Nick Holliday]

7 hours ago, uax6 said:

Not being familiar with the LBSC (or other air companies) the normal arrangements for dual fitted stock of this time period is to have the vac pipe and bag up high on the centreline of the drawhook and the air pipe and bag on the headstock. 
Now as I discovered earlier tonight it appears that the LBSC had its vac pipe and bag up high and over to one side (or could that standard actually be their air pipe and bag? I didn’t notice anything hanging off the headstock), so possibly they had their own arrangements....

 

Andy g

As I said in my previous reply, the LBSC generally had its Westinghouse brake pipe, on carriages (and the rear of locos) on a vertical standard usually to the left of the drawhook. On some dual fitted stock, both pipes were on the left, with no cranking. It should be remembered that for both air and vacuum brakes, there would be some stock which inevitably had to have the brake pipes fitted below or on the buffer beam, such a carriage trucks and, of course, corridor fitted stock, so it didn't really matter where the pipe was, as long as the bag was long enough to connect to that on the next vehicle.

I can't be bothered at the moment to check other air braked lines, but the Caledonian certainly adopted a similar system for their stock.

[Nick Holliday]

I am very pleased to hear that Hatton's are consulting with people on RMweb, like Compound2632, but I hope they are able to sort the wheat from the chaff. There seem to have been a number of blinkered broad-brush statements that, if taken at face value, would lead the design development down some blind alleys, specific to one particular company or another.

As a Brighton enthusiast, I am very fortunate to be able to call on the recently published detailed research of others, and I could claim that, for instance, because it was the way it happened on the LBSC, bolections only appeared in 1890, although I know that they were being fitted much earlier than that elsewhere. Brighton fans are also blessed that, once the carriage design had progressed from the stage coach variety, via the square panelled style which seems to have been driven by the carriage building companies such as Oldbury, the LBSC, like the LNWR to a great extent, settled on a panel styling which they continued to use up until grouping, with only a couple of aberrations along the way, whereas many lines seemed to adopt a variety of designs along the way. (For Stephen Lea's benefit, the depth of the lower panel was 6 inches between mouldings.)

 

[Trog]

With small parts like the brake pipes, steam heat pipe, vac/air cylinder etc could they be supplied loose in a detailing pack? With alternative designs so the punter can fit the option that steers the coach most towards his chosen era and company. The extra expense to hattons of a slightly bigger detailing moulding being balanced by them not having to pay to glue them on.

[Skinnylinny]

14 minutes ago, Trog said:

With small parts like the brake pipes, steam heat pipe, vac/air cylinder etc could they be supplied loose in a detailing pack? With alternative designs so the punter can fit the option that steers the coach most towards his chosen era and company. The extra expense to hattons of a slightly bigger detailing moulding being balanced by them not having to pay to glue them on.

 

Now there's an excellent idea - A small detailing sprue of brake pipes, a vac cylinder, a Westinghouse cylinder, a gas tank (for gas-lit carriages), a battery box (for electrically-lit examples), maybe even a tail lamp? With moulded locating holes in the bottom of the floor. Another advantage being that all of these parts would likely be moulded in unpainted black plastic (possibly a blast of white paint for the tail lamp, though this could be left to the modeller).

Edited October 12, 2019 by Skinnylinny

[Nick Holliday]

I rediscovered on my hard drive a series of railway company drawings that I had acquired some time ago.  I thought they fitted this generic design exercise quite well.  Perhaps the experts can tell which company they belong to?

Note that, as with several companies, the full third is shorter than the other designs - you don't want your third class passengers to get used to large compartments.  Some managed to squeeze six compartments into 32' or so!

I thought I'd throw this last one in, just to show how things might be mixed and matched - a lavatory composite, with luggage compartment and coupe end compartments to boot!

 

[Gareth Collier]

11 hours ago, Nile said:

Like this?

Snap, except mine is in N

[Compound2632]

2 hours ago, Nick Holliday said:

I am very pleased to hear that Hatton's are consulting with people on RMweb, like Compound2632, but I hope they are able to sort the wheat from the chaff. There seem to have been a number of blinkered broad-brush statements that, if taken at face value, would lead the design development down some blind alleys, specific to one particular company or another.

 

 

Nick, I'd be very pleased and not in the least offended if you would identify the chaff in my long post; I'm sure there is some - on brakes in particular I think I've said some things that may not stand up to scrutiny. The more the merrier!

 

Thanks to the generosity of assorted RMWebbers, I have assembled material on the panelling dimensions for assorted pre-Grouping companies that used the panelling style adopted by Hattons. I'm planning to tabulate this so we can see what dimensions (if any) can be regarded as typical.