Locomotion & Rails of Sheffield announce SE&CR D Class

[Craigw]

10 hours ago, Martin.M said:

It would be nice if it have splasher  clearance for EM or P4 wheels too?  Or how about the first RTR P4 steam loco? 

 

Martin

 

I am sure the dozen or so people who would buy it would be delighted but RTR P4 is simply not a commercial reality and never will be.

 

Craig W

[Martin.M]

Craig, interesting we have a RTR P4 Class 24 available possibly in limited numbers .... Why not a steam loco....?

 

Martin

[Miss Prism]

Yours for £400

 

Any new bearings required will be extra,

 

Cash in advance.

 

 

[Pre Grouping fan]

58 minutes ago, Martin.M said:

Craig, interesting we have a RTR P4 Class 24 available possibly in limited numbers .... Why not a steam loco....?

 

Martin

The 24 is a different kettle of fish having outside framed bogies.

On a steam loco, especially the D class with the large splashers. Clearances will be tight inside and even more so in P4 without making the front face either really thin or over scale width which won't please the 00 modellers.

 

Plus the demand will likely be so low the effort in dealing with the splashes may not be worth it for a handful of models. 

[Craigw]

1 hour ago, Martin.M said:

Craig, interesting we have a RTR P4 Class 24 available possibly in limited numbers .... Why not a steam loco....?

 

Martin

 

We dont Martin.

 

You can order one and SLW will fit it with P4 wheels for you, but they are actually converting it. I have one that I purchased purely to support them because of this. It is a lovely model and the sound is brilliant. 

 

But I simply do not see one of the mainstream manufacturers doing that sort of service and I would expect a conversion would take a bit of work (as ones with splashers usually do)

 

Regards,

 

Craig W

[Wickham Green]

On 27/12/2019 at 11:42, Martin.M said:

It would be nice if it have splasher  clearance for EM or P4 wheels too?  Or how about the first RTR P4 steam loco? 

 

Martin

Unless the plastic's ridiculously thick there should be adequate clearance for 'closer to scale' wheelsets under a 'D' - the 'finecast' kit is OK after all ............. IF, though Rails decide to do a 'D1', at some time in the future, they could run into splasher problems.

[Martin.M]

Or would they do an E to match? Dreaming of SE&CR locos.....

Martin

[Wickham Green]

On 18/01/2020 at 19:50, Martin.M said:

Or would they do an E to match? Dreaming of SE&CR locos.....

Martin

The Belpaire firebox and extended smokebox shouldn't pose significant difficulties - and there are no other really great cosmetic differences between the 'D' and 'E'.

 

The longer wheelbase of the 'E' would, though, necessitate some redesigning of the chassis - and, perhaps, could create clearance issues even though the wheels are marginally smaller.

[Edwardian]

3 hours ago, Wickham Green said:

The Belpaire firebox and extended smokebox shouldn't pose significant difficulties - and there are no other really great cosmetic differences between the 'D' and 'E'.

 

The longer wheelbase of the 'E' would, though, necessitate some redesigning of the chassis - and, perhaps, could create clearance issues even though the wheels are marginally smaller.

 

The late series D, with the 4 cab windows, had a slightly different tender, with coal and water capacities adjusted, and this was the tender subsequently built for the Es.

 

I understand that Dapol intends to tool for this variant, so, whereas I do not believe that there are currently any plans to produce an E, an E Class tender should at least exist!  

[Wickham Green]

There were a number of coal/water variants across the C, D & E classes but I am not aware of any visible differences from this - maybe a different position for the bunker rear/tank front ........ which wouldn't be visible under a load of coal anyway.

 

OH - one significant difference between the D & E classes that I omitted earlier is the shallower running plate angle on the E ......... most noticeable when the tenders got swapped - as many did once the rebuilding programme got underway ! ( Prototypes to be chosen carefully ! )

[JSpencer]

18 hours ago, Edwardian said:

 

The late series D, with the 4 cab windows, had a slightly different tender, with coal and water capacities adjusted, and this was the tender subsequently built for the Es.

 

I understand that Dapol intends to tool for this variant, so, whereas I do not believe that there are currently any plans to produce an E, an E Class tender should at least exist!  

 

The E would be an easy company follow on. Especially as the Brighton Atlantic group intend to build one to run on the Bluebell (though we won't see it for at least 10 years).

[JSpencer]

On 27/12/2019 at 12:42, Martin.M said:

 Or how about the first RTR P4 steam loco? 

 

 

Well, we already had our first RTR P2 steam loco, so it could happen.

[Martin.M]

Now that the Bluebell railway have confirmed in the Blue News  that they are doing a new build of the E class  which is almost the D class brother. It must make sense for Rails to follow on with the E class with perhaps a premium price so that they can donate the extra £5 or £10 to the new build..... 

 

Then all we need is a D1 and an E1..... 

[GreenGiraffe22]

5 hours ago, Martin.M said:

Then all we need is a D1 and an E1..... 

 

I'm usually a champion of RTR SECR /LBSCR prototypes but even I'm not sure I need that many SECR 4-4-0s :p

 

However, LBSCR E1 (am aware it's in the pipeline) and D1 (pleeeease) 

 

[Forester]

Trying to get my head around the fact that Dapol expect to produce their new Manor for an affordable just under £160 but in conjunction with Rails the D class is expected to be an unaffordable "hopefully just under £200".

Puzzled.

[tomparryharry]

2 minutes ago, Forester said:

Trying to get my head around the fact that Dapol expect to produce their new Manor for an affordable just under £160 but in conjunction with Rails the D class is expected to be an unaffordable "hopefully just under £200".

Puzzled.

 

If I might suggest that all 3 models have close cousins in the powertrain, and they (Dapol) might have already scanned in the locomotive from way back. Pure conjecture, mind you.

[Compound2632]

I'm slightly surprised that £40 makes that much difference. I suspect that the Manor might ultimately get higher sales figures, it being a Great Western engine an' all.

[GreenGiraffe22]

I presume what ever fees Rails have to pay Dapol to commission the model are a pricing factor? 

[The Stationmaster]

15 hours ago, tomparryharry said:

 

If I might suggest that all 3 models have close cousins in the powertrain, and they (Dapol) might have already scanned in the locomotive from way back. Pure conjecture, mind you.

I suspect that it is indeed conjecture.  I have a strong feeling that an announcement at this time of year indicates they've got hold of something about someone else looking at the Manor and have jumped in with a place holding announcement.  Don't forget that when the announced the mogul and the prairie they showed CADs (ok not very good CADs!) but not with the Manor.   Speaking from experience elsewhere you need to do quite a bit of research work before lashing out several grand for a good quality scan.  And a scan in any case is not the end of the world and some people (e.g, Hornby) don't always use them anyway; good old fashioned n measuring and photography can get you an awful long way and costs less.

[Compound2632]

13 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

good old fashioned n measuring and photography can get you an awful long way and costs less.

 

Plus a good set of drawings?

[JSpencer]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

.  And a scan in any case is not the end of the world and some people (e.g, Hornby) don't always use them anyway; good old fashioned n measuring and photography can get you an awful long way and costs less.

 

Even if a scan is done, good old fashioned measuring and checking against photos is still required anyway. Scans are useful if you have some complex shape that are hard to capture in classic orthographic views.  

[Andy Hayter]

Let's not forget that the SECR locomotive is a Locomotion model and as such a portion of the profit is supposed to support the NRM and its collection.

[Wickham Green]

2 hours ago, JSpencer said:

 

............ checking against photos is still required anyway. ..........

....... as any preserved railway vehicle is prone to detail modification by later owners - even if the basic shape can be scanned reliably.

[Forester]

1 hour ago, Andy Hayter said:

Let's not forget that the SECR locomotive is a Locomotion model and as such a portion of the profit is supposed to support the NRM and its collection.

 

It would be a reasonable price for a special finish SECR as preserved NRM limited edition model -

but not for a plain black one, by a long way.

[Compound2632]

9 minutes ago, Forester said:

 

It would be a reasonable price for a special finish SECR as preserved NRM limited edition model -

but not for a plain black one, by a long way.

 

That presumes that there is a significant additional cost associated with the more ornate livery. The recent history of pre-Grouping RTR would suggest either that there isn't, or that it is standard practice not to incorporate a price differential, in which case one could argue that you're getting the ornate livery for free.