Unknown OO brass Bulleid Pacific body

[Virgil]

Hi, 

I would be most grateful if someone would advise as to the manufacturer of the pictured brass OO scale body and also confirm that it is a WC/BoB and not a Rebuilt Merchant Navy, for which it appears to be too short. Note shown compared to an Airfix BoB Winston Churchill.

[New Haven Neil]

Think MN's had three safety valves?  Rebuilds did anyway!

[Steamport Southport]

Jamieson?

 

 

 

 

Jason

[Virgil]

Thanks Neil, I have a rebuilt MN and I agree with your comment regarding the 3 safety valves. I am unfamiliar with the safety valve etc arrangements on this body as it differs considerably from the Airfix body which I believe is accurate for a BoB.

Edited December 27, 2019 by Virgil

[Virgil]

1 minute ago, Steamport Southport said:

Jamieson?, any further advances? (thanks Jason)!

 

 

 

 

Jason

 

[KalKat]

Possibly Crownline?

 

 

Emma

[Joseph_Pestell]

1 hour ago, KalKat said:

Possibly Crownline?

 

 

Emma

 

I don't think Crownline ever produced anything that inaccurate! Indeed, I am sure of it.

 

Same would apply to Jamieson.

 

I think that we are looking at something a bit older. Early Hamblings or Bonds???

[Steamport Southport]

13 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

I don't think Crownline ever produced anything that inaccurate! Indeed, I am sure of it.

 

Same would apply to Jamieson.

 

I think that we are looking at something a bit older. Early Hamblings or Bonds???

 

Jamieson certainly did.

 

Here's the 57XX Pannier Tank. There was a few other duffers as well.

 

https://www.popscreen.com/prod/MTYwNjUzMTk2/Jamieson-Kit-Built-Brass-OO-Gauge-GWR-0-6-0-Class-57XX-Loco-Mint

 

 

 

Jason

[Right Away]

Cab front profile would suggest a 9' WC/BB (34071 onwards) having resited safety valves and reduced 250psi boiler pressure.

[Virgil]

Thanks for all the replies so far.

 Was there a modification to the BoB/WC locos which could explain the resited valves?

The clack valves under the open cover are presumably sited correctly?

Did the later Hornby model BoB show a panel here?

In other words is the body actually that inaccurate for a modified light Bulleid?

Edited December 27, 2019 by Virgil
Accuracy (sic)

[Ceptic]

The five wash out plugs. per fire-box topsides are the clues. The MNs had six.

[Right Away]

9 hours ago, Virgil said:

Thanks for all the replies so far.

 Was there a modification to the BoB/WC locos which could explain the resited valves?

The clack valves under the open cover are presumably sited correctly?

Did the later Hornby model BoB show a panel here?

In other words is the body actually that inaccurate for a modified light Bulleid?

Be cautious in using the word "modified". The Bulleid Pacifics underwent numerous modifications whilst retaining their original form. Those that were eventually rebuilt, dispensing with the air-smoothed casing and chain driven valve gear are often refered to as "modified Pacifics."

[Virgil]

Indeed the use of the word "Modified" in connection with the Bulleid pacifics is commonly used for the rebuilt versions. 

Does anyone know if the later built (unrebuilt) West Country locos had the safety valves situated aft of the (covered) steam dome instead of in front of it?

[hayfield]

Certainly looks like to be of Jamieson/Eames era, but  either heavily detailed.modified or something completely different. Can we have a view of the inside

[Right Away]

The boilers were identical throughout both classes and received the later safety valve position on having the reduced boiler pressure. One benefit was that the later position reduced the tendency of water surging through the safety valves under heavy braking on falling gradients. The lower boiler pressure reduced boiler maintenance, the original 280 psi being something of a "contingency" figure.

Please see attached photos of examples of the later engines.

[Virgil]

1 hour ago, hayfield said:

Certainly looks like to be of Jamieson/Eames era, but  either heavily detailed.modified or something completely different. Can we have a view of the inside

Here as requested is the underside, Jamieson - Crownline?

[Virgil]

31 minutes ago, Right Away said:

The boilers were identical throughout both classes and received the later safety valve position on having the reduced boiler pressure. One benefit was that the later position reduced the tendency of water surging through the safety valves under heavy braking on falling gradients. The lower boiler pressure reduced boiler maintenance, the original 280 psi being something of a "contingency" figure.

Please see attached photos of examples of the later engines.

That confirms that the safety valve position is correct on the brass body - which raises the question in my mind, did Hornby in their last issue of the unrebuilt BoB/WC locos position the valves as moved from their original position?

Has anyone got a recent issue to hand and would like to comment please?

[Right Away]

No 34019 is Hornby's latest offering of an unrebuilt Light Pacific, being in what could be called final condition with safety valves to the rear of the dome.

Moving backwards,  No 34032 was produced in early BR condition, having the safety valves in their original position.

Before that, No 34001 was depicted in its final condition prior to rebuilding (albeit with its erroneous AWS battery box) with the safety valves behind the dome.

Note that these three examples were obviously built with the narrower cab, the latter two receiving the 9' wide cabs on rebuilding (as did all rebuilds).

Hornby has previously produced examples of the wide cab version.

[Virgil]

9 minutes ago, Right Away said:

No 34019 is Hornby's latest offering of an unrebuilt Light Pacific, being in what could be called final condition with safety valves to the rear of the dome.

Moving backwards,  No 34032 was produced in early BR condition, having the safety valves in their original position.

Before that, No 34001 was depicted in its final condition prior to rebuilding (albeit with its erroneous AWS battery box) with the safety valves behind the dome.

Note that these three examples were obviously built with the narrower cab, the latter two receiving the 9' wide cabs on rebuilding (as did all rebuilds).

Hornby has previously produced examples of the wide cab version.

Thank you for that, Hornby are obviously on the ball there!

[hayfield]

6 hours ago, Virgil said:

Here as requested is the underside, Jamieson - Crownline?

 

 

Though I am no expert looks nothing like any Jamieson I have seen

[Steamport Southport]

5 minutes ago, hayfield said:

 

 

Though I am no expert looks nothing like any Jamieson I have seen

 

Agree. They are usually pre cut metal with a few metal castings and turnings. It's not Crownline as the Crownline kit is still available form PDK and is a modern etched kit.

 

This seems to be something from the 1950s IMHO. Could it be Hamblings? There is one mentioned on the MRE MAG website.

 

Hamblings  1950   OO  Manufacturer Closed Down    Ready to run,   streamlined version.

 

 

http://www.mre-mag.com/locosearch.php?mt=0&id=4

 

 

 

Jason

[Virgil]

Jason, I followed the link, thank you. As the Hamblings version is listed as 1950 manufacture it would presumably not feature the later modifications so I think it's unlikely, still a mystery loco then!

 

[hayfield]

Looking at the outside it looks like its cast or some parts are cast, what did the Graham Farish loco look like?

[APOLLO]

27 minutes ago, hayfield said:

Looking at the outside it looks like its cast or some parts are cast, what did the Graham Farish loco look like?

 

Scroll down a bit for a photo of a Farish OO Bulleid

 

Brit15

[Il Grifone]

The Farish Bulleid Pacific was supposed to be a Merchant Navy and bore various names to that effect. Being released around1950, it obviously would not have any of the later modifications. (I don't know about "marvels of this modern age", they were very much a product of their time; like the curate's egg, "Good in parts".)

 

The lack of rivet detail suggests a (excellent) scratch-build to me.