Rails of Sheffield Improved Precedent Class

[Edwardian]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Names from across the politico-historical spectrum are available.

 

 

Allegedly. The biggest single tell-tale is the lack of coal rails on the tender - introduced in that year and well-nigh universal on passenger engine tenders by the following year, IIRC. It also has the three pre-1903 lamp holders above the buffer beam.

 

Yes, I realised it is too old for your and my chosen years.  I had a dim recollection that it was even earlier than 1895, but no, you are correct.  The other indicator being the plain black rods, which I believe were pre-1896-7.

 

But for the preservation era wash-out plugs and, IIRC, the buffers, the Hardwicke model is the closer match for an early 1900s Precedent. 

 

[Compound2632]

Just now, Edwardian said:

 

Yes, I realised it is too old for your and my chosen years.  I had a dim recollection that it was even earlier than 1895, but no, you are correct.  The other indicator being the plain black rods, which I believe were pre-1896-7.

 

But for the preservation era wash-out plugs and, IIRC, the buffers, the Hardwicke model is the closer match for an early 1900s Precedent. 

 

 

Well, it is Lucknow I have on order. It will be a novel experience forward-dating rather than back-dating a RTR model to c. 1902 condition!

[Brassey]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

It also has the three pre-1903 lamp holders above the buffer beam.

Should this not be the post-1903 three lamp holders. Was the centre bracket not a later addition?

[Compound2632]

6 hours ago, Brassey said:

Should this not be the post-1903 three lamp holders. Was the centre bracket not a later addition?

 

Yes, sorry, my error. And looking again at the photos of the pre-production display model, I find I can't quite see whether it has two or three. 

[Edwardian]

10 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Well, it is Lucknow I have on order. It will be a novel experience forward-dating rather than back-dating a RTR model to c. 1902 condition!

 

Hardwicke tender plus chassis with the body swapped out for Lucknow's would seem to be the combination that gets us closest.

[Compound2632]

4 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

Hardwicke tender plus chassis with the body swapped out for Lucknow's would seem to be the combination that gets us closest.

 

I'm hoping for some aftermarket coal rails!

[Brassey]

11 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

I'm hoping for some aftermarket coal rails!

 

Coal rails were from half round bar.  I think there is a precise specification on the LNWR Society Forum (not Facebook!).  It should be relatively easy to make these up out of half round brass section.  Or maybe London Road might release an etch.

 

I'm off to the Warrington show this morning where I am picking up a bogie etch for an LNWR Experiment I have just started.  It is possible to get etches of odd bits and pieces.  Brassmasters did some LNWR kits so might be persuaded too.  What the demand might be is questionable though they could also be used to improve old GEM tenders.

[Compound2632]

54 minutes ago, Brassey said:

What the demand might be is questionable

 

True enough. I would imagine the proportion of people buying Lucknow because it's a good fit for their specific pre-grouping modelling requirements is quite a small fraction of the total order book. But it might be large compared to, say, the number of people buying and building the LRM kit. James @Edwardian has argues cogently that there is little overlap between those who buy RTR and those who build kits but I'm in that intersection in the Venn diagram where I'll use anything that contributes to my aim for historically-informed geographically-appropriate modelling.

[Brassey]

4 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

I would imagine the proportion of people buying Lucknow because it's a good fit for their specific pre-grouping modelling requirements is quite a small fraction

 

I can't think of anyone with a pre-1900 LNWR layout.  I am sure someone could get a few coal rails etched though they would have to measure the model to make sure it fits.

 

I wonder what Bachmann have done with the tender to make sure the 00 flanges don't foul the rear bufferbeam?  Have they made the tender top longer or shortened the wheelbase?

[Jol Wilkinson]

1905 is a good year to model as it covers the last of Webb's Compounds and the first of Whale's locomotives. Which doesn't help at all if you are reliant on RTR products, with only the Coal Tank and Improved Precedent available.

[Davidjsmith]

Anyone know of someone doing sound project for this loco?

[john new]

Do we have any updates yet as to the predicted actual delivery dates to pre-order customers? I only ask as we may well be going away for a few days in November and therefore I may need to update the delivery address to ensure no case of a stupid courier leaving it in the wheelie bin or on the doorstep issues.

[Butler Henderson]

Most likely sat in a container at Felixstowe and probably still there for weeks to come.

[PaulRhB]

39 minutes ago, Butler Henderson said:

Most likely sat in a container at Felixstowe and probably still there for weeks to come.

 

On 08/09/2021 at 14:16, Oliver Rails said:

Update from Bachmann:

. . .

. This means that if all goes to plan we are likely to see the models arrive with us towards the end of November.

 

 

so not due in the UK yet

 

2 hours ago, john new said:

Do we have any updates yet as to the predicted actual delivery dates to pre-order customers? 

On 08/09/2021 at 14:16, Oliver Rails said:

 

Further updates will follow once shipped and we should be able to share the ship tracking information so all can see the current location of the models.

 

 

Oliver says he will update when known is all we know. 

[PhilJ W]

1 hour ago, Butler Henderson said:

Most likely sat in a container at Felixstowe Shanghai and probably still there for weeks to come.

Thats better.

[Jenny Emily]

A spare photo of the review model I took for Ken Patterson of WNTW fame. This is a full production model; the review samples having been airfreighted in rather than waiting for a container. 
 

 

[Jol Wilkinson]

Looks like a very nice OO model, with an excellent finish and lining.

 

The top smokebox lamp socket is rather odd. The LNWR had a combined socket and handrail support, unlike the one shown. The loco is in "summer condition" as the steam heating valve, mounted on the front R/H of the cab roof (fireman's side)  is not evident. This was often removed during summer months when train heating was not required.

 

The front buffer beam centre lamp sockets were fitted from late 1902, while the second cab roof whistles were removed from 1903. That fairly firmly fixes the correct date for Lucknow in the condition as modelled as 1902/3, but I doubt that will be an issue for anyone.

 

The tenders had a coal retainer plate across the rear of the tank behind the water filler, which doesn't seem to be evident. There were separate ones either side just behind the toolboxes as visible on the model. IIRC coal rails around the tender were added from about 1895, so I would have expected Lucknow to have had those by 1902/3. Possibly there is photographic evidence of Lucknow's tender as modelled at that time.

 

 

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

The tenders had a coal retainer plate across the rear of the tank behind the water filler, which doesn't seem to be evident. There were separate ones either side just behind the toolboxes as visible on the model. IIRC coal rails around the tender were added from about 1895, so I would have expected Lucknow to have had those by 1902/3. Possibly there is photographic evidence of Lucknow's tender as modelled at that time.

 

I think Lucknow is advertised as 1895 condition - it was I said I wanted her in 1902/3 condition! (I need to read up on tenders...)

 

1 hour ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

The loco is in "summer condition" as the steam heating valve, mounted on the front R/H of the cab roof (fireman's side)  is not evident. This was often removed during summer months when train heating was not required.

 

Well, yes, summer 1902 will do very well!

 

1 hour ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

The front buffer beam centre lamp sockets were fitted from late 1902, while the second cab roof whistles were removed from 1903. That fairly firmly fixes the correct date for Lucknow in the condition as modelled as 1902/3, but I doubt that will be an issue for anyone.

 

So for summer 1902, the centre lamp socket goes! (And it shouldn't be there for 1895 condition anyway.)

 

2 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

The top smokebox lamp socket is rather odd. The LNWR had a combined socket and handrail support, unlike the one shown.

 

As seen in this photo of Cromwell (again) c. 1910:

 

[Embedded Link to Warwickshire Railways image lnwrrm924.]

 

For 1895 - and 1902 - ought not there be a pillar on the tender for the Harrison cord?

[ikks]

That looks to be a cracking model....soon to be a proud owner I hope!!  We've had a number of pre-grouping models up to modern standards produced recently, I for one, hope this trend continues.

Mike

 

[Eddie the dog]

Can’t wait to get mine, the sheen on the paintwork looks amazing !

Will be interesting to whether Rails or Bachmann produce further examples.

[Eddie the dog]

Interesting to see....doh !

[AlfaZagato]

I think the commission model concept is a bit too original to judge whether regular production will occur.

 

The earliest I know of personally is Heljan's Garratt.   That did eventually come to regular release.   I can't make heads-or-tails of Heljan's strategies, though.    Hard, for me at least, to say whether Bachmann will milk this tooling like they have some others.

[john new]

I guess it is down to who ever will stump up the cash up front. The SLS would love to commission a run of Gladstone, and we did make initial, albeit extremely tentative enquires three years ago. Unfortunately, the suggested minimum upfront costs were too large a commitment for the Society to gamble with; hopefully, it is somewhere on a future projects NRM list.

[Compound2632]

13 minutes ago, john new said:

I guess it is down to who ever will stump up the cash up front. The SLS would love to commission a run of Gladstone, and we did make initial, albeit extremely tentative enquires three years ago. Unfortunately, the suggested minimum upfront costs were too large a commitment for the Society to gamble with; hopefully, it is somewhere on a future projects NRM list.

 

The scenery may have changed in the last three years. Would you have thought Hardwicke was a goer then?

 

I'm speculating, but what we may be seeing here is a division of risk between Locomotion, who get a commissioned model of a locomotive in the National Collection, and Rails, who get exclusivity on perhaps less glamorous but possibly more layout-friendly versions - as we saw with the SECR Class D.

[Jol Wilkinson]

2 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

The scenery may have changed in the last three years. Would you have thought Hardwicke was a goer then?

 

I'm speculating, but what we may be seeing here is a division of risk between Locomotion, who get a commissioned model of a locomotive in the National Collection, and Rails, who get exclusivity on perhaps less glamorous but possibly more layout-friendly versions - as we saw with the SECR Class D.

I think the quality of RTR OO gauge locos has reached the point where people will buy literally whatever is produced, because it is so well finished and detailed.

 

Hardwicke was already on the NRM's agenda in 2018, so I believe that these early locos were already perceived as the next chapter in what the commissioners  considered viable. 3D scanning for RTR models was already well established and when you have ownership of these significantly interesting prototypes is is clearly the way to make money from them.

 

Pre-grouping has also become the new trend - because they are "different" - and the availability of "suitable" generic carriages to run behind these models or put in to the display case with them adds to the attraction.