The mysterious disappearing catalogue numbers and the Mainline 'Peak'

[andyman7]

Bachmann's relationship with models of the Class44/45/46 locos goes back to 1976 when the original Green and Blue versions of 'The Manchester Regiment' were produced for Palitoy's new 'Mainline' range of 00 scale models. These were catalogued as 37-050 and 37-051 respectively. Later on, the mould was modified, a cab interior being added and the nose ends altered to represent the split headcode box version, with directional lights added. These versions were shown in the final Mainline catalogue and came as 37-040 'The Royal Marines' in blue and 37-041 'Sherwood Forester' in green.

 

However towards the end of 1980 the original version was offered in a pair of refinished versions as 'The Royal Inniskilling Fusiliers' in blue and 'The Lancashire Fusiliers' in green. The box end labels for each just show '1Co-Co1 BLUE' and '1Co-Co1 GREEN' - and strangely the catalogue also fails to list a stock number for this pair even though other items are shown with such numbers.

 

A quick web search shows that both green and blue versions seem to get listed under the same number 37-068, which is not consistent with other items which get a separate number for each livery/version.

 

As I record my vintage items by their catalogue numbers this is a bit of a head-scratching moment and I wondered if anyone has perhaps a dealer order form which would allow the correct stock numbers to be confirmed? Thanks in advance...

[GoingUnderground]

In 2013 Bachmann published in protected (no copying) PDF format a list of all models issued to the date of publication.

 

That list does not include the part numbers 37-040, 37-041, 37-050, 37-051, nor 37-068, and Bachmann used these numbers in the 37- series for wagons not locos. But it suggests to me that they deliberately didn't use part numbers previously used by Mainline. 

 

The listing suggests that Bachmann have a logic to their numbering which, as I read it is:

15- Models releazed to celebrate their 15th anniversary in the UK

20- Models releazed to celebrate their 20th anniversary in the UK

30-000 to 30-900 Train Sets, but 30-900 is also used for a Junior Tank loco

30-901 to 30-921 was used for other models in the Junior series

31-000 to 32-980 was used for locos and DMU and EMU sets and for loco twin packs.

33-025 to 33-033 was used for sets of 3 wagons.

33-050 to 33-977 was used for individual wagons, but also has some 3 wagon sets.

34-050 to 34-703 was used for coaching stock

36-100 to 36-127 was used for pairs of containers

36-150 to 36-165 for Plasser rolling stock

37-025 to 38-679 was used for individual wagons, and wagon sets.

39-000D to 39-001Z was used for coach sets.

39-025 to 39-503 was used for coaching stock.

MM0141 to MM4110 was used for Irish Republic CIE/IE models.

 

The list can be found here, courtesy of Lendons model shop, http://www.lendonsmodelshop.co.uk/pdf/Bachmann OO Past Products/Products By Item Number Rev 11.pdf 

 

ADDED: On ebay at the moment there is a Mainline 1980 catalogue for sale. One of the images is from the locos page of the price list and this shows 37068 being used for both the blue and the green version. In actual fact the 37067 is agaisnt the Blue version and there is no number at all against the green one. Does that mean it used the same number or that it was never given a number in the first place.? Here is a link to the ebay item so you can judge for yourself https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/154316312866 If you have problems then why not add your own B and G suffixes to the 37068 model number to distinguish between them?

 

And the same price list page shows 37067 being used for 2 versions of the J72, one as 37067 the other without any number. So using the same number for 2 different models or not giving a model a number at all isn't totally unprecedented.

 

 

Edited June 13, 2021 by GoingUnderground
Added ebay info.

[andyman7]

3 hours ago, GoingUnderground said:

ADDED: On ebay at the moment there is a Mainline 1980 catalogue for sale. One of the images is from the locos page of the price list and this shows 37068 being used for both the blue and the green version. In actual fact the 37067 is agaisnt the Blue version and there is no number at all against the green one. Does that mean it used the same number or that it was never given a number in the first place.? Here is a link to the ebay item so you can judge for yourself https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/154316312866 If you have problems then why not add your own B and G suffixes to the 37068 model number to distinguish between them?

 

And the same price list page shows 37067 being used for 2 versions of the J72, one as 37067 the other without any number. So using the same number for 2 different models or not giving a model a number at all isn't totally unprecedented.

 

 

My 1980 catalogue is missing the price list so this is useful. Where the same number has been used it would be really interesting to see how the dealer ordering and stock control was managed! Probably by simply noting the colour.

 

Normally from the early to mid-1970s, published catalogue are excerpts from a longer number sequence that formed part of the computerised stock control system - I have quite a lot of Meccano material and it's interesting to see that although, for example, Dinky Toys retained the three figure numbers for boxes and public facing catalogues they were in practice the last three digits of a longer number sequence succeeded by a check digit.

Edited June 13, 2021 by andyman7

[GoingUnderground]

Part or reference numbers are often created using segments of the number to group and manage the item. The 16 digit number on credit and debit cards is a good example of segments of the full reference number having specific purposes as the first 4 digits denotes the card issuer.

 

In the 1960s I had a holiday job working for a cigarette company that had 4 different gift coupon schemes running simultaneously. One of my tasks was to prepare a master list of all the gifts in the four different catalogues and the number of coupons required for each scheme. The gifts each had a 6 digit reference. The first digit was the brand/scheme reference the next 4 were the common reference number for the gift itself, and the final digit was a check digit. Of course this was back in the days when there were no personal computers, and mainframes were huge machines, with data held on magnetic tape which could only be accessed sequentially, that had to be kept in dust free air conditioned suites tended by dedicated staff. Hence the need for the master list to be prepared manually. Another year the holiday job was as one of a team helping to put in a new sales ledger system where the individual account records were kept on visible record cards with a magnetic strip on the reverse that were kept in "troughs" on wheels that could be moved between the various desks as needed. When the card needed to be updated, it was removed fro mteh trough, put into the accounting machine, the new entries printed on the card and then the card was replaced in the trough. The process was very similar to the way that some building societies still use passbooks. It all sounds very alien to the world today, but that was over 50 years ago. 

 

 

[Butler Henderson]

According to Ramseys British Model Train Catalogue retailers were offered packs of six 45s by Palitoy in 1980 comprising 2 each of D52 The Lancashire Fusilier, 45039 The Manchester Regiment ref.37051  and 45044 Royal Inniskilling Fusilier. The reference for D52 and 45044 is given as (37068) which is the form the book uses to indicate an item in  a set so presumably if a listing were to be found it would be 37068 Pack of 6 Class 45s.

[GoingUnderground]

Wrenn also, at one stage, didn't worry about using the same catalogue part number for slightly different models. W. 6002A was used for the Brighton 1st Class Pullman car "Audrey" and also for "Vera", whilst the position was even worse for the Blue/Grey liveried coaches where W.6004A was used for S287S and S302S, W.6005 for S280S and S301S, and W.6005A for S280S and S284S. (Siurce: Maurice Gunter's "The Story of Wrenn". I don't have my copy of Ramsey to hand to see what Pat Hamond says about the Wrenn coach part numbers.

[kevinlms]

9 hours ago, GoingUnderground said:

Wrenn also, at one stage, didn't worry about using the same catalogue part number for slightly different models. W. 6002A was used for the Brighton 1st Class Pullman car "Audrey" and also for "Vera", whilst the position was even worse for the Blue/Grey liveried coaches where W.6004A was used for S287S and S302S, W.6005 for S280S and S301S, and W.6005A for S280S and S284S. (Siurce: Maurice Gunter's "The Story of Wrenn". I don't have my copy of Ramsey to hand to see what Pat Hamond says about the Wrenn coach part numbers.

It sounds like the scheme was well intended but open to unintended consequences.

 

Somewhat similar to the ISBN system for books, where on occasion a small publisher would start to reuse their allocation of ISBN numbers. Why, apparently based around the idea that if they'd sold off all of a particular title, they would simply give that ISBN to a new title, thus avoiding the expense of another batch of ISBN's.

They soon got told, but too late, they were in shops! Of course these days, the system wouldn't allow them to register a book with a duplicated ISBN.

[GoingUnderground]

2 hours ago, kevinlms said:

It sounds like the scheme was well intended but open to unintended consequences.

 

Somewhat similar to the ISBN system for books, where on occasion a small publisher would start to reuse their allocation of ISBN numbers. Why, apparently based around the idea that if they'd sold off all of a particular title, they would simply give that ISBN to a new title, thus avoiding the expense of another batch of ISBN's.

They soon got told, but too late, they were in shops! Of course these days, the system wouldn't allow them to register a book with a duplicated ISBN.

 

W.6001 was the part number for 1st class Pulman "Aries" and W.6002 for Parlour 2nd car "Car No. 73". 

"Audrey" and "Vera" were the two named coaches in Brighton Belle set number 3052 and had been made specifically for the set as Wrenn also made "Car No. 87", W.6001A,  to make up the correct 5 car set. They did eventually realise many years after the coaches were introduced what they'd done and start using W.6002V for "Vera". 

 

When the Belle sets were repainted in Blue/Grey "Audrey" became "S280S" and "Vera" became "S284S". Thus to make up a correct blue/grey set 3052 you needed both coaches, but Wrenn never gave them separate part numbers.

 

Hence it couldn't have been a "scheme" to reuse part numbers from discontinued models because the models were contemporaneous. It was more like an oversight, or a breakdown in internal communications, or perhaps the person who allocated catalogue numbers to the models didn't fully realise the significance of the names to customers when the Belle was introduced into the Wrenn range. Triang also managed the same trick of Pulman cars produced at the same time with different names but the same catalogue number as "Anne", "Jane", "Mary" and "Ruth" all shared the same part number R.228. Were Wrenn simply following that example, or was it just coincidence?

 

There were a limited number of Brighton Belle set number 3051 models, and the mistake wasn't repeated as the two named coaches produced for that set did have separate catalogue numbers W6002D for "Doris" and W6002H for "Hazel", whilst "Car No. 86" was W.6001B.

 

So going back on-topic, perhaps Palitoy's Mainline using the same catalogue number for different versions of the same model in the catalogue at the same time isn't so unique after all. 

Edited June 14, 2021 by GoingUnderground

[Halvarras]

When I was looking for a Hornby Class 142 'Skipper' about a year ago searches for 'Hornby R326' brought up more blue Class 25s than Skippers! No wonder the number range was expanded to four digits - and now of course it has just gone to five........

[Butler Henderson]

Hornby reused stacks of catalogue numbers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[andyman7]

25 minutes ago, Neil Phillips said:

When I was looking for a Hornby Class 142 'Skipper' about a year ago searches for 'Hornby R326' brought up more blue Class 25s than Skippers! No wonder the number range was expanded to four digits - and now of course it has just gone to five........

 

15 minutes ago, Butler Henderson said:

Hornby reused stacks of catalogue numbers.

Triang started with two digit catalogue numbers and very quickly expanded to three. These were reused regularly until the late 90s when the system moved to four figures and now to five figures, and there is now no reuse of numbers - each item gets a brand new number and you can see the figures climbing as the numbers increase.

 

However from the late 80s the three-figure number formed part of a longer UPC number (the barcode) so although to the public they were duplicated they were not exact matches

[melmerby]

On 13/06/2021 at 14:45, GoingUnderground said:

In 2013 Bachmann published in protected (no copying) PDF format a list of all models issued to the date of publication.

 

Much earlier than that as I have them from 2008 and they weren't protected pdfs

e.g.

 

branchline_products_by_item_no.pdf

Edited May 6, 2023 by melmerby

[GoingUnderground]

50 minutes ago, melmerby said:

Much earlier than that as I have them from 2008 and they weren't protected pdfs

e.g.

branchline_products_by_item_no.pdf 184.81 kB · 4 downloads

 

I have that one as well, but thought that the later version would possibly be more use to more folks as it included an additional 5 years worth of models. 

[melmerby]

18 hours ago, GoingUnderground said:

Wrenn also, at one stage, didn't worry about using the same catalogue part number for slightly different models.

Airfix also did duplicate numbers

I have two GWR Toads both with the same stock number but one is in a early Airfix Railways box and the second is GMR branded, they have different running numbers.

[melmerby]

35 minutes ago, GoingUnderground said:

I have that one as well, but thought that the later version would possibly be more use to more folks as it included an additional 5 years worth of models. 

I got up to the 2014 version which includes models issued to the end of 2013 and then it seemed to vanish from Bachmann's website

[GoingUnderground]

1 hour ago, Butler Henderson said:

Hornby reused stacks of catalogue numbers.

 

1 hour ago, andyman7 said:

Triang started with two digit catalogue numbers and very quickly expanded to three. These were reused regularly until the late 90s when the system moved to four figures and now to five figures, and there is now no reuse of numbers - each item gets a brand new number and you can see the figures climbing as the numbers increase.

 

However from the late 80s the three-figure number formed part of a longer UPC number (the barcode) so although to the public they were duplicated they were not exact matches

When Triang first reused catalogue numbers it was because a model in one livery had been replaced by the same model in a different livery, typically the change from maroon to blue/grey on coaches or Green to Rail Blue on locos. Examples are the sleeping cars - R.339, and the EM2/Class 77, - R351. After the withdrawal of the EM2 its catalogue number R.351 was reused some years later for "Thomas". Likewise they kept the catalogue numbers the same on the change from Mk2 to Mk3 couplings, and for locos on the change from Seuthe smoke units to Synkrosmoke. They did use new catalogue numbers if the old and new liveries were in the catalogue at the same time.

 

The 2 digit numbers were first reused by adding a leading zero to the number. For example R.20 was originally the 6" red LMS coach, but R.020 was the long wheelbase Shell Tank wagon. There seemed to be a reasonable interval of several years between the models. The sets received new numbers when the track system changed, RD becoming R3D

 

Some items even received new numbers even though the items didn't change. The electricity pylons are one example, starting as RML.61 as part of the ModelLand series, then becoming R.530, and I think there may even even have been a further change. 

[andyman7]

One if the things that the Rovex/Triang numbering system highlighted was that it was rare to have multiple liveries of the same item in the catalogue simultaneously, so a model kept the same catalogue number through different liveries. An extreme case of this is the A1A diesel made from 1962 to 1976 - firstly in experimental blue, then green as R357; then for one year available in both lined blue and in green as R357B and R357G respectively (although I've never seen a factory label with the latter suffix); then in bright blue; rail blue; back to green again; and finally glossy green with twin bogie pickups, and always as R357.The only other livery was the 1970s Australia export version in NSWR colours and that was catalogued as R307, because it was issued simultaneously.

Between 1969 and 1970 when the steam outline range was changed over to pre-nationalisation colours there were some overlaps so most of the pre nationalisation versions got separate catalogue numbers (e.g. B12 BR R150/LNER R866; BoB BR R356/SR R869 but for some like the Hall there was no overlap and the number R759 was used for both.

 

The Rovex computer arrived in 1973 and form that point it became normal to use a new R number for each version of a model - so the new Silver Seal Class 47 was issued as R863 in 1974; it became R060 when the internal wiring was simplified in 1976; R075 when issued in blue in 1977, R073 when issued in named green in 1979 and R328 when the specification changed to a fully painted body in 1980. Under the old system we would have expected it to keep the same number through all these changes. It was from this point that R numbers began to get reused quite a bit as there otherwise weren't enough to go round, a practice that continued until the move to 4 (and now 5) figure numbers. It is from 1973 that the use of prefix and suffix letters were discontinued apart from the leading 'R' - this is why any of the Model-Land buildings such as the pylons which had originally been issued with RML numbers got new R numbers if they were reissued after 1973; the train sets also lost their RS prefix, a hangover from the earliest Triang days. [EDIT: 1960 - see below]

Edited June 15, 2021 by andyman7

[GoingUnderground]

2 hours ago, andyman7 said:

....; the train sets also lost their RS prefix, a hangover from the earliest Triang days.

That isn't true about the RS prefix dating back to the earliest Triang days. The RS numbering for sets only started in 1960.

 

Up to 1956 the sets were numbered R0 to R8 with some receiving letter suffixes to denote variations from the usual contents.

 

From '56 to '59 letters were used RA, RB RC RD etc with suffixes again used to show variations. When Series 3 track was introduced in 1958 the sets with the new track had the number 3 added, so RD had standard track whilst R3D had Series 3 track. The 1958 catalogue quoted both numbers with appropriate descriptions.  I have one of the R3D sets from 1959, identifiable as such by having Series 3 track whilst the loco and wagons all had Mk3 Tensionlock couplings.

 

When the change to the RS prefix was made in 1960, some sets were unchanged but still received a new number, such as the R3R Jinty set which was renumbered RS4, and the DMU set which had been R3M becoming RS7.

 

The RS sequence continued when the track changed to Super 4 in 1962, with RS21 being the first set with Super 4.

 

When System 6 track was introduced, the sets with the new track tended to be numbered from RS600 onwards, but there were some exceptions as Pat Hamond details in Volume 2 of The Story of Rovex. 

[GoingUnderground]

Andyman is only partly right when he says that it was rare to have multiple liveries of a model on sale at the same time back in the 1950s and '60s. I don't have any HD catalogues from the period, and I only have some of the Trix catalogues. But a look at the Triang catalogues up to the mid/late 1960s shows a fair number of examples of alternate liveries with unique catalogue numbers in the same catalogues:

 

The Princess loco was available in Black, Green and Maroon

The Steeple Cab in Green and Maroon

The 0-4-0T in Black, Blue, Red and Yellow

The Dock Shunter/Yard Switcher in Black then Red, and Yellow

The suburban coaches in Maroon and Green

The short Composite, Restaurant and Brake coaches in SR Green, MR Maroon, BR Maroon & Cream, and WR Brown & Cream

The Utility Van in SR Green and MR Maroon

The 1st series Transcontinental Standard, Vista Dome, Baggage, Observation, and Dining coaches in Blue & Yellow and in Silver & Red

The 2nd series Transcontinental Standard, Baggage, Observation, Vista Dome and Dining coaches in Blue, Green and Silver versions.

The Transcontinental TPO in Red and Blue.

The tank wagon in White, Silver, Yellow and Black.

 

Aside from the coaches in the CKD kits, there weren't models in the same livery but with different running and catalogue numbers. The Pulmans did have different names but all under the same catalogue number.

 

You don't see pre and post nationalisation liveries in this period as Triang concentrated on making their models in the current BR liveries, and when those changed, so did the models. The 1950s and early '60s were the high point in sales and, with one or two exceptions, they could sell all of what they made without forcing sales with alternate loco names and numbers.

 

Remember, back in the 1950s and '60s these were made and sold as kids toys and us kids wanted different locos and different coaches, not a fleet of the same loco or a correctly formed rake, we didn't have space for that. My brother and I both had a Princess, in Green and Maroon respectively, but that was the only duplication between us.

 

Of course, one loco - one livery - one running number slowly changed, starting in the mid-late '60s as the market shrank, and after the Princess, the next Triang loco with alternate running numbers was the CKD EM2 with a choice of 3 different names and numbers provided via self adhesive labels in the box, 27000 Electra, 27002 Aurora and 27006 Pandora. As the Pre-nationalisation liveries appeared so did coaches in suitable liveries. Before them there were the two pre-grouping "Single" locos and their coaches, Lord of the Isles and the Caley single.

 

Trix did offer different liveries as well. The EM1 was available in both Black and Green versions from 1959. Their tinplate coaches were available in both Maroon and Maroon and Cream. Later the Transpennine sets in both Green and Blue/Grey, with specific NE running numbers, and their Green, Maroon and Blue/Grey scale length coaches with different running numbers to the Transpennine sets are ones that immediately spring to mind. There may well be others, but I don't have the catalogues to hand.

Edited June 15, 2021 by GoingUnderground
Added info

[Ruffnut Thorston]

The first Tri-ang Railways pre B.R. Livery was The GWR Single, Lord of the Isles, and the GWR Clerestory coaches. Followed by the Caledonian Railway Single, 123, and coaches.

Rocket and coaches is also pre B.R.

 

These were all “Historical” models.

 

What really started the swing to pre B.R. Liveries was the release of Flying Scotsman, in as preserved LNER Apple Green.

This was released just after the loco was released in B.R. Livery.

 

There was also a customer survey form in a Tri-ang Hornby catalogue around this time, the replies, and sales of the LNER “Scotsman” led to the early 1970s issue of pre B.R. Liveries...

 

As to Tri-ang numbering, I part authored an article on this subject for The Collector, the magazine of the Train Collectors Society.

 

 There were all sorts of anomalies...It is quite an interesting subject in itself...especially when the similar numbering systems of other Lines Bros. Group, Tri-ang, companies are also looked at. And then there is the TT Gauge range! Not to mention the S. And X. Spares and Assemblies numbering system...

 

In the beginning, there was a system, but it was flawed. Number ranges were allocated to sets, locos, tenders (sold separately), coaches, wagons, track, accessories....

 

But there were soon more wagons than tenders, etc. So the system partly broke down.

 

The very first Tri-ang Railways train sets were numbered in a style similar to Hornby (Meccano Ltd.) No.1, No.2, etc. Then they numbers were changed to R.1, R.2, etc.

 

Then letters were used. RA, RB, RC, etc. An X suffix denoted sets supplied with the R.42 Speed Control Unit, instead of the R.41 battery box controller. Thus RAX, RBX, RCX, etc.

 

Then the 3 came in, with the move to Series 3 track. R3A, R3B, R3C, etc.

 

The Primary Series, from 1959, had sets, with Series 3 track, with an RP. Prefix. RP.A, RP.B, etc.

The RS sets (1960) came just before the move to Super 4 track, from 1962.

 

A good list of OO gauge R numbers can be found in the Hornby Book Of Trains from 1979. This includes a lot of the reused numbers of the early 1970s, but does not include most Train Sets.

 

 

Edited June 15, 2021 by Ruffnut Thorston
Typo

[kevinlms]

1 hour ago, Ruffnut Thorston said:

The first Tri-ang Railways pre B.R. Livery was The GWR Single, Lord of the Isles, and the GWR Clerestory coaches. Followed by the Caledonian Railway Single, 123, and coaches.

Rocket and coaches is also pre B.R.

 

These were all “Historical” models.

 

What really started the swing to pre B.R. Liveries was the release of Flying Scotsman, in as preserved LNER Apple Green.

This was released just after the loco was released in B.R. Livery.

 

There was also a customer survey form in a Tri-ang Hornby catalogue around this time, the replies, and sales of the LNER “Scotsman” led to the early 1970s issue of pre B.R. Liveries...

 

As to Tri-ang numbering, I part authored an article on this subject for The Collector, the magazine of the Train Collectors Society.

 

 There were all sorts of anomalies...It is quite an interesting subject in itself...especially when the similar numbering systems of other Lines Bros. Group, Tri-ang, companies are also looked at. And then there is the TT Gauge range! Not to mention the S. And X. Spares and Assemblies numbering system...

 

In the beginning, there was a system, but it was flawed. Number ranges were allocated to sets, locos, tenders (sold separately), coaches, wagons, track, accessories....

 

But there were soon more wagons than tenders, etc. So the system partly broke down.

 

The very first Tri-ang Railways train sets were numbered in a style similar to Hornby (Meccano Ltd.) No.1, No.2, etc. Then they numbers were changed to R.1, R.2, etc.

 

Then letters were used. RA, RB, RC, etc. An X suffix denoted sets supplied with the R.42 Speed Control Unit, instead of the R.41 battery box controller. Thus RAX, RBX, RCX, etc.

 

Then the 3 came in, with the move to Series 3 track. R3A, R3B, R3C, etc.

 

The Primary Series, from 1959, had sets, with Series 3 track, with an RP. Prefix. RP.A, RP.B, etc.

The RS sets (1960) came just before the move to Super 4 track, from 1962.

 

A good list of OO gauge R numbers can be found in the Hornby Book Of Trains from 1979. This includes a lot of the reused numbers of the early 1970s, but does not include most Train Sets.

 

 

What was the intended point of selling the tenders as separate items to the locos? How many disappointed children were there on Christmas Day/birthdays, when they found out that they couldn't run their new gift, because they had a loco sans tender?

Yes, I suppose some adult modellers may have enjoyed buying a suitable tender, but I suspect the practice died off, as it caused more trouble than it was worth.

[Ruffnut Thorston]

Historically, Hornby (Meccano Ltd.) sold the tenders separately for their O gauge range, and initially also for the Hornby Dublo range.

 

The first Dublo locomotives to come with the tender were those that used the tender for the pick ups (3-Rail). The 2-rail locomotives didn’t use the tender for pick ups, but did come complete with tenders.

 

I can only think that there was a good reason for this practice. Possibly to make the locomotive price look lower, though most people can do simple addition in maths!

 

Certainly, the practice also used, of quoting prices in shillings even when in excess of 20 Shillings, which is a Pound (£), must have been to make the prices sound cheaper....it’s only so many shillings sounds cheaper than it’s so many pounds....

 

 

Tri-ang Railways did move to supplying locomotives complete with tenders, but the tenders retained separate R numbers.

 

For example, a Britannia, packed in a long window box, had a label quoting the contents as R.259S 4-6-2 “Britannia” loco With R.35 tender.

 

 

 

[GoingUnderground]

8 hours ago, kevinlms said:

What was the intended point of selling the tenders as separate items to the locos? How many disappointed children were there on Christmas Day/birthdays, when they found out that they couldn't run their new gift, because they had a loco sans tender?

Yes, I suppose some adult modellers may have enjoyed buying a suitable tender, but I suspect the practice died off, as it caused more trouble than it was worth.

Price, because it made the loco look less expensive, and when you're new into the market you do what the opposition does as Ruffnut has pointed out. That is why retailers used to price things as, say 19/11 (19 shillings and 11 (old) pence) or post 1971 decimalisation as 99p, because pricing it at £1/0/0 or £1.00 made it sound so much more expensive even though it was only a penny dearer. It struck me as strange at the time that tenders were priced and packaged separately, and putting the tender in the same box was a sensible move.

 

I don't think there would have been many disappointed kids, as any retailer worth their salt, even in toy shops, would have explained to the purchaser that they needed the matching tender. Otherwise the retailer would have missed an easy sale and been left with a potentially hard to sell item.

 

In those days in the UK no electrical appliance came with a plug. Apart from electric kettles, the mains lead was permanently fixed to the item and you had to buy and fit your own plug. So selling an item without an essential extra to make it work wasn't unknown, and retailers always asked if you wanted a plug. I don't know the reason, but it might have been because older properties had 15 amp round pin sockets and the plugs were unfused whilst newer properties had the 13 amp rectangular pin sockets and fused plugs that we use today. So getting customers to supply and fit their own plug was the easy way out. 

Edited June 16, 2021 by GoingUnderground

[BernardTPM]

10 hours ago, Ruffnut Thorston said:

The first Tri-ang Railways pre B.R. Livery was The GWR Single, Lord of the Isles, and the GWR Clerestory coaches.

Strictly speaking, the R20 LMS coach was the first pre-BR livery item that Tri-ang did, albeit inherited from the original Rovex/M&S set.

[Ruffnut Thorston]

Thanks…

 

So obvious that is, that I forgot about that one!