NORTHEASTERN KITS

[ArthurK]

 

2 hours ago, Daddyman said:

I don't think we're ready for "I told you so" yet as no new evidence has been presented. In fact, the evidence keeps adding up for these being rebodies to the rebuilt GC pattern: another argument in favour of that thesis is that those tenders (the GC rebuilds) are exactly the same width as the Atlantic tenders - 7'10" - so would need the same handrail-on-a-plate arrangement at the front.  

You appear to forget that  the GC rebuilds were a Darlington design and the dimensions are an exact match to those of NER 4125 gallon self trimming tenders. Why produce a new design when one already exists..

 

43 minutes ago, mikemeg said:

Hi Dave,

 

If Arthur's tender models are correctly proportioned, then the footplate of the 4125 gallon tender was actually 6 inches wider than that of the 3940 gallon tender. The relative widths would seem to be c 31.3 mm (3940 gallon) - 7' 10" v c 33.3 mm (4125 gallon) - 8' 4". Drag beams and buffer beams were similarly of different widths to match the footplates.

Mike

 

The footplates  of the 3940 gallon trenders were 8' (the loco footplates were 8' 6"). The 4125 tender footplates were 8' 6".

 

ArthurK

[Daddyman]

5 hours ago, ArthurK said:

You appear to forget that  the GC rebuilds were a Darlington design and the dimensions are an exact match to those of NER 4125 gallon self trimming tenders. Why produce a new design when one already exists..

I don't get your point here, sorry: I've argued all along that BR have a design already there to use when rebodying the D20 tenders, and that that design is the one used on the GC rebuild. It's precisely the unwillingness to change the design that leads to the handrail bodge at the front of the D20 tenders. 

 

Re widths, the 7'10" body of the GC rebuild still fits on the 8' platform of a D20 tender. 

 

What clinches it for me is the G/S (not NER) details on the back of these rebuilt (D20) tenders. 

Edited February 25, 2021 by Daddyman

[ArthurK]

I think that this topic is going around  in circles and whereas I have added my own  comments, I do think the these discussions are not appropriate for this thread. Would the participants please post further comments elsewhere.

 

ArthurK

[mikemeg]

I asked the original question and, clearly, the answers belong elsewhere. So I'll pick up this debate/discussion on my own thread - Mikemeg's workbench - as and when I build the 4 mm model of one of these tenders.

 

Cheers

 

Mike

 

Edited February 28, 2021 by mikemeg

[MarkC]

Hello Arthur.

 

I wonder if you have any news of progress on the F8 please?

 

Kind regards,

Mark

[ArthurK]

Sent by mistake

 

Edited March 30, 2021 by ArthurK
Sent in error

[ArthurK]

NORTHEASTERN KITS

An Update

 

Despite the all problems associated with the lockdown things are still progressing but times to get bits etched  have increased to around eight weeks. New eches and re-orders are therefore taking longer.

J25

However the good  news is the the first batch of twelve J25s are no ready to go. The first on the list will receive notification of this in the next few days .

F8

I have received the first test etches. It now being test built by Mike Megginson and the build will appear in these pages.  The has required anew lost wax casring for the springs and front valve covers. the remaining castings are already in my range.

Q7

I have reluctantly given up including full valve gear. It is just not practical. Instead I will concentrate on those  bits that can be readily seen f rom above.  Both boiler styles will be catered for.

C6

Slow progress. 

 

Tennant 

I have a new batch of four of these.

 

I have a number of other kits in stock. I will check and list them. I know that the is one Q5, first come first served.

 

ArthurK

 

 

Edited May 9, 2021 by ArthurK
Incorrect inclusion

[JaymzHatstand]

Thanks for the updates, it's good to hear about the J25 and I'm certainly anticipating seeing how the F8 progresses. I dare say I could be tempted to add a Q7 to my list in due course too! 

 

Looking forward to further updates

 

Cheers

 

J

 

[Edwardian]

I wonder if there might be a re-run of the N10?

 

It was not a class I thought I'd need, but now I'm very desirous of a brace of them - as sent new to Bowes Bridge in the Olden Times when they were Class U.

 

BTW, if anyone has any information on the Us at Bowes Bridge in NER days (I've only identified one of the initial allocation), I'd be very grateful.

[ArthurK]

I have (I believe) six N10 bodies in stock but only four underframes. Four  are reserved.

 

I can re-order underframes to make up the deficit, That will take about two months. There  are  six underframes on a sheet but only two bodies. 

 

If the demand is there I can even things out with a further four bodies.

 

ArthurK

[Edwardian]

3 hours ago, ArthurK said:

I have (I believe) six N10 bodies in stock but only four underframes. Four  are reserved.

 

I can re-order underframes to make up the deficit, That will take about two months. There  are  six underframes on a sheet but only two bodies. 

 

If the demand is there I can even things out with a further four bodies.

 

ArthurK

 

Thank you very much indeed. 

 

I would be very happy if you could please put me down for two complete kits, as and when available.  If I understand correctly, the four reserved kits would take up the four underframes you have.  That would mean the 2-month wait, which is not problem whatsoever so far as I am concerned.

 

 

[Steve Taylor]

Arthur, I believe I put my name down for a J25? Was there ever a final price given? No quibbles, just warming the chequebook. 

Thanks again

Steve

[JoeF]

On 13/05/2021 at 10:02, Edwardian said:

I wonder if there might be a re-run of the N10?

 

It was not a class I thought I'd need, but now I'm very desirous of a brace of them - as sent new to Bowes Bridge in the Olden Times when they were Class U.

 

BTW, if anyone has any information on the Us at Bowes Bridge in NER days (I've only identified one of the initial allocation), I'd be very grateful.

Bowes Bridge allocation at 1/1/1923 (first day of LNER) was U/N10 1138 & 1683 plus B/N8 349. Class L/J73 no 548 was there in 1895.  

[Edwardian]

23 hours ago, JoeF said:

Bowes Bridge allocation at 1/1/1923 (first day of LNER) was U/N10 1138 & 1683 plus B/N8 349. Class L/J73 no 548 was there in 1895.  

 

Thank you very much indeed,

 

The presence of a Class L is very interesting. and might tempt me to depict the line either side of the introduction of the Us.  I had not considered an L, though I had idly wondered whether I might plausibly run a Class 290 down the Tanfield branch, mainly because I like them and I have one!

 

Turning to the Us, I believe the initial allocation to Bowes Bridge in 1902 was No.1112 and one other.  It's the one other I'm keen to identify. 

 

 

[2mm Andy]

14 hours ago, Edwardian said:

 

Thank you very much indeed,

 

The presence of a Class L is very interesting. and might tempt me to depict the line either side of the introduction of the Us.  I had not considered an L, though I had idly wondered whether I might plausibly run a Class 290 down the Tanfield branch, mainly because I like them and I have one!

 

Turning to the Us, I believe the initial allocation to Bowes Bridge in 1902 was No.1112 and one other.  It's the one other I'm keen to identify. 

 

 

1112 and 1138 were the first pair of U class locos at Bowes Bridge shed according to an article by T.E. Rounthwaite (titled "The Tanfield Line - Yesterday and Today") which was originally published in the April-June 1958 issue of Railway Observer (the RCTS magazine) and subsequently reproduced in a Tanfield Railway magazine. The article notes that 1112 was subsequently transferred to Hull, but other regular locos are listed as 1321, 1109, 1718* and 1845* (although the latter two numbers don't correspond with the N10 class).

 

Andy

Edited May 17, 2021 by 2mm Andy

[Edwardian]

8 minutes ago, 2mm Andy said:

1112 and 1138 were the first pair of U class locos according to an article by T.E. Rounthwaite (titled "The Tanfield Line - Yesterday and Today") which was originally published in the April-June 1958 issue of Railway Observer (the RCTS magazine) and subsequently reproduced in a Tanfield Railway magazine. The article notes that 1112 was subsequently transferred to Hull, but other regular locos are listed as 1321, 1109, 1718 and 1845.

 

Andy

 

Perfect, thank you Andy.  The answer and the reference for it.  

[Paul Cram]

According to Yeadon both 1683 and 1138 were allocated when new to Bowes bridge 11/02 and 10/02 respectively

[Asterix2012]

Arthur, do you have any plans to do another batch of J24?

 

 Thanks 

 

Mark

[ArthurK]

59 minutes ago, Asterix2012 said:

Arthur, do you have any plans to do another batch of J24?

 

 Thanks 

 

Mark

 

I will order a batch of three

 

Any one else want one please let me know.

 

ArthurK

[Asterix2012]

28 minutes ago, ArthurK said:

 

I will order a batch of three

 

Any one else want one please let me know.

 

ArthurK

Thanks Arthur 

[newcastle_central]

Hi Arthur,

 

if there will be spare N10s with the reorder, I would happily take one off you (or even two, if there were sufficient spare).

 

Regards,

 

Jonathan

[Edwardian]

8 hours ago, ArthurK said:

 

I will order a batch of three

 

Any one else want one please let me know.

 

ArthurK

 

Yes, please.  In addition to two N10/Us, I would like to add a single J24/P if possible. 

[Nick Lawson]

Quote

 

I will order a batch of three

 

Any one else want one please let me know.

 

ArthurK

 

Yes please!

[Mark Hamlin]

Would love an N10 as well if available 

[ArthurK]

53 minutes ago, Mark Hamlin said:

Would love an N10 as well if available 

Your name is already on my list

 

ArthurK