Heljan Beyer garratt

[Prometheus]

Has anyone yet removed the water tank body ? It is supposed to come free when the small screw that is hidden under the tank filler is removed. The body on mine won't budge however.

 

I'm keen to get inside this part to see why the front light fails to shine as efficiently as the rear one does.

 

Otherwise, I have to say that the model runs beautifully. I did remove the front buffer beam to straighten the buffers and also lifted the rectangular brass plate that covered the frame extension in front of the smokebox [to make it fit flush]but otherwise have had to do little.

 

Tony

Edited March 7, 2014 by Prometheus

[robmcg]

I didn't realise the model had working lights!

 

In any event, here is an attractive view of somewhere on the Midland ... very enjoyable and rather strange to see in colour.. not sure if there are any colour photos about of working Garratts, certainly not with LMS 1931-condition engine and private-owner wagons.

 

Fireman hanging out in the cool air, or trying to avoid coal dust. 'Beyer-Peycock patent dust cover' is apparently functioning, or not.... <g>

edit; before someone points it out, I know in many pics the Midland 'main' had slow lines to the left, fast lines to the right, depending on which way you were looking, but it's artistic license, just like the absence of double power-line poles? ... perhaps further north than Elstree?

 

Edited March 7, 2014 by robmcg

[Darth Vader]

Kadee as modified and inserted into the NEM pocket - now at the correct height.

The pony truck has a large amount of side play that makes the Kadee off centre at times and unable to couple up.

My solution was to pack the axle with Peco fibre washers cat no R-8. It took 7 washers on each side of the pony truck to stop the side play.

 

Edited to fix spelling!

Edited March 7, 2014 by Darth Vader

[robmcg]

detail of coal empties on the Midland 1931..

 

I am pleased with this.

 

Edited March 7, 2014 by robmcg

[JZ]

Not sure if there are any colour photos about of working Garratts, certainly not with LMS 1931-condition engine and private-owner wagons.

 

Fireman hanging out in the cool air, or trying to avoid coal dust. 

The only colour picture I have seen is in David Jenkinson's book 'The Big Four in Colour 1935-50' (ISBN 1-899816-08-9) On page 47 it shows 7987 working bunker first on ironstone empties at Copmanthorpe in 1948. Quite heavily weathered, I will use this to further weather my heavily weathered 47996.

[MarkSG]

The only colour picture I have seen is in David Jenkinson's book 'The Big Four in Colour 1935-50' (ISBN 1-899816-08-9) On page 47 it shows 7987 working bunker first on ironstone empties at Copmanthorpe in 1948. Quite heavily weathered, I will use this to further weather my heavily weathered 47996.

 

Surely they were all black anyway 

[JZ]

Surely they were all black anyway 

Anything but. A mixture of greys, browns and orange.

 

 

Edit: If you google for images of LMS 7987, you will find a very small copy of one that was on ebay,

Edited March 7, 2014 by JZ

[robmcg]

The only colour picture I have seen is in David Jenkinson's book 'The Big Four in Colour 1935-50' (ISBN 1-899816-08-9) On page 47 it shows 7987 working bunker first on ironstone empties at Copmanthorpe in 1948. Quite heavily weathered, I will use this to further weather my heavily weathered 47996.

 

Thanks for that, it's a good photo, rusty colour around ashpan and other usual places like cylinder ends. 

 

To me the greatest thing about these engines, sometimes remarked-on, was that the Midland line was rather 'up-and-down' gradient-wise and with 80-100 loose-coupled 4-wheel wagons it was very much an art to manage these trains, with sometimes various parts of the train being on three different 'grades'... up, down and up again.

 

That they achieved quite high mileages, given they often ran at an 18mph average, suggests that they weren't too unreliable, but preparing them really was like preparing two for the pay of one.. and they were so large many sheds didn't have room, so the 18 sand boxes, a long way from the drier, on a wet night,  not likely to enamour the class to crews.

 

Didn't they work 80 loaded wagons from Toton to Brent and 100 empties back north as a standard 'turn'?  I forget where I read that. And drivers lodged away for a week, before the war?

 

I look forward to the Hattons/Heljan revolving-bunker versions.

[Blue Max]

Just received and checked my Garret, so far 7 faults found to report to Hattons for replacement.

 

Also can anyone confirm if the cab rooves are supposed to have the two large ventilator openings permanently open, with no sliding vent covers to close these off? A picture of a roof from someone elses model would be appreciated.

 

Thanks,

 

SteveT

[robmcg]

here is my version...   no vent covers in accessory pack, just tools, couplings, sanders etc.

 

What are the faults on your model?

 

 

 

 

 

[JSpencer]

I can,t wait to see ModelRail,s review especially the fact file part :

 

"That is nice looking little choochoo, what is it?

...it's a Garret.....

 

So it is two locos merged into one, does this mean it can pull expresses twice as fast?

No but it does mean it can pull goods trains twice as large...."

 

 

Edit: for those who do not understand, within each model loco review Model rail does! they include a 1/3rd page Crib sheet explaining to beginners what the prototype is in a nutshell. It runs as a series of questions like "that is a nice engine, what is it?", "where they a success?" Etc etc. in the above I am speculating what they could say for the crib sheet.

Edited March 8, 2014 by JSpencer

[Blue Max]

Thanks for the picture ROBMCG, just looked odd without any roof ventilator hatch covers but looks as if all the models are like this?

 

My faults are -

Front water tank filler loose

Chimey not glued on square, actually looks as if smokebox top melted as chimney is sunk into top of smokebox barrel

Cables under boiler actually dragging on track

Distorted rear footplate

Broken/loose  front right valve gear 

Four corner footsteps actually glued in place facing inwards towards chassis

Wiper contacts not touching wheels

Distorted coal bunker cover

Broken pipe under boiler hanging down to track level

 

Plus a few other issues.

 

This really destroys the pleasure in the purchase of what is a signifiant investment.

[robmcg]

Sounds very annoying.  Hattons I'm sure will replace.    Not a good experience though.

 

A lot of people on this forum have had excellent and speedy replacements from Hattons, and I think they often pay return freight too.

 

My sympathies.

 

Rob

[Grasslands]

My rotating bunker British Railways version is on the slow boat from China. It will apparently arrive mid-april

[Dominion]

Has anyone yet removed the water tank body ? It is supposed to come free when the small screw that is hidden under the tank filler is removed. The body on mine won't budge however.

 

I'm keen to get inside this part to see why the front light fails to shine as efficiently as the rear one does.

 

Otherwise, I have to say that the model runs beautifully. I did remove the front buffer beam to straighten the buffers and also lifted the rectangular brass plate that covered the frame extension in front of the smokebox [to make it fit flush]but otherwise have had to do little.

 

Tony

Yes I had to remove tha tank cover. After removing the small screw under the filler you mentioned, then mine pulled off straight up. There are 2 ridges moulded inside in the middle on each side that sit tight against the weights around the motor and flywheel. There may also have been a tiny amount of glue i think at the bottom in the middle of each side, but that didn't put up any resistance. There was nothing too delicate there, and there are not even wires to the light on the tank. The actual light stays on the chassis and its light shines through the back of the lamp. Very neat.

 

I removed it as I had loss of power while running. I traced it to an intermitent wire joint at the plug that runs to the DCC space under the boiler. I removed the thin black insulation on the single wire, resoldered, and added heat shrink. That fixed it,

 

So I could have left the tank in place. :-) As I am in Canada I normally try to fix things if I can rather than ship back. Despite having to do this repair I am very pleased with it, and pleased that Hattons and Heljan collaborated on it.

 

Having the tank off also allowed me to clean up a mould line on the metal chassis block that was stopping the tank from quite seating properly. Can't wait to ket a Kadee attached to pull some wagons.

 

Has anyone noticed the two sets of drivers turning at different speeds on the track ? They definately were on mine on a rollers but I may be imagining it on the track.

[Dominion]

Has anyone yet removed the water tank body ? It is supposed to come free when the small screw that is hidden under the tank filler is removed. The body on mine won't budge however.

 

I'm keen to get inside this part to see why the front light fails to shine as efficiently as the rear one does.

 

Otherwise, I have to say that the model runs beautifully. I did remove the front buffer beam to straighten the buffers and also lifted the rectangular brass plate that covered the frame extension in front of the smokebox [to make it fit flush]but otherwise have had to do little.

 

Tony

Tony, how did you lift the black plastic plate over the frame extension?

[Prometheus]

Tony, how did you lift the black plastic plate over the frame extension?

 

I thought that's how the light worked - thanks.

 

The plate over the frame extension is a thin brass rectangle. On most models I've seen it sits awkwardly. I have assumed that it should sit flush at the same height as the rest of the footplate. Removing mine was quite easy as there was a gap into which I could insert a scalpel blade and then gently lift the plate off. It came away without damage and the underside was cleaned up with an emery board to remove super-glue residue. I then used the emery board to clean up the tops of the frames[plastic mouldings] and reduce their height slightly. A dry fit established how much I needed to remove. The cover was then re-attached using super-glue. It is worth doing and makes a significant cosmetic difference.

 

Removing the buffer beam to reposition the buffers was another matter altogether though !

 

Tony

[250BOB]

Could I ask for a bit of help on understanding the minor differences between models 266208 and 266211, both the heavily weathered versions.   I know the running numbers are different.!!!!!!!

 

Thanks....Bob.

[Ian Hargrave]

Could I ask for a bit of help on understanding the minor differences between models 266208 and 266211, both the heavily weathered versions.   I know the running numbers are different.!!!!!!!

 

Thanks....Bob.

I e-mailed Hattons on this very point.They don't know either !!

[250BOB]

I e-mailed Hattons on this very point.They don't know either !!

 

Thanks Ian,

Just been reading the Hattons description again.......I am noticing that on model 266211, it says " no pony brake".

 

Would this be worth the effort to produce a completely separate model I wonder......or just an excuse to produce two heavily weathered models for extra sales.

 

I must admit that having never seen one as a youngster, only aged 8 in 1956, they have been a little off my radar as a purchase.  But not any longer.....the reviews, pictures etc on here are doing a damned good job of prising my wallet open.....needless to say, it would be a 266211 or 266208 I would be interested in.

 

Bob.

[Ian Hargrave]

Exactly my position too,Bob.

    

    Ian.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...To me the greatest thing about these engines, sometimes remarked-on, was that the Midland line was rather 'up-and-down' gradient-wise and with 80-100 loose-coupled 4-wheel wagons it was very much an art to manage these trains, with sometimes various parts of the train being on three different 'grades'... up, down and up again.

 

That they achieved quite high mileages, given they often ran at an 18mph average, suggests that they weren't too unreliable, but preparing them really was like preparing two for the pay of one.. and they were so large many sheds didn't have room, so the 18 sand boxes, a long way from the drier, on a wet night,  not likely to enamour the class to crews.

 

Didn't they work 80 loaded wagons from Toton to Brent and 100 empties back north as a standard 'turn'? ...

Without wishing to rain on the model's parade, the assessment in service was 'variable'.

 

The undoubted good feature was a free steaming boiler: this element was essentially Beyer-Peacock's sole work as a design, and fully reflected both their considerable expertise and the very good proportions in tube length especially, that this format permits. Probably the best boiler for evaporation per unit of thermal input that the LMS had until Stanier joined the party.

 

The flexibility afforded by the articulation was definitely track kindly, in this context the higher than expected flange wear especially of the inside drivers was regarded as disappointing: but that was why B-P had wanted inside pony trucks too...

 

Elsewhere, problematic. B-P specified a 2-6-2+2-6-2T arrangement. But this was not approved, and the driven axle loads rose accordingly. Firing the large grate from a conventional bunker was partly addressed by the conical rotating bunker, but mechanical stoking (well proven by both B-P and elsewhere in the world) would have been better: but the extra weight would have required the 2-6-2+2-6-2T arrangement. From the decision to employ standard Derby bearings and short lap valve events stemmed a host of 'knock on' troubles. They needed constant maintenance effort to keep them running, and of course one hot box on a double loco meant the whole loco out of service, instead just one of two 0-6-0s. They really were slow engines because of the valve events, no flexibility to run fast traffic because the engine efficiency dived very rapidly as speed increased: then again the high axleload on small bearings militated against running fast too.

 

The LMS effectively abandoned the concept with Stanier's arrival, he produced a competent 2-8-0 that could tackle any work the Garratt could perform, and gallop up to 75mph if required in passenger service, which the the Garratt wouldn't even begin to look at. The BR data condemns them: averaging under 20,000 miles p.a., and out of service 3 months a year, easily outperformed in all respects by the 9F, which sealed their fate. Writing retrospectively, A.J. Powell - engineer to the LMS and LMR - in 'Living with London Midland Locomotives' rates them as 'dreadful'. He was there and had to make them work, so it's an assessment worth notice.

Edited March 8, 2014 by 34theletterbetweenB&D

[Butler Henderson]

Its slightly surprising no one thought to rebuild one, how might it have performed on a pair of Crab or Staniet Mogul chassis. Presumably their was simply no need but just think what Edward Thompson or Bulleid might have done!

Edited March 8, 2014 by Butler Henderson

[Jamiel]

34theletterbetweenB&D, I don't think you are raining on anyone's parade, the thing about the Garratt isn't that it was a successful loco in real life, but it is an unusual and interesting model to run on a layout.

Most of us know it they were not a great success, but that doesn't matter if it looks good with a rake of coal wagons behind it, coming around a corner, or emerging from a tunnel.

The last loco I bought was also a Heljan, the class 16 diesel, an complete disaster in real life, but again an unusual looking loco, a lovely model, and although a bit of an imposter for my South Yorkshire layout, a nice thing to run on an 'imposters day'.

Your information is very useful for those wishing to run an accurate schedule for that time period, it does add to our knowledge of the loco, but I don't think it would put off potential buyers of the Heljan model.

Jamie

Edited March 8, 2014 by Jamiel

[toboldlygo]

Its slightly surprising no one thought to rebuild one, how might it have performed on a pair of Crab or Staniet Mogul chassis. Presumably their was simply no need but just think what Edward Thompson or Bulleid might have done!

 

Bullied came close with Leader... less said about it the better