Modelling Spam Cans (Bulleid Pacifics)

[Graham_Muz]

On 16/01/2022 at 01:03, Cofga said:

Given the changes that took place over just a span of a few years in the late 1940s just how closely has Hornby been at pairing the correct livery with the correct cab configuration and the correct tender? Are there any spreadsheets that present all this information in a concise manner, particularly the tender information? 

They have been pretty good to match their tooling options to liveries.

 

My table, albeit possibly needing updating, can be found here https://sremg.org.uk/model/lpvar.html

[Dunsignalling]

15 minutes ago, Graham_Muz said:

They have been pretty good to match their tooling options to liveries.

 

My table, albeit possibly needing updating, can be found here https://sremg.org.uk/model/lpvar.html

Thanks for the link Graham.

 

Yes, there have been a few more added since you  compiled it!

 

John

 

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

Hornby has done two versions of "Tangmere", the train pack one has a cut-down tender and late crest, so that is what you have acquired. 

The other one, R.2221, .....

Yep, has  cut down tender and small T/L coupling, was sold as R2221 by collector but brief search showed it wasn't.  Still I'm happy and prefer darker colour.

 

[Dunsignalling]

2 minutes ago, confused said:

Yep, has  cut down tender and small T/L coupling, was sold as R2221 by collector but brief search showed it wasn't.  Still I'm happy and prefer darker colour.

 

Worked well for me when I got mine, as it saved me having to sacrifice yet another "Wilton"! The R.2221 version didn’t fit my modelling period.

 

John

 

[Graham_Muz]

28 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

Thanks for the link Graham.

 

Yes, there have been a few more added since you  compiled it!

 

John

 

I will have to check my master spreadsheet as I think that although needing updating might be more up to date than the SREmG versions and get both updated. 
 

A note to all, feel free to drop me a PM with details of any omissions and I will collate them and get the page updated. 

Edited January 19, 2022 by Graham_Muz

[Cofga]

21 hours ago, Graham_Muz said:

They have been pretty good to match their tooling options to liveries.

 

My table, albeit possibly needing updating, can be found here https://sremg.org.uk/model/lpvar.html

Perfect, exactly what I was thinking of in my question, I’ll look forward to seeing your update. Although I had the link to the sremg website I had never dug down far enough to find your table and other info on the Bulleid pacifics. These have replaced the A4s as my favorite UK streamlined (air styled) steam locos. My favorites still are the USA Norfolk & Western J class 4-8-4 class and the Southern Railway Raymond Lowey streamlined 4-6-2—Larry

 

 

 

Edited January 20, 2022 by Cofga

[Oldddudders]

2 hours ago, Cofga said:

 My favorites still are the USA Norfolk & Western J class 4-8-4 class and the Southern Railway Raymond Lowey streamlined 4-6-2

Why not the New Haven I-5?

[Cofga]

2 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

Why not the New Haven I-5?

I do like the NH locos but there is evidence that N&W designer Frank Noel based the J Class design first on Southern Pacific GS locos but that one was deemed not fancy enough. Then he tried a design based on elongating the NYC Hudsons but that was too fancy. Finally he came back with the now classic streamlining and that bold red/maroon stripe on the glossy black body, coupled with the massive power of the J’s put them a class ahead. Besides, my grandfather worked for the N&W and during the 1980s excursion years they used to park no. 611 in Manassas VA where I lived and I got to explore it at will. I now model the Southern Railway mainline between Charlottesville and Lynchburg VA where several Southern trains were handed over to N&W J’s for the run across N&W territory. 

 

My interest in the Bulleid pacifics grew out of ads for the Battle Of Britain class models I saw during the 1970-80s in some US model magazines showing their distinctive nose treatment. That design stuck in my mind for 40 years and then I saw the recent Hornby releases in the Neville Grove YouTube Spamfest video and its been downhill ever since. 

[21C123]

Hi all

 

I have updated my spreadsheet of Bulleid locos made by Hornby up to last years catalogue. 

 

Hopefully it all makes sense, I have a "number" of the locos so if details of the model are wanted then I may be able to help. 

 

Roger

Bulleid Pacifics by Hornby.xlsx

[Graham_Muz]

3 hours ago, 21C123 said:

Hi all

 

I have updated my spreadsheet of Bulleid locos made by Hornby up to last years catalogue. 

 

Hopefully it all makes sense, I have a "number" of the locos so if details of the model are wanted then I may be able to help. 

 

Roger

Bulleid Pacifics by Hornby.xlsx 36.56 kB · 5 downloads

 

Thanks Roger,

 

I will merge it with mine and arrange to get the relevant pages on SREmG updated in due course

[Graham_Muz]

How to create 21c11 General Steam Navigation as she was in 1947

 

https://southern-railway.com/2022/02/11/workbench-witterings13-backdating-Hornby-bulleid-merchant-navy-to-21c11-general-steam-navigation-as-she-was-in-january-1947/

 

[John Besley]

Is that what the real 21C11 will look like when unrebuilt?

[Graham_Muz]

8 hours ago, John Besley said:

Is that what the real 21C11 will look like when unrebuilt?

Pretty close, but the real thing will have the wedge shaped cab modification.  She may also run without the front bulbous fairings as that will be dependent on the livery, it might not be in malachite first as the initial livery choice will be by shareholder vote.
 

See here for more information https://35011gsn.co.uk/

[John Besley]

That's interesting, why was the crank axle missing ... Does that mean you have to cast a pair of centre drivers?

[Graham_Muz]

2 minutes ago, John Besley said:

That's interesting, why was the crank axle missing ... Does that mean you have to cast a pair of centre drivers?

The full history of No.11 is here https://35011gsn.co.uk/archive-articles/21c11---35011-history.html after withdrawal her crank axle was fitted to no.26 and a plain axle and wheel set fitted so we have a pair of wheels and should be ordering the materials for the new crank axle later this year. 

[Wickham Green too]

2 hours ago, Graham_Muz said:

....  She may also run without the front bulbous fairings ........

I wonder if there could be clearance issues in places, too ??!? ( Maybe that's why they were done away with ? )

[Graham_Muz]

9 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said:

I wonder if there could be clearance issues in places, too ??!? ( Maybe that's why they were done away with ? )

The fairings were inside the gauging envelope and the were removed to simplify maintenance access with the bottom half removed in the 1948 leaving the top half like the rest of the class that were then removed in 1953. 

[John Besley]

Very intresting

[Wickham Green too]

12 hours ago, Graham_Muz said:

The fairings were inside the gauging envelope and the were removed to simplify maintenance access with the bottom half removed in the 1948 leaving the top half like the rest of the class that were then removed in 1953. 

Though that doesn't naturally translate into today's railway where innumerable preserved locos have had to be chopped down in order to operate on lines they were originally built for !

[Oldddudders]

46 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said:

Though that doesn't naturally translate into today's railway where innumerable preserved locos have had to be chopped down in order to operate on lines they were originally built for !

Perhaps today's railway is better at understanding kinematic envelope theory? I recall that Networker route surveyors found the walls of a tunnel near Charlton bore many scars from cantrail incursions by decades of EPBs. 

[Dunsignalling]

4 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

Though that doesn't naturally translate into today's railway where innumerable preserved locos have had to be chopped down in order to operate on lines they were originally built for !

Apart from GWR Kings which, as built, exceed permissible modern dimensions in both width and height, I wasn't aware of it being a widespread issue on the main line network. There are routes where certain classes are barred, but that's nothing new*. 

 

The only other classes that I'd think might present dimensional challenges would be LMS Pacifics. I know not if it had been "reduced" in any way, but, a preserved Duchess has worked up the SR line from Exeter which has never (TTBOFMK) seen a 4-cylinder GWR loco*.

 

John

 

[Wickham Green too]

1 hour ago, Dunsignalling said:

..... The only other classes that I'd think might present dimensional challenges would be LMS Pacifics. ....... 

'Sutherland' has definitely been reduced in height and I'm sure there are other classes ......... other locos have lost chimneys and/or safety valves by hitting bridges - but it's been the bridge at fault* rather than the loco in each case. 

 

* or the accumulated ballast under the bridge to be prexact !

[Dunsignalling]

19 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said:

'Sutherland' has definitely been reduced in height and I'm sure there are other classes ......... other locos have lost chimneys and/or safety valves by hitting bridges - but it's been the bridge at fault* rather than the loco in each case. 

 

* or the accumulated ballast under the bridge to be prexact !

Thicker ballast for the benefit of modern traction is at the root of the reduced loading gauge on many routes.

 

There's also a potential conflict sideways. I recall 'Tangmere' being temporarily barred from going through one of the overbridges between Yeovil and Salisbury after it lost the handle off the sliding valve cover at cantrail level. 

 

Tamping had not only raised the track but also moved it a bit closer to one side; way too close for comfort!

 

John

Edited February 13, 2022 by Dunsignalling

[John Besley]

10 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said:

'Sutherland' has definitely been reduced in height and I'm sure there are other classes ......... other locos have lost chimneys and/or safety valves by hitting bridges - but it's been the bridge at fault* rather than the loco in each case. 

 

* or the accumulated ballast under the bridge to be prexact !

 

I think 6000 KGV was the first victim after a PW work that raised the track too high and took out her safety valve bonnet on a light engine movement between Hereford and Shrewsbury

[Graham_Muz]

8 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

Though that doesn't naturally translate into today's railway where innumerable preserved locos have had to be chopped down in order to operate on lines they were originally built for !

 My reply was in response to your hypothesis that the fairings might have been removed for gauging issues, and as I stated they were not. 
 

At the moment there is no reason to believe or speculate that any current gauging issues exist. (And I write this as a Director of the loco owning company)