Wright writes.....

[The Johnster]

Nothing wrong with wanting your cake and eating it, John.  Impossible, yes, but nothing wrong with wanting it...

 

Most bunkers have sloping bottoms (I went out with a girl like that once) and ballast can be put in beneath them in what is the water space on tender and some tank locos; you can see the sloping line of rivets on the bunker sides of GW tank locos.  Even where this would leave the loco unbalanced, in many cases the level of plastic coal could and should be much lower, leaving the modeller more options regarding the level of coal in the bunker.

 

A case in point is my Hornby 2721, which I eventually managed to get to run properly after something of a saga.  This actually has an empty void under the plastic coal, which came away quite easily, and the running clearly showed that one of it's many issues was that it needed ballasting in the bunker to hold the back of the loco down and level.  This loco has a sprung rear axle with 2 springs bearing down on top of it, and the springs were an issue, being too strong and having no plate beneath them as you'd expect if the model had been better engineered.  The owner's manual for this chassis, downloaded from Hornby, suggests stretching these springs if they are too weak and trimming them if they are too strong.  

 

Mine were still lifting the back of the loco after trimming, impeding pickup and making the loco sit wrong, and impeding slow running until I took some emery cloth the ends of them.  I solved the ballast issue with 'Liquid Gravity', basically lead buckshot, to half full and topped off with real coal.  The loco now sits properly and runs as well as a generic Hornby 0-6-0 is likely to ever run.  The rest of the loco is ballasted as much as I can cram in as well, my standard practice with all my locos and never harmful to performance.  

 

To facilitate this, I sometimes remove the chip terminal and wire directly to the motor from the pickups, old school; some modellers will be reluctant to do this because of the warranty voiding on new models and the effect on resale value.  So, it is sometimes possible to improve the appearance of bunkers and improve performance of RTR products if you are willing to take the top off and fill the voids, but I am irritated that work on the bunkers is made more difficult than I think it should be with Bachmann Small Prairies, Panniers, and 56xx.  The Hornby 42xx is not any better.  

Edited December 9, 2019 by The Johnster

[Steamport Southport]

The Dean Goods coal load was correct though. I found dozens of photographs of them with coal loads exactly like the old Mainline model. Mainly because the smallish tender was mostly full of water and coal was piled high on top.

 

Prime example here.

 

https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/gwr/gwrbsh55.htm

 

And here

 

https://www.rail-online.co.uk/p679214033/hC260D162#hc260d162

 

Still doing it during BR days. No. 2483 at Llanidloes station 1949

Ben Brooksbank via Wikimedia Commons

 

GWR tenders being piled high with coal certainly wasn't restricted to the Dean Goods. Grange 6847 near the bottom is well over the loading gauge

 

http://www.gwr.org.uk/no-tenders.html

 

 

 

Jason

[Steamport Southport]

18 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

Nothing wrong with wanting your cake and eating it, John.  Impossible, yes, but nothing wrong with wanting it...

 

Most bunkers have sloping bottoms (I went out with a girl like that once) and ballast can be put in beneath them in what is the water space on tender and some tank locos; you can see the sloping line of rivets on the bunker sides of GW tank locos.  Even where this would leave the loco unbalanced, in many cases the level of plastic coal could and should be much lower, leaving the modeller more options regarding the level of coal in the bunker.

 

A case in point is my Hornby 2721, which I eventually managed to get to run properly after something of a saga.  This actually has an empty void under the plastic coal, which came away quite easily, and the running clearly showed that one of it's many issues was that it needed ballasting in the bunker to hold the back of the loco down and level.  This loco has a sprung rear axle with 2 springs bearing down on top of it, and the springs were an issue, being too strong and having no plate beneath them as you'd expect if the model had been better engineered.  The owner's manual for this chassis, downloaded from Hornby, suggests stretching these springs if they are too weak and trimming them if they are too strong.  

 

Mine were still lifting the back of the loco after trimming, impeding pickup and making the loco sit wrong, and impeding slow running until I took some emery cloth the ends of them.  I solved the ballast issue with 'Liquid Gravity', basically lead buckshot, to half full and topped off with real coal.  The loco now sits properly and runs as well as a generic Hornby 0-6-0 is likely to ever run.  The rest of the loco is ballasted as much as I can cram in as well, my standard practice with all my locos and never harmful to performance.  

 

To facilitate this, I sometimes remove the chip terminal and wire directly to the motor from the pickups, old school; some modellers will be reluctant to do this because of the warranty voiding on new models and the effect on resale value.  So, it is sometimes possible to improve the appearance of bunkers and improve performance of RTR products if you are willing to take the top off and fill the voids, but I am irritated that work on the bunkers is made more difficult than I think it should be with Bachmann Small Prairies, Panniers, and 56xx.  The Hornby 42xx is not any better.  

 

Apart from the 42XX they are all old models though.

 

I don't think I've bought anything with a permanent plastic coal load for years. They usually fall out when you tip them upside down. If not, a very thin scalpel blade and they ease out.

 

 

 

Jason

[Tony Wright]

5 hours ago, grahame said:

 

Here's that Farish V2 loco. I understand that steam fans hated the 'skirt' and that it couldn't pull it's own weight along effectively:

 

 

'I understand that steam fans hated the 'skirt' and that it couldn't pull it's own weight along effectively:'

 

Not to mention the solid wheels! 

 

I can't remember if I reviewed this model (or similar) for BRM, but I did note the price at the time (which was quite high). 

 

It looked in part like a shrunken-down version of what I had as a boy from Tri-ang, with its non-see-through wheels. Suitable for small boys, but not modellers, and I thought the N Gauge fraternity had been let down a fair bit. 

 

I had an LNER green example, and disguised the blank wheels by filling the in between areas of the spokes with matt black paint, 'revealing' the spokes again with a cotton bud soaked in thinners. I showed it on a DVD.

 

Not only is the latest OO Gauge Bachmann V2 in a different class, it's in a top public school, not a run-down comp'! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[cctransuk]

1 hour ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

Apart from the 42XX they are all old models though.

 

I don't think I've bought anything with a permanent plastic coal load for years. They usually fall out when you tip them upside down. If not, a very thin scalpel blade and they ease out.

 

 

 

Jason

 

Quite - I think that we have to accept that the old Hornby and early Bachmann / Airfix models were not designed to the standards that we would expect today.

 

The classic case is the Hornby 2721 - an ancient model that was designed to provide for more sales of the antedeluvian 'Jinty' chassis, with which it was originally released. The 'Jinty' and its derivatives were 'updated' repeatedly, but it was never redesigned as such and so it is pointless to bemoan it's many deficiencies. It's a cheap and cheerful caricature - weight distribution and bunker coal levels are irrelevant at this late date.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Tony Wright]

3 hours ago, Dr Al said:

 

Certainly some of Farish's recent box vans have been very very draggy on wheels for some reason, and not at all easy to free up.

I still feel that the CF example is certainly valid, but a very different usage scenario than your average modeller using standard N standards that the model was made for, and certainly shows the problem manufacturers face due to the breadth of usage cases the models will be put to - clear on Tony's layout too from what he reports of haulage.  The N V2's certainly not the best design, but I can only go with my direct experience that they perform acceptably well for my needs. 

 

If Bachmann do consider re-tooling it now they have fresh OO research in the vault, I wouldn't hold one's breath though - it'd be years off if their current turnarounds are anything to go by!

 

Cheers,
Alan

Thanks for all your recent comments, Alan,

 

Good to have you on here. 

 

Regarding loco haulage on LB, I've put the latest Bachmann V2 through its (why do folk - not you - use the contraction 'it's' rather than the possessive 'its'?) paces this afternoon, and it's (correct contraction) rather good. 

 

However (there's always an 'however' with me), it won't pull LB's heaviest rakes.

 

 

This is the limit - 12 cars, made up of two kit-built all-metal Mk.1s, a Mailcoach ex-Silver Jubilee dining triplet (with cast metal bogies) and the rest modified RTR BR Mk.1s. There was some slipping on starting, but, once underway, it handled this Newcastle-Kings Cross rake with ease, running beautifully-quietly and steadily.

 

 

It also took the ten-car QoS with relative ease. This is a heavy train, though free-running with pin-point bearings in its all-metal bogies. Again, a bit of slipping on starting, but probably prototypical.

 

What it won't take are the all-metal trains, in some cases loaded to 13/14 cars, which my own kit-built V2s handle with ease. All it does is polish its driving wheels' tyres and the rails they're sitting on! 

 

However, that said, does it matter? Nowhere (ever) has an RTR loco manufacturer claimed its products will take 13/14 all-metal kit-built carriages. If this loco takes a dozen or more plastic RTR carriages then that's surely enough. 

 

Does it matter to me, though? Of course, and, despite it being a superb-looking model (I'm looking forward to seeing a painted example), I won't really be able to use one. Why not? Because every RA9 loco on LB has to be able to haul every individual train, with no exceptions. I cannot be restricted to the limitations (especially when friends visit) of saying 'Sorry, you can't use that V2/Pacific on that train because it won't pull it'.  

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

Edited December 9, 2019 by Tony Wright
to clarify a point

[Tony Wright]

7 hours ago, Richard E said:

Aha - Little Bytham has just landed on my doormat. Quick skim for now but I'll be reading all 8 pages of the RM article properly a bit later on.

 

And I'll say good to see you again on Saturday Tony, you and Mo are both looking in the rudest of health, long may it continue.

Good to see you again as well, Richard,

 

I hope you enjoy the LB article in the RM.

 

I've yet to see a copy.

 

When others see it, I'll be interested in their comments - good or bad. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[TrevorP1]

Regarding western tenders being piled with coal. My understanding - I may be quite wrong - is that this was done at the home shed so that it needed less coal at the destination in order to work home. For example why take a trainload of coal (for example) from Plymouth to Penzance when half of it was going to be piled on to tenders to be carried back again. Of course this only works if the tender is not going to be emptied on the journey in the normal course of events.

[Tony Wright]

Regarding the 'prestigious' status (or otherwise) of the non-stop, here are two shots showing the train, taken at York on the same day, in August 1960.

 

Actually, it's a Saturday, so the train will not be non-stop, and extra cars have been added at the north end. The northbound loco should not be displaying 'The Elizabethan headboard. It should be reversed, as it is on the southbound working.

 

The extra cars are either Gresleys or Mk.1s, and the northbound service has a Gresley RF in place of the usual Thompson  equivalent. The southbound service has a MK. BSK or BSO instead of the usual Thompson BG.

 

Despite the 'mixtures', the sets look pretty good to me, and look at the state of the A4s! 

[PMP]

4 hours ago, The Johnster said:

One day perhaps, but blue box seem to have made progress with this model.  All too often removal of the plastic coal is difficult and seems in some cases to have been deliberately more difficult (Bachmann 45xx and 4575 with the rear lamp iron protection shield moulded with the coal, I'm looking at you...), and Bachmann panniers have a solid mazak ballast weight with the coal represented on the top of the casting and the bunker detail on the front inside the cab.  Removal of this means you have to make good the bunker detail and the model is no longer properly ballasted.  

 

Good work, Bachmann; now how about doing this on the new 94xx...

The Bachmann (and Mainline/Replica) ‘57xx’ family of panniers don’t have coal represented on top of the bunker weights, they are separate. The coal is part of the plastic  bunker moulding. The weight is only 28 grams and it’s removal has no bearing on either the balance or overall performance on the models. The same is true of the 64xx’s,45xx and 42xx, the bunker weight removal in my experience has no impact on performance. 
 

If you look at pictures of the Bachmann 94xx there’s a pretty good indication as to what path they’re taking with that model 

Edited December 9, 2019 by PMP

[Tony Teague]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I hope you enjoy the LB article in the RM.

 

When others see it, I'll be interested in their comments - good or bad.

 

Tony

 

My copy arrived this morning and I sat down and read it all the way through - excellent images as one would expect, and a great exposition of what LB is all about!

 

I noted an absence of pictures of the girder bridge at the north end of the layout - presumably it is currently undergoing 'refurbishment'?

 

Good to see you and Mo again at Peterborough.

 

Tony

[polybear]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

What it won't take are the all-metal trains, in some cases loaded to 13/14 cars, which my own kit-built V2s handle with ease. All it does is polish its driving wheels' tyres and the rails they're sitting on! 

 

However, that said, does it matter? Nowhere (ever) has an RTR loco manufacturer claimed its products will take 13/14 all-metal kit-built carriages. If this loco takes a dozen or more plastic RTR carriages then that's surely enough. 

 

Does it matter to me, though? Of course, and, despite it being a superb-looking model (I'm looking forward to seeing a painted example), I won't really be able to use one. Why not? Because every RA9 loco on LB has to be able to haul every individual train, with no exceptions. I cannot be restricted to the limitations (especially when friends visit) of saying 'Sorry, you can't use that V2/Pacific on that train because it won't pull it'.  

 

 

 

Hi Tony,

Is there any scope for getting some lead inside the bodyshell perhaps?

Brian

[Tony Wright]

19 minutes ago, Tony Teague said:

 

Tony

 

My copy arrived this morning and I sat down and read it all the way through - excellent images as one would expect, and a great exposition of what LB is all about!

 

I noted an absence of pictures of the girder bridge at the north end of the layout - presumably it is currently undergoing 'refurbishment'?

 

Good to see you and Mo again at Peterborough.

 

Tony

It was good to see as well, Tony,

 

And we look forward to seeing you again here next week.

 

Yes, the girder bridge. I had rather hoped to be have been able to take a shot of the proper one in situ, and Tim Rayner kept the option open until the 11th hour. There were pictures of the old one, but it was decided not to use them.

 

Dave Wager, the guy who's most-generously building the proper one, unfortunately has family health issues, and these (obviously and quite-properly) take precedence over making something for my trainset.  When he's finished the beautiful model, there could well be a further RM piece (much shorter, of course). We'll see. 

 

A year ago, if you recall, I wrote an article in RM which caused an outcry on some social media sites. I wonder if my LB piece will do the same, though I don't think it's contentious. We'll also see.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

24 minutes ago, polybear said:

 

Hi Tony,

Is there any scope for getting some lead inside the bodyshell perhaps?

Brian

Good evening Brian,

 

Good to see you at Peterborough.

 

I haven't taken the lid off (I won't at this stage), so I don't know. 

 

Its haulage capacity should suit most, however, as it is.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Teague]

1 minute ago, Tony Wright said:

 

A year ago, if you recall, I wrote an article in RM which caused an outcry on some social media sites. I wonder if my LB piece will do the same, though I don't think it's contentious. We'll also see.

 

 

I can't think of any reason why this piece should be contentious - indeed it should act as a sound justification for what you said previously and, hopefully, give people something to aspire to.

 

Tony

[davidw]

23 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Having not long returned from a most-enjoyable weekend at the Peterborough Show, may I please thank all those with whom I spoke, and thank those who gave most-generously to CRUK? Mo and I made close to £40.00. Less than half we made at Warley, though still not bad. Some monies, of course, were generous donations, my not fixing anything.

 

I was able to fix most things brought to me (apart from a DCC diesel!). Once again, why do folk who buy into a complex system not learn how to install chips and trouble-shoot for themselves? Hostage and fortune are words which spring to mind.

 

I had a splendid joust with a lovely chap who, when I asked how he was, replied 'I'm good'. 'Don't you mean "well"'? I queried. 'It's the modern way' said he. I said 'I'm glad I'm not modern' because his response, in my view, did not describe his health, rather his altruistic state of mind or proficiency standard. Which is not what I asked about.

 

Which, in a way, relates to some recent posts on here (which I won't go on about too much, honestly). If one expresses quite strong points of view, they are rather 'lessened' in my view if the English in them is wonky; wonky enough to be interpreted in an incorrect way. We've been here before, and I'll say no more, but I have chuckled, so thanks to the parties involved.

 

Speaking of interpretation, how about this..................?

 

 

 

Bachmann's new interpretation of a V2. The first 'independent' shots?

 

I have it on loan for a week, to test on LB and to write a report. It's one of the first proving prototypes and, as such, has seen much in the way of handling and passing around. Thus, inevitably, a few bits have been knocked off.

 

The motion is hand-cut from brass. Production models will have fully-fluted motion. 

 

It represents a loco in later BR condition, with the tender rear coal division plate moved further forward and extended upwards. Other options will be available, including locos with larger outside steampipes (those fitted with separate cylinder castings). Examples will also be available 'as-built' by the LNER. 

 

First impressions - not just mine, but those who commented at the show? Superb! Wonderful! Brilliant! It runs superbly, too. 

 

The asymmetric lubricator positions were commented on. This arrangement (which I've never noted before) is certainly present on the preserved GREEN ARROW, but I'm not sure it's on every loco. I'm also not sure about the cab ventilators. As arranged here, they'd be open all the time.

 

I state again, this is a proving model, and I'll be sending my observations to Bachmann. What a privileged position to be in!

 

I'm told the target price will be 'around' £200.00, hopefully less, with the first deliveries by Warley next year.

 

Don't we live in exciting times?  

 

  

Good evening Tony, I saw the V2 at Warley. The Bachmann rep I spoke to said it was completely redesigned. He spoke of multiple body tools and three different tenders. Sadly I didn't see it up close but the rep kindly showed me photos of it on his phone. 

My only comment is that the dome seems a little small. But it's light years ahead of the RTR offerings for a V2 that we've had in the past.

Just a little left of field w.r.t coaches, with the likes of the 3d printing service offered by the likes of Isinglass and mousa models. Coaches only available from metal kits  may be available in an alternative media. I appreciate that 3D printing is in it's infancy, but it may suit some and lower the weight of scale length trains.

 

Edited December 9, 2019 by davidw

[robmcg]

May I ask please the meaning of 'RM' magazine as 'Railway Modeller Dec 2019' does not bring up a magazine which mentions LB? Nor does a search for 'RM Magazine'.

 

Is it not available on line? 

 

Thanks.

[ROY@34F]

Nice to see you and Mo again at Peterborough Tony , 

The new V2 certainly looks the part. Have they got the boiler/firebox taper right this time ? That's been the worse thing hasn't it ? Re. the two lubricators on the running plate . They do look a bit odd I think . are they the same type . Some were the wakefield type , and some were the silvertown , which was slightly bulkier . That's if my old brain is correct ! I know there are many on here who will know all about such things .

Regarding tender coal loads being discussed . It's well known that Grantham , and Kings Cross top shed overloaded their steeds with coal and at KX getting levelled off in gasworks tunnel where the canal dip in the tunnel  acts as a loading gauge . I very rarely saw tenders almost empty as someone on here suggested was quite common . At least on our GN section of BR at least . The non stop would obviously not have a lot left usually .

 

A little story ; albeit a rather disturbing one :- one day in my time at top shed , I signed on in the time office and on walking round to the mess room/stores,  you passed some buffer stops and there stood an A4 and it had obviously gone at some pace into he stops and shoved them back about 6 foot . Well it appeared that crew had gone off the shed road and over to the coaling plant to top up before their trip to Newcastle . It also turned out the fireman hadn't quite tilted the chute fully back level after topping up and it was tilted the "wrong way", you might say, such that when they reversed back, the chute dug into  the nut on top of the safety valve , lifting the valve . this of course released about 200  psi of steam into the  streamlined cab. The roof enclosing the valves bodies  of course . The driver and fireman managed to jump off  , but the fireman put his burnt hands in some cash as he fell over , making a painful mess for him . I can't remember about the driver, though I don't think he was quite so bad. But what a horrendous accident . You can't begin to imagine their pain can you . The engine carried on until it hit the stops . Whether it just stayed there slipping like mad until it rain low of steam I don't know . What else could you do . unless you have an asbestos suit  to get up and shut the regulator .

 

But that tragedy came about in an effort to have maximum coal on board .

 

Regards , Roy .

 

 

p

[ROY@34F]

Why has my post posted twice , about 1 hour apart ?

[PMP]

39 minutes ago, robmcg said:

May I ask please the meaning of 'RM' magazine as 'Railway Modeller Dec 2019' does not bring up a magazine which mentions LB? Nor does a search for 'RM Magazine'.

 

Is it not available on line? 

 

Thanks.

LB is in the forthcoming January 2020 edition, available digitally via subscription, from this Thursday IIRC

https://peco-uk.com/pages/publications-digital-editions

[Coach bogie]

JUst been reading it. My January Modeller arrived in today's post.

 

Mike Wiltshire

[manna]

G'Day Folks

 

Tony could you not get one of your Gentlemen painters to give the V2, a top class paint job before returning it to Bachmann, and telling them, this is what is expected, of their paint job. !!

 

Terry, (aka manna)

[Tony Wright]

9 hours ago, ROY@34F said:

Nice to see you and Mo again at Peterborough Tony , 

The new V2 certainly looks the part. Have they got the boiler/firebox taper right this time ? That's been the worse thing hasn't it ? Re. the two lubricators on the running plate . They do look a bit odd I think . are they the same type . Some were the wakefield type , and some were the silvertown , which was slightly bulkier . That's if my old brain is correct ! I know there are many on here who will know all about such things .

Regarding tender coal loads being discussed . It's well known that Grantham , and Kings Cross top shed overloaded their steeds with coal and at KX getting levelled off in gasworks tunnel where the canal dip in the tunnel  acts as a loading gauge . I very rarely saw tenders almost empty as someone on here suggested was quite common . At least on our GN section of BR at least . The non stop would obviously not have a lot left usually .

 

A little story ; albeit a rather disturbing one :- one day in my time at top shed , I signed on in the time office and on walking round to the mess room/stores,  you passed some buffer stops and there stood an A4 and it had obviously gone at some pace into he stops and shoved them back about 6 foot . Well it appeared that crew had gone off the shed road and over to the coaling plant to top up before their trip to Newcastle . It also turned out the fireman hadn't quite tilted the chute fully back level after topping up and it was tilted the "wrong way", you might say, such that when they reversed back, the chute dug into  the nut on top of the safety valve , lifting the valve . this of course released about 200  psi of steam into the  streamlined cab. The roof enclosing the valves bodies  of course . The driver and fireman managed to jump off  , but the fireman put his burnt hands in some cash as he fell over , making a painful mess for him . I can't remember about the driver, though I don't think he was quite so bad. But what a horrendous accident . You can't begin to imagine their pain can you . The engine carried on until it hit the stops . Whether it just stayed there slipping like mad until it rain low of steam I don't know . What else could you do . unless you have an asbestos suit  to get up and shut the regulator .

 

But that tragedy came about in an effort to have maximum coal on board .

 

Regards , Roy .

 

 

p

It was good to see you and Tony as well, Roy,

 

The new Bachmann V2 boiler/firebox arrangement is spot-on this time, with that subtle drop towards the cab in profile. 

 

Both lubricators appear to be the same. On the preserved GREEN ARROW they're quite offset, yet I don't think that's entirely typical for the whole class. 

 

In both the prototype examples shown below, they appear to be in line.

 

 

 

In the top example, could the rear lubricator be slightly bigger?

 

I've puzzled over this lubricator-position aspect. Every model I've built of a V2 (well beyond a score) has them in line, and both the same size. I've plotted their positions from drawings/photographs, and, in many cases, how they're fixed and where they're fixed is dictated by pegs on the lubricators' castings fitting into holes in the footplate. Oddly enough, the Isinglass V2 drawing doesn't show the lubricators' position in plan view, though they're there on the LH side elevation.

 

In answer to another query, the dome matches the drawing. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

9 hours ago, Coach bogie said:

JUst been reading it. My January Modeller arrived in today's post.

 

Mike Wiltshire

I hope you enjoy the 'Layout of the Month', Mike,

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[30368]

I'm sure we will all enjoy it Tony. I know I did.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard B