Hornby ex LSWR/SR Adams 0415 Radial

[JSpencer]

Of course the big dilemma, if not modelling the Lyme Regis branch, is how to justify an Adams Radial in the model fleet? I'm sure the local shed could handle all the day-to-day repairs, perhaps even boiler washouts, but for anything heavier, a trip to Exmouth Junction shed, or Yeovil shed, or even Eastleigh Works, would occasionally be required, so there's a good excuse. Furthermore, of the three surviving locos in the 1950s/60s, were all three kept on the branch, or would the third spare be kept away at a parent shed?    

                    Cheers, Brian.

 

It's easier than you think. One of these was operating in Kent at the end of the pre-grouping era and for most of the grouping one. I opted for an EKR version (Oxfordrail) as this can run next to my SECR fleet (like LBSCR can too).

 

During this period and for much of BR, they had the occasional foray elsewhere in the system (such as popping to the works, on a side note, I have photo of a Beattie well tank - also normally limited to one line - making a foray onto a mainline being overtaken by a Bullied diesel!).

 

The preserved member trotted around few parts of BR/SR (when BR was a mix of diesel and steam)  before settling on the Bluebell. Once into preservation, you can justify one in pretty much any timer frame there after, running either on a Bluebell line or with other bluebell locos or occasional visits to elsewhere.

 

Of course, if what you model is not southern area then I agree justifying one will be near impossible. I doubt they ever touched Great Western metals during SR or BR days, with other regions being a big no. Even here you can also use rule number 1....

[No Decorum]

Speaking of a Bulleid diesel …

[Mod4]

Note I have updated the thread title to reflect the fact that this thread is about the finished product now not just the sample anymore. 

[Ian Hargrave]

And if I can find it.....I do have such a Replica set. Thank you for that,John.Now for a good ferret in the loft.....A purchase at Warley a few years back.The coachesI mean,not the ferret

 

Still in their box a set of three crimson 64' suburban BR coaches in unlined crimson and flush-glazed .I have now "modelled" the train photographed by Norman Lockett and Ivo Peters on that day...except it was 30584 and I have 30582. I feel rather chuffed if you'll pardon the pun Now I ask myself what about that double header with a Bulleid set on the rear ? Mmm....doable but greedy

[toboldlygo]

Beautifully smooth running coaches too, behind an Adams Radial (yes I know it should be Early Crest - that version is in its box)

 

[Ian Hargrave]

Beautifully smooth running coaches too, behind an Adams Radial (yes I know it should be Early Crest - that version is in its box)

IMG_20160728_192059_598.jpg

Not necessarily.I have in front of me several colour images of 30583 hauling a Maunsell brake 2nd and a crimson ex-LSWR 2nd behind 30583 in late crest...circa 1959.

[Robin Brasher]

Double vision. Hornby 488 on the left and Oxfordrail 488 on the right. For me the most noticeable differences are the colour of the bodies, the size of the domes and the rear windows, the radial trucks, the wheels and the colour of the interiors. The daylight under the boiler of the Hornby version has been adequately covered in previous posts. I have not run the Hornby version yet.

[NHY 581]

Not necessarily.I have in front of me several colour images of 30583 hauling a Maunsell brake 2nd and a crimson ex-LSWR 2nd behind 30583 in late crest...circa 1959.

I think the crimson coach is more likely to be an ex SECR 10 compartment jobbie. Shortly afterwards BR decided all coaches over 30yrs were to be withdrawn. As a result the SECR coach was replaced with a Maunsell open second.

 

Rob.

[Ian Hargrave]

I think the crimson coach is more likely to be an ex SECR 10 compartment jobbie. Shortly afterwards BR decided all coaches over 30yrs were to be withdrawn. As a result the SECR coach was replaced with a Maunsell open second.

Rob.

Which would account for the stock in the Norman Lockett photos taken a year later with a BR suburban 64' as a strengthener.

Thanks for that,Rob.

[mikesndbs]

Double vision. Hornby 488 on the left and Oxfordrail 488 on the right. For me the most noticeable differences are the colour of the bodies, the size of the domes and the rear windows, the radial trucks, the wheels and the colour of the interiors. The daylight under the boiler of the Hornby version has been adequately covered in previous posts. I have not run the Hornby version yet.

Interesting! looks like the Hornby one is the most accurate apart from the wheels on the radial truck.

[21C123]

Hi all

 

I've just started to run in my Hornby 0415 and encountered a problem.

 

When running backwards the loco occasionally hesitates with a "brrr" sound, like the gears are slipping.

 

I opened it up and found the gear box cover wasn't all the way down, though I can't see where it is held up.

 

Would this be the source of the problem ?

 

I'm inclined to return it, but the postage is a bit of a pain from here in NZ if there is a simple fix instead.

 

 

Roger

[Ian Hargrave]

Hi all

 

I've just started to run in my Hornby 0415 and encountered a problem.

 

When running backwards the loco occasionally hesitates with a "brrr" sound, like the gears are slipping.

 

I opened it up and found the gear box cover wasn't all the way down, though I can't see where it is held up.

 

Would this be the source of the problem ?

 

I'm inclined to return it, but the postage is a bit of a pain from here in NZ if there is a simple fix instead.

 

 

Roger

 

That's exactly the same problem I encountered with my first radial.....which was duly returned.

[railroadbill]

Double vision. Hornby 488 on the left and Oxfordrail 488 on the right. For me the most noticeable differences are the colour of the bodies, the size of the domes and the rear windows, the radial trucks, the wheels and the colour of the interiors. The daylight under the boiler of the Hornby version has been adequately covered in previous posts. I have not run the Hornby version yet.

Regarding the dome, I've been looking at an F W Roche drawing of boiler fittings. It includes an Adams dome with   dimensions.  The diameter is 2' 4 1/2"  and the height (above the boiler line) is 2' 10".   Converting these dimensions to 4mm to 1ft equivalent,  and measuring the Hornby Adams dome with a digital micrometer, this gives:

 

Prototype  OO scale dia              9.5mm,,   Hornby 9.37 mm

 

     "                 "         height      11.34 mm   Hornby 10.86 mm

 

 

This of course depends on the accuracy of the Roche drawing dimensions, and also the micrometer, however it does look like Hornby got the dome pretty well accurate. 

[Butler Henderson]

Hi all

 

I've just started to run in my Hornby 0415 and encountered a problem.

 

When running backwards the loco occasionally hesitates with a "brrr" sound, like the gears are slipping.

 

I opened it up and found the gear box cover wasn't all the way down, though I can't see where it is held up.

 

Would this be the source of the problem ?

 

I'm inclined to return it, but the postage is a bit of a pain from here in NZ if there is a simple fix instead.

 

 

Roger

Are the screws on either side of the cover tight?

[Dunsignalling]

Regarding the dome, I've been looking at an F W Roche drawing of boiler fittings. It includes an Adams dome with   dimensions.  The diameter is 2' 4 1/2"  and the height (above the boiler line) is 2' 10".   Converting these dimensions to 4mm to 1ft equivalent,  and measuring the Hornby Adams dome with a digital micrometer, this gives:

 

Prototype  OO scale dia              9.5mm,,   Hornby 9.37 mm

 

     "                 "         height      11.34 mm   Hornby 10.86 mm

 

 

This of course depends on the accuracy of the Roche drawing dimensions, and also the micrometer, however it does look like Hornby got the dome pretty well accurate. 

Bear in mind that there were two Adams boilers still extant in the latter part of the Radials' careers and one had a taller dome than the other. I don't have measurements but visually the difference looks like at least 6". One is significantly higher than the top of the cab, the other doesn't quite reach it. The tall one looks a bit "fatter", too. 

 

30584 lost the one with the taller dome in 1954 and received that with the shorter version, ex-30582, which it carried to withdrawal. 

 

The tall-domed boiler was then stored out-of-use until 1959  when it was fitted to 30583; being retained into preservation.

 

30582 carried a Drummond boiler from 1954 to withdrawal and 30583 had one from 1949 to 1959.

 

From pictures of the models, the domes on both Hornby locos look right but Oxford's releases of 30583/488 appear to have the shorter one which, according to my notes, the prototype could only have carried prior to it being fitted to 30582 in 1949, if at all. 

 

John

Edited July 30, 2016 by Dunsignalling

[railroadbill]

Thanks for that, John, didn't realise the 2 Adams boilers surviving in the 50s had different height  domes. So it looks like 488 in preservation does have a higher dome and therefore the Hornby model of 488 looks right. 

Does this mean that in earlier days (and going back to the 1880s!) 488 could or did  have had a shorter dome fitted?

[Dunsignalling]

Thanks for that, John, didn't realise the 2 Adams boilers surviving in the 50s had different height  domes. So it looks like 488 in preservation does have a higher dome and therefore the Hornby model of 488 looks right. 

Does this mean that in earlier days (and going back to the 1880s!) 488 could or did  have had a shorter dome fitted?

I don't know for certain but it seems likely that 30583 had been earmarked for preservation before its final works visit.

 

It would have been chosen because it didn't have the later modifications received by the other two. Closeness to original specification was held in great store when selecting locos to be retained, e.g. Sir Lamiel survived despite King Arthur being available because the latter no longer had its original Watercart tender.

 

I have never seen it stated directly but my intuition is that 30583 was refitted with the boiler in question (which it had carried when purchased from the EKR) specifically because it took the loco nearer to its as-built state.

 

I'm not a student of pre-1900 railways but works practice probably didn't match what developed later. ISTR reading that boiler-swaps were relatively uncommon, with the loco normally being overhauled as a single entity. The boiler was the most time-consuming part of the job and the later provision (or, in this case, retention) of spare ones speeded up the overhaul process considerably. 

 

John

Edited July 30, 2016 by Dunsignalling

[railroadbill]

I believe that the locos picked for the Clapham museum were chosen for being closest to their original condition and this led to some locos being passed over if they had been rebuilt etc. .  Can't off hand remember the name of the curator at Clapham but they ended up with a very good collection. Locos were older and smaller types.

[bagnall]

Interesting! looks like the Hornby one is the most accurate apart from the wheels on the radial truck.

Hi Mike, what is the problem with the wheels on the radial truck ?

Regards Alan

[mikesndbs]

Hi Mike, what is the problem with the wheels on the radial truck ?

Regards Alan

 

Hi Alan

 

They are too small, there is an explination from 4:15 in this video 

 

Were 3foot 6 on the real thing, not the same as the bogie ones

[Dunsignalling]

Hi Alan

 

They are too small, there is an explination from 4:15 in this video 

 

Were 3foot 6 on the real thing, not the same as the bogie ones

Not on 488/30583 they aren't. The bigger radial wheels were only on 30582 and 30584.  

 

John

[mikesndbs]

Not on 488/30583 they aren't. The bigger radial wheels were only on 30582 and 30584.  

 

John

 

Hi John, locos built from 1885 had the bigger wheels, I measured them at the Bluebell on my visit to confirm this. 

[bagnall]

Hi John, locos built from 1885 had the bigger wheels, I measured them at the Bluebell on my visit to confirm this.

 

Hi Mike, l am inclined to agree with John, Russels book on Southern Locomotives mentions that 30583 had 3'0" radial wheels the same size as the bogie wheels, were as the other two's were 3'6", there is even a nice broadside photo of 30583 to show it. A quick Google of Adams Radials has enough photos to show the difference in size, l think Hornby have got this spot on. It's a shame they got the lamp irons on 30582 wrong, they were like that when it had the early emblem but not the way Hornby have modeled it with the late emblem.

Regards Alan

[Horsetan]

Hi John, locos built from 1885 had the bigger wheels, I measured them at the Bluebell on my visit to confirm this.

 

In summary, anything built from August 1882 up to March 1885 had 3ft trailing wheels. This means 415-426, 45/7-57, 427-32, 169-71/73, 490-495, 479-489.

 

Anything built from June to November 1885 had 3ft 6in trailing wheels, so this covers 516-525, 68, 77/8, 82, 104/6/7, 125/6/9.

 

LSWR numbering could be spectacularly haphazard!

 

And that's before you start looking into short and long tanks, and high and low tank fronts!!

[Guest]

Hi John, locos built from 1885 had the bigger wheels, I measured them at the Bluebell on my visit to confirm this. 

Of the three BR survivors, 30583 was fitted with the smaller variant of radial axle, while 30582 and 30584 both had the larger variant.

 

Regards,

Matt