National Collection in Miniature Dean Goods Class No 2516

[Coach bogie]

Given the former Reich's obsession with methodical recording,there should be some photographic evidence of this ?

Unless the RAF/USAF bombed the German records office.

 

Mike Wiltshire

[Bernard Lamb]

Examples are reputed to have reached as far East as Dresden and possibly even Warsaw.

Nothing reputed about it.

I new a chap who worked on one not far from Berlin around 1942.

Bernard

[The Stationmaster]

Examples are reputed to have reached as far East as Dresden and possibly even Warsaw.

 

There is reasonable evidence that the farthest east they got was China although I was told by a reliable source that they were definitely none left there by the time Western enthusiasts started to have a good look around sites of dumped engines in the 1980s.

[81C]

I seem to recall reading somewhere Heller made the plastic parts for the Dean's Goods engine all Airfix/Mainline done was use the Castle tender drive unit and 3F loco chassis. 

[Bulwell Hall]

There is reasonable evidence that the farthest east they got was China although I was told by a reliable source that they were definitely none left there by the time Western enthusiasts started to have a good look around sites of dumped engines in the 1980s.

Those that went to China were shipped out there - those that got as far as Eastern Germany and Poland were those that were shipped to France and got left behind after Dunkirk.  That there are no photos is not surprising as by 1945 railway enthusiasts in Dresden and Warsaw had rather more serious matters to think about than funny foreign locomotives!

[Edwardian]

Apropos the Dean Goods in the Third Reich discussion, let us not forget that it was the Germans who first addressed the issue of the class's cab-side cut-outs.

 

Notice how the German owners of no. 2475, one of the class represented in the Oxford range, have overcome the tooling defects by adding cab-side rivets, removing the splasher-front rivets and effectively disguising the cut-out profile. 

 

 

[Coppercap]

Nothing reputed about it.

I new a chap who worked on one not far from Berlin around 1942.

Bernard

Please do tell. Was he a German railwayman, or an ex-Swindon works, British POW who was forced/persuaded to show them how to work on it? 

[Coppercap]

Apropos the Dean Goods in the Third Reich discussion, let us not forget that it was the Germans who first addressed the issue of the class's cab-side cut-outs.

 

Notice how the German owners of no. 2475, one of the class represented in the Oxford range, have overcome the tooling defects by adding cab-side rivets, removing the splasher-front rivets and effectively disguising the cut-out profile. 

 

 

Notice how someone's already pinched the safety valve bonnet for their collection. 

Edited December 6, 2016 by Coppercap

[Talltim]

What is the lump on the lower cab side for?

[autocoach]

What is the lump on the lower cab side for?

A Luger to fight of those nasty partisans trying to blow up your engine?

Edited December 6, 2016 by autocoach

[Edwardian]

What is the lump on the lower cab side for?

 

Being a Great Western, it's right hand drive, so I guess this is where the driver keeps his sausage (so his right hand is free to hold the regulator).

[Bernard Lamb]

Please do tell. Was he a German railwayman, or an ex-Swindon works, British POW who was forced/persuaded to show them how to work on it? 

The machines were very easy to operate apparently and the Germans had no difficulty in putting them to good use.

As Edwardian points out they were even able to provide more comfortable crew facilities than Swindon thought sufficient.

Probably in the mid 1990s there was a book on war time railways published in Germany and on seeing a photograph of a Dean Goods he immediately recognised it and had several stories to recount about trips with it. There was one tale of a volunteer crew using one to deliver Christmas presents from near the front to the Berlin area.

People in Germany and Germans in other countries have been very wary in what they were willing to talk about due to all sorts of political skeletons in the cupboard.

After the wall came down people began to open up both in the east and the west. The chap concerned was the father of a good family friend who had spent the war working on the railway.

When the family did open up it became clear that he was well connected back in those days and also managed to keep his nose clean during the communist period.

I have known people for over forty years and even now find out details that they have never before been willing to mention. One person died last year and the origins and early life of the family that emerged after the funeral were nothing like the story that they had told in the past. 

Bernard

[Coppercap]

Being a Great Western, it's right hand drive, so I guess this is where the driver keeps his sausage (so his right hand is free to hold the regulator).

It being right hand drive, the driver's right hand would be free a lot of the time anyway (apart from when using the reverser), his left hand would be on the regulator.

[Edwardian]

It being right hand drive, the driver's right hand would be free a lot of the time anyway (apart from when using the reverser), his left hand would be on the regulator.

 

Indeed yes.  Which reminds me of the lorry driver interviewed when a channel road tunnel was mooted - which side of the tunnel would the traffic drive, give that Continentals drove on the right.  "Oh", said the driver, "that doesn't bother me - I'm left handed" 

[JSpencer]

Unless the RAF/USAF bombed the German records office.

 

Mike Wiltshire

 

In fact they did. I know for a fact that most records covering German warship development from Blucher's era to WWII were lost in one bombing raid. This lead to some author's filling gaps from their own memories in the immediate post war.

 

While we know about some things that were happening around various points in the country during WWII, there are some serious gaps for pre-war and even WWI developments.

 

This leads to 2 things:

1/ that German material was superior even though the actual details are scant

2/ lots of speculation on how they did things based on scant evidence.

 

For example, we really do not know how the German's controlled the fire of their battleship guns in WWI. Likewise, we do not know how fire control computers developed between the wars. One scientific naval historian noted that the few photo's of Bismark's computer (which is all that survives) shows a strong resemblance to  Barr & Strouds computer developed between the wars and not brought by the RN, but was put on the international market. Did the British provide details of mechanical computer that would then be copied, and one day used by Bismark to sink HMS Hood? Who knows. The German records did not survive.

 

Immediately post war, one German author would talk about the superior quality of German steel armours because it contained metals not published by any other nation in their armours. Adding to the myth of how superior German stuff really was.

We found out later (much later in fact) after the UK and US released their test records from captured samples, that German armour was not really any different to anyone elses (even weaker in some cases). And also later the ingredients which made up British and US armours, and they were not that different.

 

So if something is missing from the German public records office about their use of Dean goods engines, then don't be surprised because it really was bombed and burned out.

Edited December 7, 2016 by JSpencer

[LocomotionatShildon]

An update on Dean Goods - 

 

We know there were one or two things that need sorting out and we have done our best to make this a model worthy of the National Collection in Miniature stamp.

 

So..

 

We have sorted out the livery as the colour wasn't quite right,  the smoke box door caused a few issues but that is also sorted now and the roof debate... Well..suffice to say -  All done!

 

 

The design is finished for the packaging and it is going to be a smart looking parcel!

[Edwardian]

Interesting.

 

And encouraging.

 

Thanks.

 

"One or two" might err on the side of classic British understatement, but if corrections have been made, we clearly need to give this another look. 

 

Not sure the roof issue was really a debate, but the cab-side seemed to be the most intractable problem in using this model to represent a given prototype, so, if that has been satisfactorily address along with the other points mentioned .....

 

I am now very keen to see the updated version of the model.

 

And whether the corrections are tracked through to the standard range.

 

I hope we get a great little model out of this exercise after all.

[GWR8700]

I hope that these issues have been corrected on the main range too.  Would be a shame if that was not the case.

[57xx]

We have sorted out the livery as the colour wasn't quite right,  the smoke box door caused a few issues but that is also sorted now and the roof debate... Well..suffice to say -  All done!

 

Excellent, we all look forward to seeing the final result!

 

Than you for taking the time to get things right and not accept mediocrity from Oxford.

Edited January 24, 2017 by 57xx

[Hilux5972]

Excellent, we all look forward to seeing the final result!

 

Than you for taking the time to get things right and not accept mediocrity from Oxford.

Hopefully we see some updated samples of the corrections.

[57xx]

Hopefully we see some updated samples of the corrections.

 

Indeed, that is what I was meaning.

[Edwardian]

I note the following on the Locomotion website:

 

12/5/17 Update on Progress with Dean Goods Model

The design changes we have requested are underway and we have now seen the first pictures of the newly tooled cab with the correct profile, and new improved detail. Further work is still ongoing ....

 

http://www.locomotionmodels.com/update.htm

 

That is good news.  As anyone following the main Oxford Dean Goods topic will know, there was an awful lot wrong with the model aside from the completely off cab, so curing everything is a "big ask", yet we can but, and should, hope for the best.

 

Portraying 2516 for the period 1928-34, as I believe was the intention, has its own challenges. In any event, we may yet get a decent generic inter-war DG out of this process.  If we do, I suspect that will be down to the NRM; Oxford had seemingly pulled the shutters down in the face of criticism and, of course, critiquing RTR models can be something of a death wish round here .... ! 

 

Still, if we get a good result, that will be the main thing.

[woodenhead]

Aww, I was hoping it would be a complete shambles and I wouldn't want to buy one, damn you NRM and your influence over Oxford Rail.

[Edwardian]

Aww, I was hoping it would be a complete shambles and I wouldn't want to buy one, damn you NRM and your influence over Oxford Rail.

 

You and me both. 

 

Moreover, fancy having to purchase and enjoy a great model instead of having the satisfaction of moaning endlessly about a bad one!

 

No consideration, some commissioners.

 

At least certain retail commissioners are still doing their best to give dissatisfaction, thank goodness!

 

More seriously, I suspect we must wait and see, but some grounds for hope, I think.

Edited May 15, 2017 by Edwardian

[Edwardian]

One of the problems with this model so far, difficult to avoid and expensive to cure, is the splasher size.

 

I believe that on the preserved prototype, and according to the GA drawing, the splasher top is approximately 14 1/2 " above the running plate.

 

The problem is making a model with splashers this size.  if you model the wheels at the scale equivalent of 5'2", I think this becomes technically difficult.  Indeed, it may be that even reducing the diameter to something like a more typically 'worn' in service diameter may not surfice.  Perhaps the axle height needs lowering.  All very difficult to achieve and the sort of fundamental re-design it might be difficult to acheive.

 

Of course, I don't know that the splashers will be too large; we can only anticipate the consequences of the technical difficulties and scale off the photographs of the model that have been release.  The problem is, by the time we are in a position to measure the splashers on the model, it will be too late.

 

How much of a potential problem is this? 

 

Well, OO gauge flanges are deeper and the plastic moulded splasher tops are thicker than scale.  The combination of these probably adds up to about 1mm on the splasher height. Now, I daresay this is not hard and fast and could be regarded as debatable, but interestingly, scaling off the Oxford profile pictures suggests that the splasher height represents 17 1/2 ", i.e. 3" or 1mm higher; 5.83mm as opposed to the correct 4.83mm.  Increased height also causes a 20% increase on the length of the splasher.

 

Does this really matter?

 

Well this is subjective, but I believe there is an appreciable visual impact.  The bulk of the splasher appears noticeably larger than on prototype to me.  Oxford say they can tool for all variants, including round-top firebox.  I think Indian Red spashers (applied up to 1905) in particular would really emphasise, but I think it is noticeable in any event.

 

One area in which I think an oversized splasher will be particularly obvious is the cab-side.  Readers may recall that the number plate on the lined version, 2309, did not fit within the lining.  This is because the splasher occupies too much space and distorts the proportions of the cab-side.

 

I am delighted that there is to be new tooling for the cab.  I assume this is to correct the incorrect shape of the curved cut-out.  However, unless excessive splasher size is mitigated, the cab-side will still be significantly 'off'.

 

Now this is not a known fault - we can't measure the EPs - but is a strongly suspected issue.

 

I think it will be hard to correct this issue completely, and expensive to try, but I suspect there was a trade off to be made between wheel  diameter and splasher size.  The wheel diameter could be reduced, quite prototypically, to under the nominal 5'2", so that might have been a better way to go than to have a prominent component in the form of the splasher so significantly oversize.  Again, there is an element of subjectivity, but I think it is reasonable to argue that 20% over scale is significant 9and noticeably so).

 

But we must see.  I am genuinely interested to see how NRM and Oxford will address this difficulty.  I hope they identify and adopt the optimum solution.

 

Good luck to them on this and all the other necessary changes.  

Edited May 16, 2017 by Edwardian