Model Rail/Rapido Trains GER/LNER 'J70' 0-6-0T 'Project Toby'

[south_tyne]

There was no requirement I understand for side skirts to work Hythe Quay but I have photos showing J70 both with and without skirts.

 

68226 was the last of the class and allocated to Colchester. A couple more photos again unsure of copyright; 68226 BRITISH RAILWAYS without side skirts and unidentified with side skirts.

Interesting photos Paul.

 

Does anyone know whether the removal/re-application of the sideplates was a relatively easy job? If so, they could have been taken on/off at regular intervals during a trams working life, depending on requirements and need? Or was it the case that those which has sideplates removed never had them reinstated once gone?

 

David

[MarkSG]

I would imagine they were removable and replaceable for maintenance. Given that they were outside cylinder locos, access to the gear would need to have been from the outside, and that would mean removing the skirts. But, for use on the W&U, they should then have had the skirts replaced afterwards - although we do have photographic evidence for the fact that that didn't always take place, at least not immediately! 

[Pint of Adnams]

I would imagine they were removable and replaceable for maintenance. Given that they were outside cylinder locos, access to the gear would need to have been from the outside, and that would mean removing the skirts. But, for use on the W&U, they should then have had the skirts replaced afterwards - although we do have photographic evidence for the fact that that didn't always take place, at least not immediately! 

The main removable skirt panels were hinged at the top, with securing pins and rings to hold them onto the lower bar that ran between the cowcatchers. There were smaller hinged panels within the larger ones, for access for routine oiling, etc. Presumably the hinge pins at the top could be withdrawn when necessary to allow the panels to be completely removed, whilst the horizontal bars were bolted at each end and hence could also be removed.

 

The photograph in Paul G's post 484 http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/118730-model-railrapido-trains-gerlner-j70-0-6-0t-project-toby/page-20&do=findComment&comment=3255035 makes this very clear - it's a great photograph.

[south_tyne]

The main removable skirt panels were hinged at the top, with securing pins and rings to hold them onto the lower bar that ran between the cowcatchers. There were smaller hinged panels within the larger ones, for access for routine oiling, etc. Presumably the hinge pins at the top could be withdrawn when necessary to allow the panels to be completely removed, whilst the horizontal bars were bolted at each end and hence could also be removed.

 

The photograph in Paul G's post 484 http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/118730-model-railrapido-trains-gerlner-j70-0-6-0t-project-toby/page-20&do=findComment&comment=3255035 makes this very clear - it's a great photograph.

Agreed that is a great photo and supports your explanation. Thank you for that! This should have allowed access for maintenance whilst in the W&U, but they would need to be quickly back in place for lawful running on the tramway (although we know there were exceptions to this rule!). When at Ipswich/Yarmouth/Colchester etc I would imagine the sideplates were more trouble than it was worth and removal allowed easy access for on going maintainance?

[south_tyne]

I would imagine they were removable and replaceable for maintenance. Given that they were outside cylinder locos, access to the gear would need to have been from the outside, and that would mean removing the skirts. But, for use on the W&U, they should then have had the skirts replaced afterwards - although we do have photographic evidence for the fact that that didn't always take place, at least not immediately!

All makes sense Mark - yes there is always an exception to prove the rule as we can see through photographs! To be honest I always think the trams look a little ungainly without their sideplates... maybe it's a case of exposing the innards (for want of a better word) and making things public which are best left under wraps! Things are nice and tidy when in place. However I know many will disagree; it is definitely a case of horses for courses

[dibber25]

The side skirts were hinged at the top and could be lifted for access to the motion etc. They could then be held up by the chains. There are certainly pictures of locos on the tramway without skirts. I suspect this was often due to damaged skirts because the trams seem to have frequently tangled with road vehicles. Faced with the urgent need to move traffic (the tramway had some very busy periods in steam days) it would be better to leave the damaged skirts off and break the rules, than to delay the perishable traffic while the damage was beaten out. (CJL)

[Edwardian]

I always think the trams look a little ungainly without their sideplates... maybe it's a case of exposing the innards (for want of a better word) and making things public which are best left under wraps! Things are nice and tidy when in place.

 

Says the man with an unskirted tram engine as his avatar.

 

Just say'n'

[Steamport Southport]

Just like Bucks Fizz, they look better without the skirts. 

 

 

 

 

Jason

[south_tyne]

Says the man with an unskirted tram engine as his avatar.

 

Just say'n'

Ha ha, ooops you've got me there.... I deserve the right to be hypocritical... Edited August 24, 2018 by south_tyne

[phil gollin]

.

 

I don't know if this is old, or new, but there is a link to a Rapido factory tour on the "Modelling Musings and Miscellany" posted by "PhilJ W" which shows the Tram engine (2 versions) around 10 mins 30 secs in ;

 

https://youtu.be/u0DYxnNL28Q?t=615

 

 

.

[NHY 581]

Just like Bucks Fizz, they look better without the skirts. 

 

 

 

 

Jason

Totally agree. Even the girls.

[Oldddudders]

Totally agree. Even the girls.

 

Says the Welshman with a sheep as his avatar....

[NHY 581]

Says the Welshman with a sheep as his avatar....

[KymN]

My understanding of how the process works, based on the order I placed, is that if you order online you pay the full amount by credit or debit card straightaway.  A few days later the full amount is credited back to your card account.  When the models are dispatched your card will be charged again.

 

For these and Kernow's own goods I instruct them to not refund the payment.  This avoids duplication of bank charges for overseas transactions.  It also means that my bank account does not get any surprises down the track!   It may not be the best use on my money but it works for me.

[Norton Wood]

.

 

I don't know if this is old, or new, but there is a link to a Rapido factory tour on the "Modelling Musings and Miscellany" posted by "PhilJ W" which shows the Tram engine (2 versions) around 10 mins 30 secs in ;

 

https://youtu.be/u0DYxnNL28Q?t=615

 

 

.

 

As 0:24 - There's a cavalcade of all the models together, they look very impressive.  

 

In addition I can fully understand and respect the price of these locomotives, of course the magazine has to make a profit as it will go on to pay for future projects which again is fantastic

Edited September 4, 2018 by Norton Wood

[rue_d_etropal]

Looking at this new loco from a different perspective(something narrow gauge modellers often do!). The wheelbase is very short, overall not much different to an 0-4-0, so was wondering which axle was driven. If it is eithe of the outside ones, then thinking it might be possible to remove centre axle/whel and use it as an 0-4-0. If that was not possible then as a 0-6-0 it would still be useful.

Also with these new models , in general, I think offering the chassis as a separate item , would be popular, not just  for those wanting to use chassis for something else(how dare they!!!), but as a spare part. One reason for the growth of OO9 has been the good supply of (low cost) motor chassis . Bachmann used to offer loco chassis, but main problem was that they charged too much. The Japanese policyof not over charging for just the chassis seems to work well for them. I can't believe the companies are making a loss on them.

[Norton Wood]

Looking at this new loco from a different perspective(something narrow gauge modellers often do!). The wheelbase is very short, overall not much different to an 0-4-0, so was wondering which axle was driven. If it is eithe of the outside ones, then thinking it might be possible to remove centre axle/whel and use it as an 0-4-0. If that was not possible then as a 0-6-0 it would still be useful.

Also with these new models , in general, I think offering the chassis as a separate item , would be popular, not just  for those wanting to use chassis for something else(how dare they!!!), but as a spare part. One reason for the growth of OO9 has been the good supply of (low cost) motor chassis . Bachmann used to offer loco chassis, but main problem was that they charged too much. The Japanese policyof not over charging for just the chassis seems to work well for them. I can't believe the companies are making a loss on them.

 

Interesting idea, questions on whether this would/could be done by any RTR Manufacturer has been floating around for sometime, I have to admit when Hornby Announced that they would be producing the 0-4-0 Sentinal I did hope that a MOD version would be produced but alas, Hornby has not, so a repaint was in order... As for these loco's being separated, body and chassis I have no idea what else they could be used for bar the GER/LNER Y6.  Even then why change it...it's too lovely to change. 

 

If I remember correctly I think the whole locomotive is powered on all 6 wheels, which I'd assume is also why the locomotive gets that terrific pulling power, especially if it's able to pull 7 of Rails of Sheffield's fantastic LNER Dynomometer cars (Annoying when I have the Golden Age Brass version, but it would certainly interesting to put them together side by side) 

Edited September 6, 2018 by Norton Wood

[rue_d_etropal]

As I said, narrow gauge modellers look for alternative uses as standard. Even for standard gauge a small 0-4-0 with outside valve gear would find a use. We seem to get bogged down in having to have everything so and so, I won't say it is rivet counting, but there is far far more to the hobby, and being more creative and finding ways round problems adds so much to the hobby. Why be boring and have to do it one way, when adapting is far more fun. 

It is well established companies in Japan as well as smaller ones that offer motorized chassis as standard. A complete loco might cost say £60 , but the motorized chassis will only cost £25.

Edited September 6, 2018 by rue_d_etropal

[dibber25]

Looking at this new loco from a different perspective(something narrow gauge modellers often do!). The wheelbase is very short, overall not much different to an 0-4-0, so was wondering which axle was driven. If it is eithe of the outside ones, then thinking it might be possible to remove centre axle/whel and use it as an 0-4-0. If that was not possible then as a 0-6-0 it would still be useful.

Also with these new models , in general, I think offering the chassis as a separate item , would be popular, not just  for those wanting to use chassis for something else(how dare they!!!), but as a spare part. One reason for the growth of OO9 has been the good supply of (low cost) motor chassis . Bachmann used to offer loco chassis, but main problem was that they charged too much. The Japanese policyof not over charging for just the chassis seems to work well for them. I can't believe the companies are making a loss on them.

 

Modern rtr design often means that the mechanical parts are specific to one chassis and do not lend themselves to adaptations - kit butchery, as we used to call it. I don't have a J70 in front of me but I think it follows Rapido's normal practice of having all three axles driven, in which case cutting it down to an 0-4-0 would be difficult and would probably destroy it. Production slots are , these days, usually assigned to a specific number of complete models so there would be unlikely to be spare chassis available. In the past, with limited edition models of 504 quantity, the extra four usually allowed for the odd damaged model to be broken up for spares but that was purely to cover defective models or postal damage. There is really no money to be made from commissioning lots of spare parts.  (CJL)

[rue_d_etropal]

Pity, as many use curren tHornby sparessuch as the 2Bil motor chassis as used in the Tyneside conversion in current edition of magazine.

Maybe a bit of market research to see if there would be a demand for chassis on its own. One reason I asked the question, as too many sit back, don't ask so no one thinks they are interested.

If all 3 axles are driven(internal gears?), then it might be possible to just remove wheels and leave axle. Even as an 0-6-0 there would be a lot of modellers who would want a small chassis. Not just narrow gauge but a lot of modellers do actually build models not just collecting r2r.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

... in general, I think offering the chassis as a separate item , would be popular, not just  for those wanting to use chassis for something else (how dare they!!!), but as a spare part...

It would be popular with me too. But sadly I believe this 'doing things' with RTR mechanisms is very much a minority sport nowadays. Before the bad news came in about Bach's split chassis, I purchased several mechanisms for projects various, and as I recollect the prices were very reasonable. Those businesses like 'East Kent' that once either broke models or got the parts and sold them individually, have largely exited the scene.

 

I do it for myself now. Buy the cheapest discounted version of a model to extract the element(s) required, sell on all the remainders for whatever it will fetch to reduce the cost.

[Pint of Adnams]

Back to the main topic - any indication of dates of arrival of the complete models in the UK yet?

[Norton Wood]

Back to the main topic - any indication of dates of arrival of the complete models in the UK yet?

 

Model Rail Mag has said 3/4Q as we are now into 4th Quater and we've seen the painted samples, I think we might start receiving them next year Feb/March time. Chris has said on this thread we can expect to see more at Warley this year.

 

But as Chris Leigh is on here, better to hear it from him  

Edited September 12, 2018 by Norton Wood

[Garethp8873]

Update on Facebook:

 

https://www.facebook.com/modelrail/photos/pb.176420418206.-2207520000.1536852145./10155945212428207/?type=3&theater

Edited September 13, 2018 by Garethp8873

[Gilbert]

Update on Facebook:

 

https://www.facebook.com/modelrail/photos/a.371681018206/10155945212428207/?type=3&theater

I can't get a link - just page not found