Bachmann Midland 1P 0-4-4T

[peterfgf]

6 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

It did with me - I have many hundreds of them on my stock; more recently,  I've adapted them to fit in NEM pockets.

 

Version 1

 

 

Version 2

 

The 'stem' in version 2  is 2.5 x 1.5mm. brass; bent and soldered to the coupling head. It pivots on a short length of wire inserted into a hole drilled through the centre of the NEM pocket. The wire can be pulled out to remove the coupling, and the NEM pocket then functions as intended.

 

John Isherwood.

You ought to make these commercially available (perhaps you have, I've just not found them).  Best couplings by far in my opinion.

 

[Captain Kernow]

Looking at that video, the loco does seem to run nice and smoothly.

 

However, am I wrong in thinking that the coupling rods are 'wobbling' up and down as they go round?

 

[Simond]

Thanks John,

 

I suspect that when I last had an HD wagon in my hand, I was a wee bit young to appreciate the finer points of intellectual property protection...

 

cheers

Simon

[SDJR7F88]

10 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

I watched the video with the sound off. Was the sample shown there the sort that makes its own noises or the sort where one can enjoy chuffing away oneself? 

Working on an edit which will feature the model chuffing (Hopefully some of my real sound files of a 3F will be a close enough match). 

[cctransuk]

3 hours ago, peterfgf said:

You ought to make these commercially available (perhaps you have, I've just not found them).  Best couplings by far in my opinion.

 

 

a] the Peco Simplex coupling is a patented design;

 

b] the adaptations as I manually produce them are not commercially viable;

 

c] I offered the adaptation design to Peco - who expressed interest; did some design and prototyping work; announced that they would be making them commercially available; and then dropped the idea!!

 

Been there, done that, got nowhere.

 

John Isherwood.

[Welchester]

10 hours ago, Flying Pig said:

The clerestories (sorry cle-restories) .

 

I'm sorry, but I don't quite understand what you mean.

[Flying Pig]

5 minutes ago, Bishop of Welchester said:

 

I'm sorry, but I don't quite understand what you mean.

 

It was a pedantic reference to the video commentator's pronunciation of clerestory which should be clear-story not cle-RESTory.

[No Decorum]

7 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

Looking at that video, the loco does seem to run nice and smoothly.

 

However, am I wrong in thinking that the coupling rods are 'wobbling' up and down as they go round?

 

Ah yes, I noticed that too. I hope the production models aren’t like that. That sort of wobble put me right off DJM’s O2s.

[Compound2632]

8 hours ago, Flying Pig said:

It was a pedantic reference to the video commentator's pronunciation of clerestory which should be clear-story not cle-RESTory.

 

It's pronounced clear-story if the context is ecclesiastical architecture but cleRESTory if the context is railway carriages. 

 

Usage is King (or perhaps Monarch in these gender balance aware days).

[Izzy]

6 hours ago, No Decorum said:

Ah yes, I noticed that too. I hope the production models aren’t like that. That sort of wobble put me right off DJM’s O2s.

I thought that too, but looking at the video a few times I think it’s variable shadow reflections as rods & hex head crankpins revolve due to the lowish shot angle it was taken at. There is the slightest hint of coupling rod angle at times, not truly horizontal, but this is fairly common to any 4-coupled loco with anything more than negligible play in them. 
 

Having built a few of these to P4 from Craftsman kits in past years I’d be more than happy with one from the looks of it, should I be wanting one now. 
 

Izzy

[Welchester]

9 hours ago, Flying Pig said:

 

It was a pedantic reference to the video commentator's pronunciation of clerestory which should be clear-story not cle-RESTory.

 

Thank you. You are quite correct, although I have heard even ecclesiastical architects mispronounce the word.

[Legend]

I see from this months Hornby Mag that it has a Coreless motor .

Edited November 9, 2020 by Legend
Oops . Thanks Chard!

['CHARD]

2 minutes ago, Legend said:

I see from this months Horny Mag that it has a Coreless motor .

 

Been at the top shelf again, I see!

[Poor Old Bruce]

On 16/10/2020 at 22:07, shunny said:

I wonder if we will get a SDJR blue version for the next collectors club model in November? 

 

On 16/10/2020 at 22:32, Compound2632 said:

 

As previously mentioned, it has to be the second No. 54, formerly MR 1532 Class No. 1305 (1907 number), sold to the S&DJR for £3,000 in January 1921, to replace the original No. 54 that had been withdrawn with damaged frames. There's variety: you could have it as delivered to the S&DJR in Midland red, lettered SDJR, or as subsequently repainted in blue.

 

 Just seen a comment which, if I have understood it correctly, says that when No.54 was taken back into LMS stock in 1930, it reverted to its old number (1305) and received LMS markings onto the SDJR blue livery. Even more variety.

[Compound2632]

11 minutes ago, Poor Old Bruce said:

 Just seen a comment which, if I have understood it correctly, says that when No.54 was taken back into LMS stock in 1930, it reverted to its old number (1305) and received LMS markings onto the SDJR blue livery. Even more variety.

 

No. 54 / 1305 was withdrawn in August 1931, so not for long! "Hand painted insignia on the blue livery" [S. Summerson, Midland Railway Locomotives Vol. 3 (Irwell Press, 2002) p. 109]. Presumably this was done at Highbridge?

[Invicta]

21 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

No. 54 / 1305 was withdrawn in August 1931, so not for long! "Hand painted insignia on the blue livery" [S. Summerson, Midland Railway Locomotives Vol. 3 (Irwell Press, 2002) p. 109]. Presumably this was done at Highbridge?

Yes, it seems to have been done locally- Essery & Jenkinson's Illustrated History of LMS Locomotives (vol. 1, p. 212-3) refers to this as a 'Highbridge style', although they suggest the repainting of insignia was for the most part done at the sheds. The hand painted numerals are described as being "of a style rather like the new standard pattern but not quite the same. It was executed in yellow and varied in height according to the class of engine" and accompanied by hand painted smokebox door numbers in the absence of new plates.

The accompanying photo shows No. 54/1305 and 1202.

[Poor Old Bruce]

Going back to the video of the model hauling two Ratio coaches, there's a photo by H.C.Casserley in Bradford Barton's 'LMSR Steam 1923-1948' showing 1408 "near Derby" (probably somewhere near Breadsall Crossing) with the two-coach Wirksworth train in June 1941. The coaches are similar profile to the Ratio clerestories, one is a non-gangway six compartment Brake Third, the other is partially hidden behind lineside vegetation. The coaches look, to me, to be a bit longer than the 48ft of the Ratio models and the engine is in lined black. Apply Rule 1 if required.

[t-b-g]

8 minutes ago, Poor Old Bruce said:

Going back to the video of the model hauling two Ratio coaches, there's a photo by H.C.Casserley in Bradford Barton's 'LMSR Steam 1923-1948' showing 1408 "near Derby" (probably somewhere near Breadsall Crossing) with the two-coach Wirksworth train in June 1941. The coaches are similar profile to the Ratio clerestories, one is a non-gangway six compartment Brake Third, the other is partially hidden behind lineside vegetation. The coaches look, to me, to be a bit longer than the 48ft of the Ratio models and the engine is in lined black. Apply Rule 1 if required.

 

Absolutely. Such carriages were "cascaded" down to secondary duties when they were replaced by more modern stock. Having the Ratio carriages available is a real boost to anybody modelling the Midland, and the LMS. They are also very easy to "cut and shut" to make different versions and I have a 12 wheel Clerestory Brake 3rd part built.

 

I have recently acquired a number (around 15 or so)  of superbly built models based on Ratio kits in Midland Livery and condition, including clerestories and a number of ratio arc roof non corridor kits altered to make 6 wheelers, long before the Slaters kits were introduced.

 

They are not 100% accurate as in the period, I am pretty sure the area above the doors should be a toplight window rather than a vent on the clerestories but I am not going to alter them and risk spoiling the paint job.

 

So yes, rule one applies!

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, t-b-g said:

They are not 100% accurate as in the period, I am pretty sure the area above the doors should be a toplight window rather than a vent on the clerestories but I am not going to alter them and risk spoiling the paint job.

 

As built, yes. I'm not quite sure when the door toplights were replaced by ventilators - late Midland / early LMS. The Ratio sides feature a bit of the eves beading made a bit deeper - this was done from c. 1905/6 to accommodate the new livery style with the word MIDLAND in the eves.

 

For later LMS condition - late 20s onwards and certainly by the time of the simplified livery (if these carriages ever got it) the lower stepboards were removed except on bogies at brake ends.

 

Many of these carriages were given 8ft wheelbase bogies, possibly as early as c. 1908/9, the original 10ft wheelbase bogies being put under the new Bain arc-roof suburbans for the Birmingham district, I believe.

 

So it's doubtful if its possible to assemble the Ratio kits "as is" to represent accurately the condition of these carriages at any period! Hey-ho, beggars can't be choosers and we Midland modellers must be thankful for what we've got, which is a sight more than is available at near entry-level kit building for most other pre-Grouping companies.

[t-b-g]

35 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

As built, yes. I'm not quite sure when the door toplights were replaced by ventilators - late Midland / early LMS. The Ratio sides feature a bit of the eves beading made a bit deeper - this was done from c. 1905/6 to accommodate the new livery style with the word MIDLAND in the eves.

 

For later LMS condition - late 20s onwards and certainly by the time of the simplified livery (if these carriages ever got it) the lower stepboards were removed except on bogies at brake ends.

 

Many of these carriages were given 8ft wheelbase bogies, possibly as early as c. 1908/9, the original 10ft wheelbase bogies being put under the new Bain arc-roof suburbans for the Birmingham district, I believe.

 

So it's doubtful if its possible to assemble the Ratio kits "as is" to represent accurately the condition of these carriages at any period! Hey-ho, beggars can't be choosers and we Midland modellers must be thankful for what we've got, which is a sight more than is available at near entry-level kit building for most other pre-Grouping companies.

 

As a good friend of mine used to say, "They are much better than the ones we haven't got".

 

They are the sort of thing that allow a relative novice to get something running fairly easily and also allow the more discerning modeller to do some work on them to make them more accurate for the period they are modelling.

 

At the price, I don't have any problem with that at all.

 

At the risk of upsetting folk, the Midland is about fourth on my list of favoured pre-gtouping companies, behind the GCR, GNR and the LD&ECR and that probably reflects in both my knowledge and my library! So variations such as new bogies etc. are news to me.

 

The ones on Narrow Road were built straight from the kits (arc roof and clerestory), in a great hurry (around 20 built by three people in a week!) for our first show. So they may well be wrong for 1923/4 condition. A bit off topic but if you can tell us what we would need to sort out to make them right, that would be appreciated. The plastic bogies are falling apart and due for replacement with metal ones soon anyway, so if the kit ones are wrong for the period, now would be a good time to know! 

[Compound2632]

I'll PM you later but 1923/4 is about optimal for both the clerestory and arc roof kits!

 

I don't think I would have got into the Midland and kit-building in my late teens were it not for the Ratio carriages and Slaters wagons.

[barrymx5]

I have just joined the Bachmann Collectors Club in order to put my name down for a Blue SDJR. Additional cost for a not inexpensive model. But I was pleasantly surprised today to receive my Club Wagon. Not quite sure what to make of it. May even sell to put towards cost of 1P. Any views?

[Compound2632]

I'd sue for false advertising since that's a 12 ton wagon.

[No Decorum]

16 minutes ago, barrymx5 said:

I have just joined the Bachmann Collectors Club in order to put my name down for a Blue SDJR. Additional cost for a not inexpensive model. But I was pleasantly surprised today to receive my Club Wagon. Not quite sure what to make of it. May even sell to put towards cost of 1P. Any views?

Gloucester promotional wagons. Last years was marked as an 8-ton wagon. I hope next year’s will be marked as a 12-ton.

 

[Compound2632]

There you are, they could have done the 12 ton wagon and got a bit nearer, though their RCH 1923 specification 12 tonner is in post-war condition (clips holding the capping strip in place) so should only really be seen in grot. 

 

However, I'd be pretty confident that those three wagons never ran in service painted like that, even in the hire fleet - it's just for the photo.

 

To cap it all, I don't think they've even got the livery right, with the double-shading of the large lettering. I'm pretty confident the shading is just black - there's just some highlights from the gloss finish.