4mm Scale Industrial Tank Engine - Prototype Bodyshell

[Ruston]

RMweb - old topic

 

Following on from the above old topic, I have noticed several other topics recently on the forum where resin casting or other processes are discussed with regards making components for models, but never an entire bodyshell to fit an RTR chassis. Golden Arrow productions (Chris Meachen) does some splendid kits in the vein I am thinking of - a resin cast bodyshell onto an RTR chassis.

 

A friend of mine is investigating the possibility of having plastic bodyshells made, so he can have a specific locomotive on his layout. Reading to the above, and listening to him, the questions I want to pose are:

1. Would a generic "Industrial" bodyshell, to fit an RTR chassis, be a viable product?

 

By generic, I mean it looks like a Hunslet but could also, with some modelling or painting, represent another similar locomotive from avonside. By viable, I mean not necessarily will it sell straight away, but would it have an appeal that, if a particular prototype was made, it could sell on the back of the chosen prototype's following?

 

2. Would a particular prototype (e.g Hunslet), to fit an RTR chassis, be a viable product?

 

Basically, I have seen the Bachmann "percy" or "greg" chassis modified for use in 0-16.5. Could this be taken further to represent an 0-4-0ST of a particular company, with simple fit on, replacement bodyshells? This could also be applicable to the Bachmann 0-6-0 chassis although I suspect some form of valve gear would have to be made available for a Peckett, for example.

 

I've done some reading on avonside designs of late, and I had never quite twigged I think just how many classes and sub-classes there are for industrial locomotives in general in this country. Perhaps this is why an RTR does not exist at present aside from the Hornby J94/Austerity model?

 

I'm not sure in the last thread on RMweb3 that there was any form of consensus over a particular design - many different choices emerged, and while I'm not advocating a thread in the vein of the scottish locomotive poll (as I will freely admit my knowledge of industrial steam/diesel is limited) I did think it relevant to bring up as a topic for discussion given the other topics at present floating around with things like 3-D printing, resin casting, and similar, relating to this.

 

You don't say what wheel arrangement are you thinking of. The most common small industrial steam locos were 0-4-0STs. These usally had a very short wheelbase (typically 5ft. 6in.) and very small wheels (3ft. - 3ft. 6in.) I can't think of any RTR chassis that fits the bill. If it's an 0-6-0 then there may be possibilites with a class 03 or 04 diesel chassis being modified by removing the jackshaft and cutting a bit off the driving rods but the balance of the loco (and presumably the chassis) is still wrong for many steam locos and then it's not exactly RTR if you have to hack parts about.

 

As far as a body that fits one of those"Percy" things goes I can't see any point in having it at all, with it's outsize wheels and long wheelbase. You may as well simply file the face off the model is it is and call it an "industrial" because any body made to fit could only be roughly based upon your theoretical generic Hunslet or what have you, let alone an actual prototype.

 

It's got to be a complete RTR loco with realistic wheel diameter and wheelbase or it's not worth a fig IMHO. Think of it this way - you would never consider having a Peppercorn A1 body made that fits a Bulleid pacific chassis, would you? So why are industrial locos seen as generic locos and not individual types and designs in their own right?

[S.A.C Martin]

As far as a body that fits one of those"Percy" things goes I can't see any point in having it at all, with it's outsize wheels and long wheelbase. You may as well simply file the face off the model is it is and call it an "industrial" because any body made to fit could only be roughly based upon your theoretical generic Hunslet or what have you, let alone an actual prototype.

 

It's got to be a complete RTR loco with realistic wheel diameter and wheelbase or it's not worth a fig IMHO. Think of it this way - you would never consider having a Peppercorn A1 body made that fits a Bulleid pacific chassis, would you? So why are industrial locos seen as generic locos and not individual types and designs in their own right?

 

A very thought provoking post, Ruston. In my defence, I can't see that, aside from making a full brass or whitemetal kit, that an industrial steam engine as an RTR model is viable using a specially designed chassis (at present).

 

While I agree with your sentiments, I'm afraid your point RE generic locos is spot on. From what I've been reading up on, the only way to sell any model of an industrial steam locomotive is to make it as generic as possible in order for the maximum amount of personal modification possible - there being so many differences, even between engines of the same batch, that there is not to the same extent on mainline locomotives such as the Bulleids and Peppercorn Pacifics you mention. By their very nature, Industrials are wholly more personal and unique locomotives, and (strangely - conversely in fact), their unique features amongst members of the same batch are why a more generic design for RTR would be preferred - at the very least, it gives room for modification later on.

 

The suggestion of the Bachmann Percy was down to the valve gear more than anything - sharing a similar pattern amongst many industrial steam locomotives.

 

I'm not saying you are wrong - only that (as I have found in my research thus far) an RTR industrial based on one specific locomotive might restrict itself in sales

 

Is one generic design not better than nothing for the majority? Not saying it is, am actually asking if a generic design or prototypical design would be preferred?

 

I think Ruston's point is extremely thought provoking, and will show Sean it in order to gauge reactions from both sides of the coin, so to speak.

[Ruston]

By their very nature, Industrials are wholly more personal and unique locomotives, and (strangely - conversely in fact), their unique features amongst members of the same batch are why a more generic design for RTR would be preferred - at the very least, it gives room for modification later on.

 

The suggestion of the Bachmann Percy was down to the valve gear more than anything - sharing a similar pattern amongst many industrial steam locomotives.

 

 

 

I agree that industrial locos are more personal and unique and a generic body would be acceptable providing it is recognisable as a style of an individual manufacturer. People who know something about industrials can recognise a manufacturer's product but not neccesarily an individual loco or class. Take Barclays as an example. The wheels, the saddletank. and the cabs are the key features that tell you that it's a Barclay (although the same features were copied by other Scottish manuacturers to some extent but we'll gloss over that for now) , the same goes for Peckett and others and so long as it looks right and is properly proportioned then that would do. My point about your idea of wanting to put this body onto an RTR chassis is that there isn't anything available RTR that would suit. Not only do you need to have the body in proportion and recognisable but you need the running gear to match otherwise it then looks silly and doesn't look like a generic Barclay , it looks like a poor bodge job and a toy, which after all is what Percy is.

[Kits from Somerset]

The only hope is if somebody brings out a RTR 0-4-0 ST OC from the Pre Grouping railways, that the chassie can be used with a firm like High Level doing the correct chassie. The Hornby CR pug is a good idear but in this case the wheel base is 8' long.

[Wheeltapper]

Personally I would be quite happy to buy at least one and possibly several RtR Peckett 0-4-0ST's should they ever become available and I would also like to see one of the small industrial diesels such as a Ruston also available .

[Hesperus]

Wouldn't it be so much easier if there was a usable chassis under the normal Hornby 0-4-0

 

If they could be convinced that there was a demand do you think that they might?........Maybe

[S.A.C Martin]

I agree that industrial locos are more personal and unique and a generic body would be acceptable providing it is recognisable as a style of an individual manufacturer. People who know something about industrials can recognise a manufacturer's product but not neccesarily an individual loco or class. Take Barclays as an example. The wheels, the saddletank. and the cabs are the key features that tell you that it's a Barclay (although the same features were copied by other Scottish manuacturers to some extent but we'll gloss over that for now) , the same goes for Peckett and others and so long as it looks right and is properly proportioned then that would do. My point about your idea of wanting to put this body onto an RTR chassis is that there isn't anything available RTR that would suit. Not only do you need to have the body in proportion and recognisable but you need the running gear to match otherwise it then looks silly and doesn't look like a generic Barclay , it looks like a poor bodge job and a toy, which after all is what Percy is.

 

 

 

Just looking at the wheelbase: Percy is too long between the driving wheels - but the valve gear isn't that bad, surely?

 

I look at this chassis and I think I can see some potential in it for something greater. You never know...

[millsie]

If someone could make a pattern I'm sure that out of Smallbrook, myself at Port Wynnstay,and other resin casters on here, one of us would probably be willing to take it on as a casting commission. I'd do the patterns myself but, happily, I'm so busy casting it would take me several years to complete them.

 

Phil T.

 

 

i have been tempted to make a kit for the Hornby percy, as smallbrook already do one for the Bachmann one, i have also been tempted to make another kit for the bill/ben loco, and thomas himself.

 

And like phils has said, one of us 'resin casters' sould be happy to procude something if you have the master(s)

 

martin

[S.A.C Martin]

A little news - discussions with a friend has brought up the possibility of a test bodyshell to post on here, should it be made, but to change the choice of the chassis accordingly. However - it still looks like we're going to have to go for an RTR one of some form.

 

The idea is simply to gain feedback on the choice of prototype, overall look and accuracy and if this is something we should invest some time into at a later date.

[Poor Old Bruce]

So far in this thread there seems to have been little mention of the Dapol/Hornby L&YR Pug 0-4-0ST. This has the requesite short wheelbase similar to many Pecketts, Barclays and others even if the wheels are different. Also the Bachmann 'Junior' locos, even if their 0-4-0ST is 'Percy' with a smokebox door instead of a face it is still crying out for a body transplant. The wb may be a bit long for some but bear in mind that few of the wagons they shunted had a wb less than 9ft.

 

There was a comment regarding the results of the recent MRE Mag 'Wish List' that there were only two requests (presumably myself ond one other) for Industrial Locos to be included, apparently following a poor voting record last year. Pukka RtR Industrials would seem to be a long way off, I just wish I had the time to build the kits I have in stock. Who said you have lots of spare time when you retire?

 

Richard

 

 

 

[S.A.C Martin]

So far in this thread there seems to have been little mention of the Dapol/Hornby L&YR Pug 0-4-0ST. This has the requesite short wheelbase similar to many Pecketts, Barclays and others even if the wheels are different. Also the Bachmann 'Junior' locos, even if their 0-4-0ST is 'Percy' with a smokebox door instead of a face it is still crying out for a body transplant. The wb may be a bit long for some but bear in mind that few of the wagons they shunted had a wb less than 9ft.

 

There was a comment regarding the results of the recent MRE Mag 'Wish List' that there were only two requests (presumably myself ond one other) for Industrial Locos to be included, apparently following a poor voting record last year. Pukka RtR Industrials would seem to be a long way off, I just wish I had the time to build the kits I have in stock. Who said you have lots of spare time when you retire?

 

Richard

 

 

Thats the thing Richard, there's clearly a market of some form, how big it actually is, is another thing. I agree on the use of the Percy, though I am more wary of the L&Y pug as the wheels would need changing for a lot of the industrials. That said, there is another RTR chassis coming out this year that may well be suitable for industrial prototypes, and that is what Sean and I are looking at, with great interest.

[Mark Dickerson]

Ah, if Poor Old Bruce is right, I'm the other one who asked for industrials to be included (a good exchange of e-mails with Pat Hammond). That's lovely. I assumed from the digest 2 people had still asked for industrials after the vote started - although it appears others were more effusive about pre-grouping stuff.

 

Oddly, I spotted pictures of, er, a Flowerpot-Men-related model today that might be useful. I'd hoped Bachmann UK might do something with the Salty chassis this year, but there you go.

[Guest Phil]

Ok

Let's take this one step further.

 

Can anyone come up with ;

 

a) a set of wheelbases

B) driving wheel diameters

c) crankpin throw - relating to slidebar travel

d) frame lengths

 

which are common to an 0-4-0 design from ;

 

Peckett

Andrew Barclay

RSH

Hudswell Clarke

Hunslet

NBL

 

etc

 

 

Perhaps we are within an mm of a wheelbase for at least three of the above, which might make commonality a greater selling point ?

[Adam]

Ok

Let's take this one step further.

 

Can anyone come up with ;

 

a) a set of wheelbases

B) driving wheel diameters

c) crankpin throw - relating to slidebar travel

d) frame lengths

 

which are common to an 0-4-0 design from ;

 

Peckett

Andrew Barclay

RSH

Hudswell Clarke

Hunslet

NBL

 

etc

 

Perhaps we are within an mm of a wheelbase for at least three of the above, which might make commonality a greater selling point ?

 

Off the top of my head, no, but most designs of 0-4-0 saddle tanks with 14" cylinders seem to have been along the lines of 3' 6" wheels (so bigger than an L&Y pug), 5' 6" to 6' 6" wheelbase and, I guess, about the same length over buffers as this Peckett design. Mechanically, these things didn't vary so much in terms of general principle - being pretty simple - but in detail and platework.

 

Adam

[No32Elr]

This is a crazy idea, but could you not include a set of water-slide lining transfers, in a range of different colours & maybe a set of names included on the same sheet? And

 

Maybe have the base body made in a range of standard colours, like black, deep green & maroon?

 

Apologies if this sounds a bit bossy!

[Captain Kernow]

It's got to be a complete RTR loco with realistic wheel diameter and wheelbase or it's not worth a fig IMHO. Think of it this way - you would never consider having a Peppercorn A1 body made that fits a Bulleid pacific chassis, would you? So why are industrial locos seen as generic locos and not individual types and designs in their own right?

I think that this comment is spot-on.

 

Possibly one reason why so many modellers of main line company practice seem quite happy to accept 'generic' industrial designs (and I've been as guilty of this myself in the past) is a lack of understanding of the actual industrial prototype.

 

What would modellers of main line company practice say, if they saw a layout built by someone who really understands industrial locos, but had a few 'generic' main line type locos (ie. bearing only a passing resemblance to anything prototypical) running past their colliery or steel works on the 'BR line?'....

 

Whilst industrial locos did get modified by their owners during their working lives, each and every one was originally designed and built by one of the industrial loco suppliers and the only prototype locos that looked like the Dapol/Hornby 'Pug' was, er, the ex-L&Y 'Pug'....

 

Most modellers of main line company practice would want to get the details of their main line company locos correct, as evidenced by the continuing market support for the ever-improving R-T-R products.

 

So, why are people seemingly happy to accept inaccurate, generic 'industrial' models, almost (being a bit provocative now), 'as if it didn't really matter'....

 

There were some 'standard' type locos produced by the industrial manufacturers, especially firms such as Pecketts, but there was also a lot of variety within so-called standard classes.

 

It would, nevertheless, be a huge step forward for one of the R-T-R manufacturers to take the step of producing one of these 'standard' industrial types. This could then form the basis for after-market products to modify the R-T-R loco to produce other types from that manufacturer.

 

Having said 'R-T-R' - if folk are going to buy something like that and immediately modify it, perhaps what would be better would be a range of 'standardised' components (boiler, saddle tanks, cylinders, wheels etc.), from which modellers could assemble their own chosen model - possibly using reference material and drawings supplied by the model manufacturer. Body components moulded in plastic would probably be most people's favourite, I suspect.

[bike2steam]

So in one word the answer is 'yes', as long as it's an OQ Pecket

[No32Elr]

I was just searching for Bachmann's Percy model & came across this

From here

 

Is the underframe like what you are looking for?

 

EDIT: http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/MODEL-POWER-No-52-TANK-ENGINE-W-HEAD-TAIL-LIGHT-6503_W0QQitemZ260583419961QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_Trains_Railway_Models?hash=item3cabfb7039

 

Would the chassis, although a bit toy-like, be something you are after?

 

I really am going to sound bossy this time!

[Adam]

Hmm, not sure what chassis that 'Percy' is actually on. It shares the same faults however, with too long a wheelbase to be really convincing as a possibility for even a semi-accurate industrial. The Model Power 0-4-0 in the Ebay link looks, frankly, like crude junk and, I would suspect, runs no better than the Hornby chassis already discussed.

 

Adam

[S.A.C Martin]

Hmm, not sure what chassis that 'Percy' is actually on. It shares the same faults however, with too long a wheelbase to be really convincing as a possibility for even a semi-accurate industrial. The Model Power 0-4-0 in the Ebay link looks, frankly, like crude junk and, I would suspect,runs no better than the Hornby chassis already discussed.

 

Adam

 

In fairness we're using neither of those two chassis, as a starting medium. The long wheelbase is indeed the problem with the Hornby Percy, although that to me looks kit bashed from an etched chassis to fit the Percy body.

[Guest Phil]

Moving one more step forward from my previous posting on this thread. How many 0-4-0 industrial steam locos had 3'6" wheels, 6' wheelbase and 12" or 14" outside cylinders ?

 

I'm quite sure a cast chassis block with geared drive could be a very useful powerhouse to a number of plastic or diecast bodies.

 

What I think needs to happen, is an alternative for the "average modeller" to buy, apart from soldering up etched frames etc. I'm sure a large number of modellers/collectors would buy, if they didn't have to build. So once again, I believe there may well be some value in sharing an reasonably popular 0-4-0 chassis among several bodyshells.

[S.A.C Martin]

Moving one more step forward from my previous posting on this thread. How many 0-4-0 industrial steam locos had 3'6" wheels, 6' wheelbase and 12" or 14" outside cylinders ?

 

I'm quite sure a cast chassis block with geared drive could be a very useful powerhouse to a number of plastic or diecast bodies.

 

What I think needs to happen, is an alternative for the "average modeller" to buy, apart from soldering up etched frames etc. I'm sure a large number of modellers/collectors would buy, if they didn't have to build. So once again, I believe there may well be some value in sharing an reasonably popular 0-4-0 chassis among several bodyshells.

 

I agree Phil - that's a very good post there.

 

Gents, how does a basic Peckett class M5 float your boats? Would you buy a version that was of a basic "off the shelf" configuration, i.e not tailored to fit any particular member of the class M5?

 

 

Picture from the Martyn Bane forum, used for educational purposes only. Copyright remains that of Martyn Bane.

[f#m]

Whatever it is it should be something that is easily made ones own and unique, part of the charm of an industrial railway is the little modifications the railways make having aquired the loco. a good idea would be to have the cab removable from the rest of the body like on hornbys pug, this would allow for a pretty much limitless line of different cabs of varrying style.

[S.A.C Martin]

Whatever it is it should be something that is easily made ones own and unique, part of the charm of an industrial railway is the little modifications the railways make having acquired the loco. a good idea would be to have the cab removable from the rest of the body like on hornbys pug, this would allow for a pretty much limitless line of different cabs of varying style.

 

That's a very good idea, I shall make a note of that. Thank you.

[James]

J94/Austerity thing to see that! (and no I cant tell the difference either! )

 

A J94 is an Austerity Tank which was owned by the LNER, and hence received their classification. If it was never in their ownership it's not a J94.