RTR North Eastern Railway Locomotives - A discussion.

[Compound2632]

Johnson needn’t have worried: the generation of electricity usually starts with steam-powered turbines...

 

Whatever, his point was: to the Locomotive Superintendent, Locomotives. 

[Edwardian]

Whilst I agree that raven's designs and ideas were advanced for the prewar period I'm not sure anyone would argue he'd had one of those up his sleeve.

 

Not Raven!  

[brack]

A minor correction Edwardian - twas not I who suggested the railcar was Raven's.

[Edwardian]

Not Raven!  

 

To Whom it May Concern:

 

Not Raven!

[Compound2632]

To Whom it May Concern:

 

Not Raven!

 

Quoth the Raven: Nevermore! ... Electric traction is the way to go. By 1904 he was busy with the North Tyneside 3-rail electrification. 

[sem34090]

.

 

YET ANOTHER North-Eastern loco announced  !!!!!!!!!!

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/139650-accurascale-announce-4mm-deltic/

 

 

(But as it only pulled passenger trains I suppose it doesn't count        )

 

 

.

Horrible ugly monstrosity that only makes a half decent noise... I take the joke, I also take your point, but did we really need such a horror to appear in the pre-grouping section?

 

Also, what's wrong with the existing Bachmann model? Can't they have been a bit more imaginative... done something with a decent range, a use for many modellers, many liveries (including beautiful pre-grouping ones)... Can't they have done an NER C/C1?

[Fenman]

Horrible ugly monstrosity that only makes a half decent noise... I take the joke, I also take your point, but did we really need such a horror to appear in the pre-grouping section?

 

Also, what's wrong with the existing Bachmann model? Can't they have been a bit more imaginative... done something with a decent range, a use for many modellers, many liveries (including beautiful pre-grouping ones)... Can't they have done an NER C/C1?

If you’d have said an NER ES1 (also in the National Collection) I’d have agreed with you. Impossibly cute, and unlike anything else on the market...

 

Paul

[sem34090]

To be fair, I'd love an  ES1...

 

But I suspect this is where you and I are in the minority, and I think a J21 is perhaps more important to be done first.

 

Otherwise, I agree with you!

[Fenman]

To be fair, I'd love an ES1...

 

...

There’s a glorious Judith Edge kit (I have one). In both 00 and O gauge.

 

Paul

[sem34090]

At some point I'll get one... all in good time...

[runs as required]

That's getting dangerously close... Least its horizontal and not vertical stripes like the Mackem's strip...

After my heart attack 17 years ago I was re-cuperating in the RVI Newcastle next to a much younger self employed tiler.

 

He proudly told me he'd been awarded the contract for tiling the loos throughout Sunderland's 'Stadium of Light'.

A 'toon' supporter, he said he'd got away with doing the whole lot in white - but trimmed out in black.

I got awarded my Sunderland Uni degree in Fine Art at the SoL a few years back - and ducked in for a quick p -eek.

Sure enough  my loo was still b+w w+b !

dh

[brack]

Also, what's wrong with the existing Bachmann model? Can't they have been a bit more imaginative... done something with a decent range, a use for many modellers, many liveries (including beautiful pre-grouping ones)... Can't they have done an NER C/C1?

I can't help but think they've tried to get a lot of excitement/hype for the 4th? RTR model of a 4mm scale deltic (22 locos with a working life of about 20 years). It really isn't that hard to find something that hasn't been done before (NER or otherwise).

The CIE A class was a genuinely interesting and original choice for a model.

I'm sure they'll do ok commercially with a deltic though. Lots of glass wall cabinets around the country are probably having their unused Bachmann deltics evicted ready for a new occupant as we speak. It does feel unnecessary to duplicate a model thats only 10 years old though, especially when the Lima/Railroad one is still floating about as well.

[lanchester]

Whatever, his point was: to the Locomotive Superintendent, Locomotives. 

Ah, yeh, well, but. It's no coincidence that around this time a lot of 'Locomotive Superintendents' got rebranded as 'Chief Mechanical Engineers'. Note that the differential is mechanical as against civil - electrical engineering as a discipline/profession was still developing. CMEs were responsible for a lot of stuff that wasn't strictly locomotive - structural stuff on carriage and wagon work, for example (a number of CMEs including Gresley had C&W in their CVs). as well as static installations such as cranes, and perhaps (I don't know) they new-fangled infernal combustion vehicles, on road and rail.

 

Off the main line, my great grandfather was Chief Engineer for the Lambton Hetton and Joicey Collieries, 1897-1935. Certainly his responsibilities included locomotives. But Lambton Engine Works made and mended a lot of stuff for the pits beyond over and under ground rail systems - aside from mech eng for underground (although this was increasingly bought in as technology advanced) and stationary winding etc engines, there was maritime-related work for the collier fleet. My ancestor was well in to electrification - Lambton had its own power station - and was involved in developing underground electrification, and of course converting/replacing steam winding engines etc to electric. All very advanced for the time, and chiming with the views of near contemporaries such as Raven.

 

BUT - the Lambton rail system remained steam-powered until very near the end, essentially for economic rather than engineering reasons.

 

CME's on the major pre-group railways were expected to handle a much wider brief than the old Locomotive Superintendents - whether or not they were designing there own engines (or alternatively going to the trade for a standard design). And of course the various works had capabilities well beyond the fettling of engines - as was demonstrated in both wars.

[sem34090]

It just seems so un-original to do another Deltic.

 

The same goes for Gresley Pacifics...

[Jol Wilkinson]

That was the point I was, obscurely, trying to make. Northumbria was rather bigger than Kent.

 

Re. SEM's point about two of the other companies making up the pre-Grouping "Big Four", the L&NW and the Midland, one has to remember that locomotive designs which survived into the 1950s will continue to be a better proposition for at least the big two RTR manufacturers. The LNER's relative poverty (coupled with the excellence and robustness of the locomotive fleets it inherited) ensured the long-term survival of many late-19th-century classes, particularly among the 0-6-0 goods engines; a similar situation existed on the Southern, where steam was not the focus of investment. Of the two great Mercian companies, the L&NW's engines were swept away in the LMS's great 5MT/8F building programme whilst the Midland's were rebuilt away - into the 2Ps and 3Fs that did survive into the 1950s and hence are represented in RTR form.

 

Of the fourth of the pre-Grouping "Big Four" we need not speak. In fact, of RTR models of its 19th century classes, perhaps the less said the better.

Stephen

 

a belated reply but I have been away for a few days. Some LNWR locos, usually the older ones of Webb design, lasted into the 1950's. including Cauliflower 0-6-0s, Watford Tanks and Jumbos. The G2 0-8-0 and 0-6-2T Coal Tank also made it in to "preservation" and have been produced as RTR models, probably because they could be 3D scanned.

 

As those others that did last into the 50's can't be 3D scanned (with the exception of Hardwick and the Ramsbottom 0-4-0T in the hands of the NRM) I am sure we won't see them other than as the kits that have been available for years. So those that wish to model LNWR locos in pre-group or LMS days have to follow the DIY route.

.

Jol

[Dick Turpin]

Returning to the twin subjects of the North Eastern Railway, and RTR, what with a G5 and now Petrol Electric Railcar on the way, what is sorely needed, as frequently hinted at above, is some North Eastern coaches. Obviously RTR would be fantastic, but failing that, we only have a precarious, hit and miss, supply of D&S or, if you are lucky, John Fozzard ones via Ebay - at a price. If anyone knows of other options I would be gladly informed. So the question is: what are we all going to do about coaches for our G5 to pull, or for a single one to hang behind our Petrol Railcar?

[Andy Hayter]

http://www.langleymodels.co.uk/acatalog/Online_Catalogue_OO___HO_Locomotive___Coach_kits_38.html

[phil gollin]

.

 

As I have stated, I like clerestory coaches, and the dynamometer car and petrol-electric railmotor will show off the style to others.

 

I don't, IN THE FIRST INSTANCE, care which company's clerestory coach gets done first, merely that it is well done.

 

I would "guess" that the GWR would be the most popular ones.  Once they are produced the should be a glut within a few years.

 

.

[Compound2632]

Stephen

 

a belated reply but I have been away for a few days. Some LNWR locos, usually the older ones of Webb design, lasted into the 1950's. including Cauliflower 0-6-0s, Watford Tanks and Jumbos. The G2 0-8-0 and 0-6-2T Coal Tank also made it in to "preservation" and have been produced as RTR models, probably because they could be 3D scanned.

 

As those others that did last into the 50's can't be 3D scanned (with the exception of Hardwick and the Ramsbottom 0-4-0T in the hands of the NRM) I am sure we won't see them other than as the kits that have been available for years. So those that wish to model LNWR locos in pre-group or LMS days have to follow the DIY route.

.

Jol

 

Well, yes, I was making a broad generalisation. The surviving Webb 0-6-0s and tank engine classes didn't dominate the LMR Western Division in the way engines of the same generation did the ex-North Eastern or ex-Great Eastern lines. 

 

I thought all the Jumbos bar the preserved No. 790 were withdrawn in the early 1930s?

[Jol Wilkinson]

Well, yes, I was making a broad generalisation. The surviving Webb 0-6-0s and tank engine classes didn't dominate the LMR Western Division in the way engines of the same generation did the ex-North Eastern or ex-Great Eastern lines. 

 

I thought all the Jumbos bar the preserved No. 790 were withdrawn in the early 1930s?

Stephen,

 

I stand corrected, only Hardwicke survived past the 1930's. Ironically, the most likely to be produced as a RTR model as it is in the hands of the NRM so provides a revenue opportunity for them and can be scanned. 

 

I have a Whitworth on London Road and a Precedent kit in the to do stack, so the more I wait before building that, then the longer it will be before the NRM do anything (not that I would buy one off them anyway if they do commission it).

 

Jol

[MarkC]

http://www.langleymodels.co.uk/acatalog/Online_Catalogue_OO___HO_Locomotive___Coach_kits_38.html

They make up into nice models too

[The Black Hat]

Some more results following the 2018 poll, this time taking into account the whole Eastern regional selection.

 

Previously, to make matters fair, I had taken the top 10 votes of each of the companies and while this gives a general overview, what it doesn't show are the total votes for engines sitting lower in the table. Often engines can sit there with good scores but are not counted as for the region it can already have 10 scores. While some Eastern region companies don't manage to get 10 scores, the vote increase is noticeable when you compare lower NER scores against those of GE. While some popular GE engines have been done, the ones lower down the list that remain do not score as highly as NER machines that are lower down. That means that NER often scores better compared to others when it comes to some of its lower selections, showing the foundation for these is stronger.

 

As some models are made it raises the interest and scores in other corresponding models until there is a tipping point where subjects are so niche that modellers believe their interest is satisfied and thus they don't vote for some of their regional choices that remain. This can be seen in GE selections where there are a few remaining popular choices but then there is a dramatic drop off as GE models have been made and some more remain but not many. Also the votes for other companies do grow and their selection grows over time, but still not as strong as GE or NER, despite companies like GC being selected for production, by the likes of Bachmann.

 

 

 

The two charts above show the same information in two formats so that you can interpret the data collected. Clearly GE and NER remain popular. Over time however, other companies are growing in popularity but its nice to see some engines being done, such as Caledonian Railway, which has increased the scores of other engines from there in turn.

Coming soon, NER compared to other pre-grouping companies...

[The Black Hat]

Okay, so this will be the one that really gets people talking.

 

People have already commented on the whole range of North vs South, and other areas of the company. Just looking at the numbers over the years I have noticed the like by like comparison between the areas and thought that it was frustrating that NER seemed to always miss out when the numbers where very similar, or massively higher compared with some regions.

 

Despite this, companies have continued with their push on developing areas of the market, with Hornby having strongly developed the GE area and done some pre-grouping designs that were adopted by the Southern, as well as others for that company. These mainly have been done in their later guise but still, the model has been made as companies have generally targeted the transition period market. This could change as tooling on new models can be made to be more complex, allowing for subtle details to be captured and changed.

 

So, to compare notes and numbers on companies, I back dated the total numbers for companies as listed in the poll. This means that some engines that were listed as pre-grouping have been defined as what was listed in the poll, not by me compiling the data. So as someone lobbying for the NER I cant be accused to bias!

 

I also applied the same top 10 methodology so that results can be compared with the Eastern region results shown a page or so ago. This sees the top 10 scores per company listed, regardless of type engine listed. I have tried also to include companies from across the whole country so as to give an indication of interest compared to geographical location of the prototypes. However, this still does not mean that all those voting for one area are actually living within that geographical area - the poll does not factor this. Merely that the area registers interest, though you would expect that some people will still live in the area of interest.

 

The one company that escapes is the Great Western - namely as the company had the same name before and after grouping, so its very hard to distinguish which engines would fit into where based on the poll as naturally there would be some cross over. However Western topics would have polled strongly by comparison.

 

So.. here's the graph with the results.

 

 

Its interesting to see the results of companies over the time shown, but also note the decline when models are made and then as they are released others from a similar area rise in interest and get more votes. It makes me really believe that making a model can stimulate interest in others around it, but that as a result the amount of Southern models unique to the region has been a catalyst in pushing for yet more models from that reason at the expense of elsewhere.

 

Over time, some of the other companies have started to feature more engines from certain areas. Its interesting to compare how the poll has been done, with areas of Southern interest regularly getting new engines to replace others that get taken out. The midland region gets some additions but these slowly rise, compared with the Eastern region which tends to have many types listed for popular companies like GE an NER, but then others such as GC and GN did not manage to get 10 listed. The top 10 cut off gives a fair view across all companies despite the ways that areas had their lists compiled in the poll.

 

So, over to what others think of the table and its results.

 

[Regularity]

What happened to 2017?

The graph mostly shows me that more people have responded to the survey over time, with a slight decline this year. LSWR popularity is strange.

 

To be meaningful, the graph needs to show not the numbers, but percentages, as you are trying to show changes in relative popularity. You can do that either as a line for each railway company, or as stacked percentages totalling 100% for each year.

 

So far, the chart doesn’t show a great deal, and certainly not anything to support any debate about popularity.

 

And that’s my professional opinion. If I was presented this at work, then if I would reject it.

[BMacdermott]

Hello Simon

 

The Poll didn't run in 2017. We decided to 'take a year off' as some makers were catching up with production.

 

Brian (on behalf of The 00 Poll Team)