TMC announce NER G5 0-4-4T

[Lambton Coaler]

Like a few others, I am mulling over which version(s) to buy and may need to do a little work once they eventually arrive (although commissioning TMC might be an option!).

I am modelling the period 1948-50 (NE region), which gives scope for various liveries etc.

Would G5s at Nationalisation be in LNER lined black, green, or still in wartime unlined black (with the NE logo) or a mix?

It’s not that obvious from contemporary photos.

[Edwardian]

Would TMC consider an 'as built' version, i.e. with the brake pumps tucked away in the cab?

 

That would get us 1894-1901 (depending on batch) onwards, rather than 1912 onwards, as I understand it.

 

Of course, I would happily back-date the one you are releasing, but if an earlier condition version was released, I'd go for that, too.

 

I am very pleased and thankful that we have a pukka pre-Grouping in-service version included in the first release. An as-built version would be to add icing to a very satisfactory cake.

[Wickham Green]

Like a few others, I am mulling over which version(s) to buy and may need to do a little work once they eventually arrive (although commissioning TMC might be an option!).

I am modelling the period 1948-50 (NE region), which gives scope for various liveries etc.

Would G5s at Nationalisation be in LNER lined black, green, or still in wartime unlined black (with the NE logo) or a mix?

It’s not that obvious from contemporary photos.

I'd stick with the contemporary photos, if I were you ........... probably a layer of grot with some sort of black showing through in places ............... 

[Mark Dickerson]

Really ??, I know a G5 was tried out on the Thaxted branch, but I didn't know they ran to Ongar.

(From a former Ongar resident)

 

edit, So they did, just found this;- http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/4800336

What's interesting is that this and the other images I've seen online (and the TMC model) don't appear to have it with visible push-pull gear fitted(?) (although there is a Westinghouse Pump) - even though it was run with push-pull stock. Are there any photos of 67322 with the gear?

[Nearholmer]

Is the vacuum PP gear that strange contraption that is fitted to the rhs of the smoke box on some locos?

 

(This stuff is all foreign to me, given my Southern bias!)

Edited March 1, 2018 by Nearholmer

[Flying Pig]

Is the vacuum PP gear that strange contraption that is fitted to the rhs of the smoke box on some locos?

(This stuff is all foreign to me, given my Southern bias!)

That would be it: the Southern system was air-operated and much neater in appearance...

[Steamport Southport]

That would be it: the Southern system was air-operated and much neater in appearance...

 

The GE used the same system I believe.

 

 

Interesting looking carriages used on the Saffron Walden line. Any kits available? 

 

 http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/s/saffron_walden/index2.shtml

 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/PHOTO-OF-STEAM-TRAIN-G5-NO-67269-NEAR-FULFEN-SLADE-ON-SAFFRON-WALDEN-LINE-/253319082913

 

 

 

Jason

[Lambton58]

"Interesting looking carriages used on the Saffron Walden line. Any kits available?"

 

Not sure these days - the lamented D&S range would have been the choice, but they're like hens teeth on Ebay these days.  I was thinking an NER brake third would nice alongside a couple of Hornby LNER offerings.

 

Ralph

Lambton 58

 

 

Edited March 1, 2018 by Lambton58

[Steamport Southport]

Ah, D&S.

 

D&S apparently still produce kits on an occasional basis. Probably time to get in touch. I'm considering the GE section one to go with my J15 and Model Rail J70. 

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/13126-ds-models/page-7

 

 

For those of a North Eastern persuasion I take it the Langley push/pull clerestory would be fitting. 

 

http://www.langley-models.co.uk/acatalog/Online_Catalogue_OO___HO_Locomotive___Coach_kits_38.html

 

 

 

Jason

[9402 Fredrick]

I went ahead and got seven variants on order instead of all ten: the two NER Lined Green ones, the two L.N.E.R Lined Black ones, two BR Early Emblem ones (35-255Z & 35-256Z), and the BR Late Crest Push-Pull Fitted one.

Edited March 1, 2018 by 9402 Fredrick

[tmc]

What's interesting is that this and the other images I've seen online (and the TMC model) don't appear to have it with visible push-pull gear fitted(?) (although there is a Westinghouse Pump) - even though it was run with push-pull stock. Are there any photos of 67322 with the gear?

There were 2 types of push and pull apparatus fitted to some G5s. Those on North Eastern region had vacuum operated push pull fitted to RH side of loco and lost their Westinghouse pumps. Those on the Great Eastern were fitted with compressed air gear that retained their Westinghouse Pumps so you won't find any of the Great Eastern area locos with the vacuum operated push & pull gear on the RH side of the loco. A good example of why we had to use photographs as well as the written works when deciding which locos to model.

 

Kind Regards,

[tmc]

Would TMC consider an 'as built' version, i.e. with the brake pumps tucked away in the cab?

 

That would get us 1894-1901 (depending on batch) onwards, rather than 1912 onwards, as I understand it.

 

Of course, I would happily back-date the one you are releasing, but if an earlier condition version was released, I'd go for that, too.

 

I am very pleased and thankful that we have a pukka pre-Grouping in-service version included in the first release. An as-built version would be to add icing to a very satisfactory cake.

 

Every model that is being produced for us is based on photographs backed up by written works on the G5, we found very few photographs from the era that you refer to. All the photos of NER livered locos we have which show the left side show the pump fitted to the front of the LH tank hence the reason the NER in service model is being produced as such.

 

Kind regards,

[Compound2632]

Every model that is being produced for us is based on photographs backed up by written works on the G5, we found very few photographs from the era that you refer to. All the photos of NER livered locos we have which show the left side show the pump fitted to the front of the LH tank hence the reason the NER in service model is being produced as such.

 

Kind regards,

 

But, equally, the written word tells us that pumps were moved to this position from c. 1912 onwards, having previously been tucked away (rather noisily) in a cupboard in the cab; and that as built the front of the tanks were lined out. As I wrote earlier, not a problem so long as the pump can be cleanly removed without damaging the model. But then I'm happy to take the RTR model as a starting point for my modelling, rather than waiting for the manufacturer to produce exactly the engine I want. Of course there's an element of hypocrisy in this attitude - I'm ordering this now that you've made it available; I've not already bought the LMR/George Norton kit...

Edited March 1, 2018 by Compound2632

[Edwardian]

But, equally, the written word tells us that pumps were moved to this position from c. 1912 onwards, having previously been tucked away (rather noisily) in a cupboard in the cab; and that as built the front of the tanks were lined out. As I wrote earlier, not a problem so long as the pump can be cleanly removed without damaging the model. But then I'm happy to take the RTR model as a starting point for my modelling, rather than waiting for the manufacturer to produce exactly the engine I want. Of course there's an element of hypocrisy in this attitude - I'm ordering this now that you've made it available; I've not already bought the LMR/George Norton kit...

 

I agree.  There is a good picture in North Eastern Record of the right-hand side as built.  I would dare to suggest that this would be a reasonable guide to the appearance of the left-hand side, as we know the pump was not present.  The North Eastern Record confirms there was lining to the front of the tanks.

 

Query, would the NER have removed the lining from the front of the left or of both tanks on the relocation of the pumps?  I would have thought they would simply have moved the pump, without implementing seemingly unnecessary livery changes in the process?

 

I think you mentioned earlier seeing photographs apparently without front tank lining?  Of course, sometimes lining is there that does not show up ell in photographs. What does the photographic record show in that regard?

 

As for the model, which I shall be pre-ordering, I would imagine that the pump could be removed with minimal cosmetic damage, and that suitable lining transfers could be found and applied as necessary.  That is what I would want to do with mine, as I am aiming for some consistency with NE models, to conform to a c.1900-1903 period.

 

The necessity for individualising a RTR model is seldom a bad thing!

 

EDIT: I am sure a better copy of this picture could be found without too much effort:

Edited March 2, 2018 by Edwardian

[Compound2632]

I agree.  There is a good picture in North Eastern Record of the right-hand side as built.  I would dare to suggest that this would be a reasonable guide to the appearance of the left-hand side, as we know the pump was not present.  The North Eastern Record confirms there was lining to the front of the tanks.

 

Query, would the NER have removed the lining from the front of the left or of both tanks on the relocation of the pumps?  I would have thought they would simply have moved the pump, without implementing seemingly unnecessary livery changes in the process?

 

I think you mentioned earlier seeing photographs apparently without front tank lining?  Of course, sometimes lining is there that does not show up ell in photographs. What does the photographic record show in that regard?

 

 

There are five photos of the class in K. Hoole, An Illustrated History of NER Locomotives (OPC, 1988), a standard work which I expect TMC have consulted, along with North Eastern Record. 

 

No. 1783, LHS in works grey photographic livery so presumably taken when built (June 1894), broadside view so front of tanks not visible. No Westinghouse pump visible. No cab doors; lining carried round cab cut out. Two coal rails. EDIT: this is the photo Edwardian posted, though of course a rather better print.

 

No. 441, RHS broadside view so front of tanks not visible, undated - I think the bottom of the pump would be visible under the boiler if it was fitted to the front of the LH tank. Cab doors, unlined, also lining not carried round cab cut-out. Three coal rails.

 

No. 1779. RHS view, undated, with front of tank visible and unlined. Can't say whether or not the pump has been moved to the front of the LH tank. No cab door; lining carried round cab cut-out. Two coal rails.

 

No. 2089. LHS front three-quarter view taken at Richmond in 1922 (W.L. Good photo). Westinghouse pump, front of tank unlined - front of splasher sandbox is lined (white/black on edge as splasher side). Stay to front footstep (absent from the other photos). Cab door, possibly lined; cab cut-out lined. Two coal rails with hopper.

 

No. 1884, LHS broadside view undated, with pump on front of tank. Stay to front footstep. Cab door and cab cut-out lined. Two coal rails with hopper with additional rails. 

 

These photos aren't very conclusive but my inference would be that tank fronts were lined but the practice was dropped, on both sides, when the pump was moved to the LH tank front. Good evidence that the tank fronts were usually lined is provided by a photo of Class A No. 1580, another W.L. Good photo from 1922. This engine also has the cab door and cutout lined. 

 

Of course practice may have varied not only over time but between the NER's various works.

 

EDIT: TMC, if you produced an as-built version* you'd clearly sell two, one to me (I'd want to change my pre-order) and one to Edwardian.

 

*Oh dear: early batch w/o cab doors or later batches with; does anybody know which engines were built with and without?

 

Even without this, will the NER green version have the front step stay or not?

Edited March 2, 2018 by Compound2632

[Edwardian]

So, here's a question.  I'm not aware that NER lining transfers are available, but I wonder if GNR would do(!)

 

Alternatively I'm sure the innumerable lining transfers by Fox would include something suitable.  The trouble is, there is so much choice, I have never yet been able to navigate to find something I might want!

[Worsdell forever]

So, here's a question.  I'm not aware that NER lining transfers are available, but I wonder if GNR would do(!)

 

Alternatively I'm sure the innumerable lining transfers by Fox would include something suitable.  The trouble is, there is so much choice, I have never yet been able to navigate to find something I might want!

I've always used Fox LNER lining, after all they followed the NER pattern rather than that of the GN.

[Edwardian]

 

EDIT: TMC, if you produced an as-built version* you'd clearly sell two, one to me (I'd want to change my pre-order) and one to Edwardian.

 

*Oh dear: early batch w/o cab doors or later batches with; does anybody know which engines were built with and without?

 

Even without this, will the NER green version have the front step stay or not?

 

Agree!

 

As for doors, North Eastern Record again:

 

The last 40 engines of Class O, built in 1900-01, had cab doors of varnished wood ... but steel cab doors were later provided for the entire class.  The steel doors were painted green, with black borders and white lining.

 

That would seem to be 2081-2100, 149, 380-1, 384, 387, 408, 413, 427, 433, 435-7, 439, 441, 468, 540, 580, 1319, 1334, though I seem to have come up 1 short!

 

So, yes. if the identity of 1779 (of 1896) was to be kept, you would need to remove the door.

 

Of course, changing the identity is hardly drastic in the context of removing the pump and adding lining.

 

EDIT: I think it would be fun to depict one of the final 40 in as-built condition by painting the door as varnished wood.

 

Modellers' interpretations are interesting.

 

Here is the London Road kit finished in later pre-Grouping condition, complete with pump on tank front and, indeed, coal cage, but interestingly the tank front is lined round the edges: https://traders.scalefour.org/LondonRoadModels/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/LOCO62c.jpg

 

Here is another version (couldn't link to it, sorry) that presumably shows an earlier condition as the pump is not there, though I see no evidence of the wooden door that 380 should have according to the Record, and the tank front is unlined:

Edited March 2, 2018 by Edwardian

[EddieB]

The GE used the same system I believe.

 

 

Interesting looking carriages used on the Saffron Walden line. Any kits available? 

 

 http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/s/saffron_walden/index2.shtml

 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/PHOTO-OF-STEAM-TRAIN-G5-NO-67269-NEAR-FULFEN-SLADE-ON-SAFFRON-WALDEN-LINE-/253319082913

 

 

 

Jason

Those eBay listings look a little suspicious.  Copies of the works of several well-known photographers (which should be familiar from the two editions of Peter Paye's book on the Saffron Walden branch).

 

Incidentally, there was an Argo Transacord record of a G5 working the branch.

[Compound2632]

Modellers' interpretations are interesting.

 

Here is the London Road kit finished in later pre-Grouping condition, complete with pump on tank front and, indeed, coal cage, but interestingly the tank front is lined round the edges: https://traders.scalefour.org/LondonRoadModels/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/LOCO62c.jpg

 

Here is another version (couldn't link to it, sorry) that presumably shows an earlier condition as the pump is not there, though I see no evidence of the wooden door that 380 should have according to the Record, and the tank front is unlined:

 

The model on the LRM website has the outer white/black lining carried down the vertical edges either side of the cab door opening (as opposed to the cab cut-out, the round-cornered rectangular opening above waist height) and on the front corner of the tank; this doesn't correspond to the lining on the photos in Hoole that I described earlier. The model in the photo in your post is better in that respect. On the other hand, the dome seems too far forward, leading to rather obvious unequal spacing of the boiler cladding bands (unless there's a variation I'm unaware of in my ignorance).

[Edwardian]

The model on the LRM website has the outer white/black lining carried down the vertical edges either side of the cab door opening (as opposed to the cab cut-out, the round-cornered rectangular opening above waist height) and on the front corner of the tank; this doesn't correspond to the lining on the photos in Hoole that I described earlier. The model in the photo in your post is better in that respect. On the other hand, the dome seems too far forward, leading to rather obvious unequal spacing of the boiler cladding bands (unless there's a variation I'm unaware of in my ignorance).

 

Interesting.  I have ordered a copy of Hoole, something I should have done a long time ago.  Hopefully by the time this loco is released I'll have worked out what I need to do to it!

[stovepipe]

There's a photo on ebay of NER 2087, with dome in the original position. The boiler bands on both linked models seem incorrect in one way or another. On 2087 the white lining on the side tank is horizontal only, with no vertical lining, except around the cab side sheet.

 

https://www.photosandpostcards.co.uk/EBay679/IMGP8757.JPG

[Compound2632]

There's another 'photo I can't find just now' of a Belpaire in original condition at Hawes Junction, with a NER train in the branch platform - either an O or an A, with 6-wheelers.

 

I find I was conflating two photographs. The Belpaire at Hawes Junction is in W.R. Mitchell and D. Joy, Settle to Carlisle: A Railway over the Pennines (Dalesman Books, 1982). From the make-up of the southbound Scotch express behind it, the date is c. 1902 - c. 1905. There is a train of NER 6-wheeled carriages at the branch platform - a brake third and full third are visible - but no engine. The other photo is in C.S. Hallas, The Wensleydale Railway (Dalesman Books, 1984) and must be of later date. This was taken between Redmire and Aysgarth, with Bolton Castle in the background. The engine is an A rather than an O, pulling a set of  bogie non-corridor clerestories - I think a luggage composite between two brake thirds. There's an elliptical-roofed 6-wheeled vehicle at the tail - a full brake or other NPCS? I'm not well-up on NER carriages but presumably that provides a terminus post quem. As far as I can make out, the A's tank front does not carry the white-black-white lining panel. (To be clear on this point about lined tank fronts, it's the presence or absence of this panel that has been discussed - the white/black edging to the panel top and bottom (query? inside edge) seems to be always present - the photo of a Class A here illustrates the fully-lined tank front.)

 

Other North Eastern period photos in the Hallas book feature BTPs - No. 588 on the first train at Leyburn - so in Fletcher condition, with a train of five 4-wheelers, birdcage brake thirds at either end and a couple of three-compartment carriages - firsts? - and a centre-luggage carriage - a composite? The other is No. 207 at Redmire, c. 1920, with several barrow-loads of milk churns being loaded. The only photo of an O is at Hawes c. 1950 - a G5 we can now call it. But I think there are plenty of other photos of G5s on the Wensleydale line in the 1950s. Class A (F8) had, I read, all gone by 1938.

 

Please excuse my compulsive completism.

[Paul Cram]

On the Wensleydale branch the BTPs were replaced by class As(F8) which in turn were replaced by class Os (G5s)

[Compound2632]

On the Wensleydale branch the BTPs were replaced by class As(F8) which in turn were replaced by class Os (G5s)

 

The LNER encyclopedia mentions the As being used on lighter branch passenger duties such as the Hawes line post-Grouping; the photo of the A near Bolton Castle could be mid-20s notwithstanding the full NER livery.