SECR Maunsell D1 Class Locomotive

[RFS]

On 11/07/2023 at 13:06, SRman said:

 

Unfortunately, it seems fairly common with Next 18 decoders for them to come loose in transit; they don't lock in very positively, especially when compared to some of the other connection types. The Rails NER railcar had similar problems, with (in this case) the decoder blanking plug coming loose, so they wouldn't even respond on DC for testing before chipping.

I'm glad it was that simple to fix, and Rails can't really be blamed for this hiccup.

 

With the D1, the decoder is plugged into a circuit board which is itself then plugged into the socket inside the loco. There are no wires as such. What I believe has happened here is that it's the circuit board that has popped out of its socket with Next18 decoder still in place. That is why it was resolved by just pushing the CB back in. When I fitted my decoder, the CB was very easy to remove so perhaps not surprising that it can work loose in transit. 

[Trofimow]

On 10/07/2023 at 22:18, selset bill said:

I received my D1 (31487 with sound) on Saturday and have given it a run on my layout and on the club's one.  It cetainly looks really good, and the sound is also good once the volume has been reduced substantially.  The sychronisation with the wheels is probably the best I have seen for a model straight from the box.  The performance in terms of speed control is excellent, from a crawl up to a prototypical maximum speed BUT it can't pull the proverbial skin off a rice pudding!  My layout has a ruling gradient of 1 in 60 on the main line and it just about manages three birdcage coaches but not four.  On the club layout (whose gradients I haven't measured but I would guess 1 in 50 in a couple of places) it wouldn't even take three but got round, with a bit of slipping, with two.  Not good enough, Mr Dapol ! You should have put traction tyres on, like the D which is ok with three birdcages on the club layout.

I should add that I have a section of 1 in 30 that forms a link to enable continuous running, and this I have equipped with DCC Concepts' Powerbase system.  Fitting a magnet under the loco (with loss of the brake pull rod) transforms the performance and it will take the three coaches up the 1 in 30 without difficulty - possibly more than the prototype could do.  If I were starting from scratch I would fit Powerbase everywhere but I'm not going to rip all the track up so I will have to live with my 1 in 60 gradients as they are. 

 

Out of the box, mine slipped to a stand with 3 Hornby Maunsells on a 1 in 100 and wouldn't even look at 1 in 80.

3 Powerbase magnets fitted above the brake pull rod and it's happy with the 3 up the 1 in 80, which is all that I require of it.

I wouldn't expect a 4-4-0 to climb anything steeper.

Traction tyres are banned on the layout, so I'm very glad that Dapol didn't use them.

 

[No Decorum]

7 hours ago, Darius43 said:

Sound fitted D1 arrived today 😀.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

just tested it and all works fine - the sound functionality is impressive.
 

Cheers

 

Darius

Gosh, that looks stunning! I’m waiting eagerly for my 1749; happy that I got a set of Southern Birdcages years ago. A Modelu crew, tailored to fit, would be the finishing touch. It’s a pity about the lack of traction – perhaps a diecast firebox would have helped. My G5 has been galloping around the loft with five Gresley non-gangwayed in tow. Thanks for the super pics.

[SRman]

8 hours ago, RFS said:

 

With the D1, the decoder is plugged into a circuit board which is itself then plugged into the socket inside the loco. There are no wires as such. What I believe has happened here is that it's the circuit board that has popped out of its socket with Next18 decoder still in place. That is why it was resolved by just pushing the CB back in. When I fitted my decoder, the CB was very easy to remove so perhaps not surprising that it can work loose in transit. 

 

That's interesting, because I found the circuit board was very tight, and took some effort to pull out, whereas the decoder blanking plate and the decoder both felt very insecure. Obviously, there are different production tolerances at work here. 🙃

[chris25]

Are there any videos of the Sound versions running yet?

 

Hopefully Rails of Sheffield hasn't just reused their D class sound recordings for the Maunsell D1.

 

Perhaps Oliver can shed some light on this?

[MikeParkin65]

4 hours ago, chris25 said:

Are there any videos of the Sound versions running yet?

 

Hopefully Rails of Sheffield hasn't just reused their D class sound recordings for the Maunsell D1.

 

Perhaps Oliver can shed some light on this?

Though with there being no working examples of either class any sound project will have to be generic surely?

[chris25]

Hello all,

 

I'm fully aware there are no examples of D1's left. The SECR D class in York museum hasn't steamed since the mid 1950s.

There are several recordings of both available though, and while some sounds can be generic, others are specific to SECR locomotives and can be reused.

 

The point I was trying to raise was that the two locomotives were very different and using exactly the same 'sound file' for both, just would be a disappointment.

 

Edited July 13, 2023 by chris25
Grammar

[Olive_Green1923]

On 03/07/2023 at 10:51, Jack P said:

 

Page 70, top left image (A470) very much looks like it has cab doors.

 

If you click on the images in my above post, you can zoom in. 31545 very much appears to have doors:

 

 

 

the E's, E1's L's, L1's and D's all have them, which begs the question why they'd be removed on the D1? I  would've thought you'd be hard pressed to find many tender engines without cab doors. (Even the Z and W tanks had them - among many others, but specifically those maunsell locos).

 

Perhaps rails arrived at the same conclusion though - and the images in the instructions are simply cut and pasted from the D?

 

Spoke to Dapol. The inclusion of the door fitting instructions was indeed an oversight from the previous D class. In terms of why cab doors weren't included in the design of the D1, this is down to Rails apparently, not Dapol, so they couldn't speculate about why they weren't included vs doors potentially fitted on prototypes.

 

 

 

 

[Graham_Muz]

One thing that I have recently had pointed out to me is that for some inexplicable reason the non BR versions still have a cast shed plate on the smokebox... I will have to get the scalpel out...

[No Decorum]

On 13/07/2023 at 16:19, chris25 said:

Hello all,

 

I'm fully aware there are no examples of D1's left. The SECR D class in York museum hasn't steamed since the mid 1950s.

There are several recordings of both available though, and while some sounds can be generic, others are specific to SECR locomotives and can be reused.

 

The point I was trying to raise was that the two locomotives were very different and using exactly the same 'sound file' for both, just would be a disappointment.

 

My SR 1749 arrived this morning. Overall, I’m impressed but not quite as much as I thought I would be. The sounds are identical to the D. In particular, the Wainwright has a Ramsbottom-type safety valve which opens gradually. The Maunsell has a pop-type safety valve which, as the name implies, opens suddenly. It is an obvious mismatch between what you see and what you hear.

On 14/07/2023 at 11:47, Olive_Green1923 said:

 

Spoke to Dapol. The inclusion of the door fitting instructions was indeed an oversight from the previous D class. In terms of why cab doors weren't included in the design of the D1, this is down to Rails apparently, not Dapol, so they couldn't speculate about why they weren't included vs doors potentially fitted on prototypes.

 

That is interesting. The D has just about the easiest method of fitting cab doors that I have come across. To abandon it on the D1 is a pity.

12 hours ago, Graham_Muz said:

One thing that I have recently had pointed out to me is that for some inexplicable reason the non BR versions still have a cast shed plate on the smokebox... I will have to get the scalpel out...

So they have. I hadn’t noticed. 😖 Being black, it isn’t as obvious as the join in the bottom of the boiler behind the leading splasher. I wonder if Rails or Dapol will think to impress us by providing replacement smokebox doors. I’m glad I got 1749 and not 1741 with both side and dome feed. (I believe that water entering the boiler through the dome decended along a spiral, known to some as the “helter-skelter lighthouse”. Presumably a similar purpose to the Great Western arrangement of trays i.e. to warm the feed water and reduce thermal shock.)

 

Overall, performance is very smooth and the livery application is very neat. Having five Gresley non-gangwayed coaches on the layout to test my G5, I attached them to the D1 and it romped away with them. Sadly, it tends now and again to jam on Peco large radius Code 100 electrofrog points when in reverse. Wheels out of gauge, I suspect. To nitpick, the cab detail is very nicely done, including printed gauges, but the gauge glasses rather obviously lack their stripes. Why oh why does Dapol go to such trouble to provide an insert to the bogie to replace the tension lock but not provide a screw link coupling?

 

The instruction booklet is well done, apart from the odd error. I particularly like the explanations of the various sounds which should help those new to the hobby who may well not know in detail how a steam loco works.

 

Subjectively, I prefer the more purposeful lines of the D1 to the D. There is a lot to like about the model but there are little let downs which I think stop it reaching the level of the Manor.

[Wickham Green too]

11 hours ago, No Decorum said:

... The sounds are identical to the D. In particular, the Wainwright has a Ramsbottom-type safety valve which opens gradually. The Maunsell has a pop-type safety valve which, as the name implies, opens suddenly. It is an obvious mismatch between what you see and what you hear.

That is interesting. The D has just about the easiest method of fitting cab doors that I have come across. To abandon it on the D1 is a pity.

...

SOME D1s had Ross Pop safety valves so the sound is probably correct for the others ..... a generic selection provided for all, by the 'sound' of it !

As I tried to point out earlier, the rebuilds shouldn't have the big tool boxes in the cab ( just splashers ) - so fitting cab doors SHOULD have been done differently ........ rather than not at all. ☹️

[Guardian]

On 25/06/2023 at 15:03, Graham_Muz said:

Not sure which war you are referring to. It took until 1948 for the last top feed to be replaced by side feed.

But yes the use of a simple blanking plate was changed to removing the flange from the boiler steam dome. 

Hi Graham and all D1 specialists,

 

As I intend to get a D1 in a state of the late 1920s, early 1930s, is it known by when the D1s received the side feed instead of the top feed? I assume this was a longer process. When did it start?

 

Normally, I would simply acquire a top feed D1 as it represents the older condition, but the top feed D1 SR version no. 1741 has the side feed pipes mounted. If these are removed from the model, holes will remain in the boiler...

 

Best,

Mark 

[JSpencer]

4 minutes ago, Guardian said:

Hi Graham and all D1 specialists,

 

As I intend to get a D1 in a state of the late 1920s, early 1930s, is it known by when the D1s received the side feed instead of the top feed? I assume this was a longer process. When did it start?

 

Normally, I would simply acquire a top feed D1 as it represents the older condition, but the top feed D1 SR version no. 1741 has the side feed pipes mounted. If these are removed from the model, holes will remain in the boiler...

 

Best,

Mark 

 

Many were rebuilt with side feed at the start. The SECR grey one is such a case https://railsofsheffield.com/products/Dapol-4s-028-001s-secr-maunsell-d1-class-secr-grey-4-4-0-steam-locomotive-no-735-dcc-sound

 

Without referring to my books, I think around 2/3rds of the 1926 rebuilds (from D to D1) got the newer side frames and - maybe  - top feed while SECR batch all kept the old D frames and side feed. But this is my fallible memory...

The best bet as always is to look at photos. Or simply go for a side feed version which works across the entire period you are after.

 

[Guardian]

On 10/07/2023 at 23:18, selset bill said:

BUT it can't pull the proverbial skin off a rice pudding!  My layout has a ruling gradient of 1 in 60 on the main line and it just about manages three birdcage coaches but not four.  On the club layout (whose gradients I haven't measured but I would guess 1 in 50 in a couple of places) it wouldn't even take three but got round, with a bit of slipping, with two.  Not good enough, Mr Dapol ! You should have put traction tyres on, like the D which is ok with three birdcages on the club layout.

Dapol should have included a wheelset with traction tyres. And if someone objects: if the traction tyres are made of quality rubber, any abresion on the rails is limited. As I run a lot of Märklin/Trix, Fleischmann and other continental models with traction tyres for decades, I made the experience that the rubber quality of the traction tyres is significant for their performance, longevity and abrasion resistance. And the increase in traction is immense compared to 25 g additional weight of the D1 compared to the D class... 

Edited August 30, 2023 by Guardian

[Guardian]

58 minutes ago, JSpencer said:

 

Many were rebuilt with side feed at the start. The SECR grey one is such a case https://railsofsheffield.com/products/Dapol-4s-028-001s-secr-maunsell-d1-class-secr-grey-4-4-0-steam-locomotive-no-735-dcc-sound

 

Without referring to my books, I think around 2/3rds of the 1926 rebuilds (from D to D1) got the newer side frames and - maybe  - top feed while SECR batch all kept the old D frames and side feed. But this is my fallible memory...

The best bet as always is to look at photos. Or simply go for a side feed version which works across the entire period you are after.

 

Ah, thank you for clarification. I had understood that top feed was the initial setup, not side feed. In that case, the choice for an earlier SR version is easy - side feed no. 1749.

 

Best,

Mark

[Fuggles]

I agree that Dapol should have included traction tyres. They enable my D and Schools classes to pull reasonable length trains up a gentle incline.

Maybe I'm just unlucky but both the D and D1class were missing a buffer. When I queried this with Rails of Sheffield they said "Dapol have produced these so that the buffers are more of a push/pull system so they will pop in and out...." Only one of my thirty plus locos acquired over the last 20 years of modelling has lost a buffer. 

I am very disappointed and thinking of selling the D1 as it is not up to the task. I've waited many years for someone to produce a 4-4-0 for the South eastern  section of British Railways. My layout is based in the hop-picking area of Kent so these locos were very common on the front of hop-pickers specials.

It is certainly a very nice looking loco, but I would quite happily forego a few of the finer details such internal framework and a lit firebox for better performance.

[stephennicholson]

2 hours ago, Fuggles said:

I agree that Dapol should have included traction tyres. They enable my D and Schools classes to pull reasonable length trains up a gentle incline.

Maybe I'm just unlucky but both the D and D1class were missing a buffer. When I queried this with Rails of Sheffield they said "Dapol have produced these so that the buffers are more of a push/pull system so they will pop in and out...." Only one of my thirty plus locos acquired over the last 20 years of modelling has lost a buffer. 

I am very disappointed and thinking of selling the D1 as it is not up to the task. I've waited many years for someone to produce a 4-4-0 for the South eastern  section of British Railways. My layout is based in the hop-picking area of Kent so these locos were very common on the front of hop-pickers specials.

It is certainly a very nice looking loco, but I would quite happily forego a few of the finer details such internal framework and a lit firebox for better performance.

Just a thought, are spare D class wheels with traction tyres available as a spare? On the assumption they fit a D1 that might be a solution? 

[cctransuk]

2 hours ago, Fuggles said:

I agree that Dapol should have included traction tyres. They enable my D and Schools classes to pull reasonable length trains up a gentle incline.

Maybe I'm just unlucky but both the D and D1class were missing a buffer. When I queried this with Rails of Sheffield they said "Dapol have produced these so that the buffers are more of a push/pull system so they will pop in and out...." Only one of my thirty plus locos acquired over the last 20 years of modelling has lost a buffer. 

I am very disappointed and thinking of selling the D1 as it is not up to the task. I've waited many years for someone to produce a 4-4-0 for the South eastern  section of British Railways. My layout is based in the hop-picking area of Kent so these locos were very common on the front of hop-pickers specials.

It is certainly a very nice looking loco, but I would quite happily forego a few of the finer details such internal framework and a lit firebox for better performance.

 

Can't say it often enough - model railways + gradients = complaints.

 

CJI.

[Wickham Green too]

13 hours ago, stephennicholson said:

Just a thought, are spare D class wheels with traction tyres available as a spare? On the assumption they fit a D1 that might be a solution? 

On the assumption they fit a D1 they should be freely available from anyone who's ditched the rubber tyred horrors on their D.

[Fuggles]

That is a good thought. Thank you. I'm going to make enquiries. Actually, if anyone has done that I'd be interested.

Worst case scenario: I'll double head the trains which was not uncommon.

Edited September 2, 2023 by Fuggles

[JSpencer]

On 02/09/2023 at 11:30, Wickham Green too said:

On the assumption they fit a D1 they should be freely available from anyone who's ditched the rubber tyred horrors on their D.

 

On 02/09/2023 at 13:34, Fuggles said:

That is a good thought. Thank you. I'm going to make enquiries. Actually, if anyone has done that I'd be interested.

Worst case scenario: I'll double head the trains which was not uncommon.

 

The chassis is the same, so should be possible to swap.  Can they be sourced (without buying a D) is another question though.

[Wickham Green too]

Swapping the chassis - which do, indeed look identical* - is complicated by all the electrickery bits in the smokebox, of course !

 

* notwithstanding the fact that the valve gear should have been different and the D1s originally had bypass valves ( I think ) below the running plate.

[JSpencer]

1 hour ago, Wickham Green too said:

Swapping the chassis - which do, indeed look identical* - is complicated by all the electrickery bits in the smokebox, of course !

 

* notwithstanding the fact that the valve gear should have been different and the D1s originally had bypass valves ( I think ) below the running plate.

 

Just to clarify, IF the chassis are the same then using  D class drivers with rubber tyres on a D1 should be feasible. Obviously the D then uses normal wheels without rubber tyres (spare set supplied in the box). I don't think I'd try to swap the entire chassis.

[Kaput]

D Class wheels are available as spares https://www.petersspares.com/p/Dapol-115733-d-class-oo-gauge-wheel-set-grey-stud-front-driving

[tetsudofan]

17 hours ago, Kaput said:

D Class wheels are available as spares https://www.petersspares.com/p/Dapol-115733-d-class-oo-gauge-wheel-set-grey-stud-front-driving

 

Thanks for the information, ordered two sets (for my olive green & BR black livery models) last night and just got an email saying they on the way,

 

Keith