Big Bertha

[Steamport Southport]

4 hours ago, Allegheny1600 said:

Yeah, it seems that it was not that popular!

Apparently, in August 1955, 69999 was trialled as an oil burner but again, not successfully.

The “Big-un” was much more appreciated.

From “Life on the Lickey 1943 - 1986” by Patrick ‘Pat’ Wallace,  Brewin books.

Not a particularly easy read imho but fascinating nevertheless. This book has given me many ideas and a lot of interest in this line, of which 2290/58100 is a principle component but never did I think she might be modelled RTR.

 

Big Bertha is how I’ve always thought of this engine and being a Derby lad, I’d probably want a model anyway. I just hope it’s a worthy one.

 

John

 

I was more commenting on the fact they thought it was big!

 

Smaller than a GWR 2-8-0 or a medium size 4-6-0 such as a Hall or Black Five.

 

 

 

Jason

[micklner]

54 minutes ago, Din said:

As to the "rise of the different name". Could it have had something to do with the War? A number of artillery peices were named "Big Bertha" during the Great War, and the name has certainly stuck about in the general cultural lexicon, so a similar "big weapon" could've become known as such by veterans from the War who went back to train spotting?

Wikepedia.

 

The nickname "Big Bertha" appeared early in the war, when German soldiers named the guns "Dicke Berta" at the Battle of Liège, a reference to Bertha Krupp, who had inherited the Krupp works from her father. The name spread to German newspapers and then to Allied servicemen as "Big Bertha" and became slang for all heavy German artillery, but especially the 42-centimetre guns.[41][42] The name has since entered the public consciousness, for example being applied as a moniker to a line of Callaway golf clubs,[43] and a satirical French-language magazine,[44] and a bond-buying policy by Mario Draghi, President of the European Central Bank.

[Lewi73050]

Seems the error between LMS and MR Crimson has been rectified

[Compound2632]

2 minutes ago, Lewi73050 said:

Seems the error between LMS and MR Crimson has been rectified

 

Was mentioned several posts back.

 

I'm not sure how changing from one fictional livery to another can be seen as correcting an error. 

Edited October 9, 2022 by Compound2632

[Lewi73050]

1 minute ago, Compound2632 said:

 

I'm not sure how changing from one fictional livery to another can be seen as correcting an error. 

I thought it was in MR red for a short duration at the start of its life?

[woodenhead]

So if KR Models are doing the remain one offs, do you think this one is on the cards

 

Edited October 9, 2022 by woodenhead
awful grammar

[Compound2632]

Just now, Lewi73050 said:

I thought it was in MR red for a short duration at the start of its life?

 

No. Can we nail this on its head once and for all? A series of photographs were taken of the engine in works grey:

 

 

[Embedded link to catalogue thumbnail of Midland Railway Study Centre item 66921.]

 

The engine entered traffic in the standard Midland livery for goods engines, plain black:

 

 

[Embedded link to catalogue thumbnail of Midland Railway Study Centre item 66926.]

 

This photograph, taken at Derby on 1 January 1920, is generally supposed to be the earliest photo of the engine in steam. 

 

This photo is dated 7 February 1920:

 

 

[Embedded link to catalogue thumbnail of Midland Railway Study Centre item 66928.]

 

On photographs of undoubtedly red engines, taken around this date, the straw lining stands out well.

[Fair Oak Junction]

In all the various books I have about the MR, LMS or Lickey I've never seen a photo of Bertha in service pre-BR that gives me any impression she is in anything but unlined black.

[Compound2632]

Just now, Obsidian Quarry said:

In all the various books I have about the MR, LMS or Lickey I've never seen a photo of Bertha in service pre-BR that gives me any impression she is in anything but unlined black.

 

Summerson, op. cit., states that there is no known photo of the engine in first LMS livery, i.e. with the LMS cartouche replacing the Midland coat of arms. 

 

Reading Summerson again, I'm reminded that a second boiler was built in 1922, to speed the engine's return to service at heavy overhauls. These boilers were modified over time - most notably acquiring a row of washout plugs on the firebox side, and Ross pop safety valves in place of the Ramsbottom originals.

[CF MRC]

I made an N gauge model of Big Bertha in 1975 for use on the 1:37 gradient on my layout. Unfortunately, I sold it on.
 

For what it’s worth  my uncle helped lift up the inside connecting rods when he was a premium apprentice at Derby - they were very long and very heavy - the second axle was cranked to clear it.

 

I recollect hearing a recording of the engine: it sounded quite muffled; probably because it was about as far removed from the Chapelon style of steam passage design philosophy as one could get. 
 

Other than those useless snippets good luck to them. 

 

Tim

Edited October 9, 2022 by CF MRC

[Steamport Southport]

Video footage does exist.

 

Some on YouTube. which I think might be from Railway Roundabout.

 

 

Jason

[Clearwater]

I appreciate different producers have different cost bases but I’m surprised that KR’s price here is so much inside that of say Rapido’s Jones Goods or the `Heljan Garrett.  With the valve gear here, it wouldn’t have surprised me to see Bertha at a similar price.  

[E100]

50 minutes ago, Clearwater said:

I appreciate different producers have different cost bases but I’m surprised that KR’s price here is so much inside that of say Rapido’s Jones Goods or the `Heljan Garrett.  With the valve gear here, it wouldn’t have surprised me to see Bertha at a similar price.  

Bear in mind that there is a VAT quirk on the website so it’s not £180 but about £220 for the DCC ready version and it’ll be sold at that price (ie no retailer discount). The Rapido Jones Good is about £185 at retailers so there is a fair price difference.
 

I for one reckon they will get it right. Despite issues with the Fell I reckon they will have heard and realise they need to step it up to regain trust and reputation. The modest price increase reflects that hopefully.

[Fair Oak Junction]

30 minutes ago, E100 said:

I for one reckon they will get it right. Despite issues with the Fell I reckon they will have heard and realise they need to step it up to regain trust and reputation. The modest price increase reflects that hopefully.

 

Continuing accuracy issues with the Leader and 4DD projects, and the continuing denial by the company over the issues with the Fell really don't inspire confidence in that happening.

HOWEVER! I do hope with every fibre of my being that KR do indeed get Bertha right and she ends up being a superb model.

I still don't think I can trust them enough to part with my money, as much as that pains me, but for those who do pre-order one I really hope it ends up working out. 🤞

[E100]

30 minutes ago, Obsidian Quarry said:

 

Continuing accuracy issues with the Leader and 4DD projects, and the continuing denial by the company over the issues with the Fell really don't inspire confidence in that happening.

HOWEVER! I do hope with every fibre of my being that KR do indeed get Bertha right and she ends up being a superb model.

I still don't think I can trust them enough to part with my money, as much as that pains me, but for those who do pre-order one I really hope it ends up working out. 🤞

I’ll be honest I’ve only followed the Fell and Consett hoppers so can’t speak into the Leader and 4DD so that’s interesting to know but was left with a decent impression of the company at model rail Scotland speaking with the younger son.
 

That being said the Fell is ‘ok’ enough for me even if it is a bit frustrating and for others it’s clearly not. Felt like it was just a bit rushed. 
 

I won’t claim to know half of what others know and I’m not the biggest stickler for outstanding accuracy so maybe I’m KR models target market? Accurascale just seem to make it look easy getting it ‘right’ for a competitive price.

[No Decorum]

On 08/10/2022 at 14:56, Colin_McLeod said:

KR Models, I wish you success with this, but PLEASE TAKE YOUR TIME to get this right. No need to RUSH into production before details are checked.

 

Please don't take constructive criticism as something that requires a stubborn defence. It is a genuine attempt to get the model right.

 

I look forward to seeing your CADs and if they are OK I will place a pre order.  If there are errors, please correct them (unlike the Fell) or I, and many others will be slow to commit. 

 

Looking forward to a great model.

 

 

A heartfelt plea which most of us would agree with. Sadly, I think it is significant that it was left to one of us to announce the news. Neither KRModels itself posted anything on RMweb nor did KR provide any information to Andy to post, which just about every other manufacturer does. It looks as if KR is ignoring us completely, which is bad for us but also bad for KR.

[Colin_McLeod]

Perhaps he is still smarting from the initial questioning when KRM first appeared, or our habit of trying to be helpful. Or maybe it's the humorous posts that appear on here from time to time.

 

Anyway it would be better for his business if he worked with RMweb.

 

His own website could also be more informative in respect of items that are no longer available for sale.  

 

 

 

.

Edited October 9, 2022 by Colin_McLeod
typo

[5944]

21 hours ago, Obsidian Quarry said:

Maybe that is why KR aren't doing MR livery, as they would need to do the two different tender toolings.

Looking at those two photos, both sides of the loco look identical except for the injector pipe on the right hand side of the boiler and the turbo generator under the left hand side of the cab. Will KR manage to get that right, or can we expect one side of the loco to look more like a 2P?

[melmerby]

18 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Summerson, op. cit., states that there is no known photo of the engine in first LMS livery, i.e. with the LMS cartouche replacing the Midland coat of arms. 

 

Reading Summerson again, I'm reminded that a second boiler was built in 1922, to speed the engine's return to service at heavy overhauls. These boilers were modified over time - most notably acquiring a row of washout plugs on the firebox side, and Ross pop safety valves in place of the Ramsbottom originals.

Essery and Jenkinson say that the MR crest stayed until 1926 when it was replaced with the loco number and "LMS" went on the Tender.

 

In this photo there looks like an oil tank in the tender:

[Compound2632]

41 minutes ago, melmerby said:

Essery and Jenkinson say that the MR crest stayed until 1926 when it was replaced with the loco number and "LMS" went on the Tender.

 

Would that not be a very early instance of the "1928" style?

 

41 minutes ago, melmerby said:

In this photo there looks like an oil tank in the tender:

 

The Lickey Banker was one of a number of Midland engines converted to oil burning during the coal strike of the summer of 1921- from, it seems, late July until sometime in August. There are a number of photos of it so fitted - I think some of them are by W.L. Good, who seems to have been out with his camera a lot photographing the oil-fired engines.

 

Re. the six washout plugs on the firebox side, Summerson states that this change was made in January 1948, to only one of the two boilers. Since the boilers were swapped more or less annually from then until withdrawal, this could cause some confusion to the unwary!

 

There was also a spare cylinder block cast when the engine was built; this was fitted in January 1954 following damage as a result of one of the inside connecting rods braking.

 

Another change noted by Summerson that might affect the visible detail on a model was the change from steam reverser to screw reverser in September 1938. Cab doors were fitted at the same time.

 

The original chimney might have come off the Paget 2-6-2, or have been of the same design. It was replaced with a Stanier chimney in 1942. 

 

Summerson notes the unusual arrangement whereby each piston valve fed a pair of cylinders - there being no room for valves between the inside cylinders and the smokebox and refers to an article by C.P. Atkins in Backtrack No. 3 where the similarity of this arrangement to that widely used on Italian 4-cylinder engines; it is said that the Derby LDO had a set of drawings of an Italian 0-10-0. (These Italian engines were, I gather, compounds, which probably accounts for Derby's interest.)

 

[Summerson, op. cit.]

Edited October 10, 2022 by Compound2632

[Ringfield_Motor]

This is worth watching, if you're interested in Big Bertha.
 

 

[Helmdon]

19 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

I was more commenting on the fact they thought it was big!

 

Smaller than a GWR 2-8-0 or a medium size 4-6-0 such as a Hall or Black Five.

 

 

 

Jason

well, when it was built, on a small engine railway like the Midland, it probably was big.

[Compound2632]

15 minutes ago, Helmdon said:

well, when it was built, on a small engine railway like the Midland, it probably was big.

 

Here it is, alongside the LNER Garratt - built some five years after the Lickey Banker, and as a banking engine, rather less successful, either on the Lickey Incline or on the Worsborough Bank for which it was designed - which goes to show that size isn't everything.

 

 

[Embedded link to catalogue thumbnail of Midland Railway Study Centre item 63018.]

 

Re the oil burning, here's a rear view:

 

 

[Embedded link to catalogue thumbnail of Midland Railway Study Centre item 66922.]

[Helmdon]

I've been weighing it up over the weekend, and can't justify one, even with strong family links to Bromsgrove. It would be a white elephant on my set-up. 

 

However, the agonising has persuaded me that I *do* actually want a GT3 (which, obviously, is right for my line, at the stretch end of my dates) so I've got in quick before the order book closes on the second wave of those. 

[Compound2632]

Sorry to bang on about livery but I've been told of a priceless gem on an LMS Facebook group - unfortunately I have been unable to track down the original post but I'm told the poster lists the Banker's liveries as:

 

1 works photographic grey

2 Midland Lake, crest on cab, number on tender

3 LMS black number on cab, LMS on tender

4 early BR crest,  Lined MT livery

5 late BR crest, plain black

 

Setting aside the already-exploded question of Midland lake, it's No. 5 that tickles me for its absurdity. From an internet source (!) I learn that "The first locomotive to display the new crest was BR Standard Class 7MT No. 70016 “Ariel” at Marylebone Station on 21st June 1956." - a date corroborated by Essery & Jenkinson, Midland Locomotives Vol. 1, though without this specific detail. The Banker was withdrawn from traffic in May 1956!

 

Summerson reproduces two photographs taken in this period, one with the boiler cladding removed on 3 July 1956 and the other with it put back on again for a Derby Works open day, 27 September 1956. The engine is in mixed-traffic lining with the early crest. 

 

This is the second of those two photos:

 

 

[Embedded link to catalogue thumbnail of Midland Railway Study Centre item 66931.]