Rapido OO Gauge Y7

[Mark Dickerson]

36 minutes ago, JohnR said:

However, I have seen various stay alive variants which claim to work on DC, so I guess it might be possible, given the correct circuitry. 

Thanks - the first to really promote one might therefore make a kiiling?

[spamcan61]

3 minutes ago, Mark Dickerson said:

Thanks - the first to really promote one might therefore make a kiiling?

Trouble is, if you install a stay alive on dc it'c going to make it really difficult stopping the loco when/where you want to I would think.

[Philip Jackson]

oh go on then, it would be rude not to

[Paul_sterling]

13 minutes ago, spamcan61 said:

Trouble is, if you install a stay alive on dc it'c going to make it really difficult stopping the loco when/where you want to I would think.

If you go for a worm-free drivetrain, coasting over dead spots would become a lot easier, and would only require retaining of how to control it to get it to stop in the right spot ( just as Thomas' driver and fireman learned to be extra careful.......)

 

Paul. 

[Corbs]

5 hours ago, Daddyman said:

So have you tooled the different frame shapes for NER-built and LNER-built locos? What about the cab rear on 68089? Your artwork shows it with the standard open back, which is wrong. There were at least two iterations for its cab rear. 

 

Hello Daddyman,

 

Please could I check something on this - the notes and CAD I have for 68089 have the bottom-right corner of the opening blanked off with a shroud for the handbrake (to allow it to turn) sticking out of the back.

 

The main photo ref. I have shows this arrangement with a jury-rigged tarpaulin, so hopefully this should be correct?

 

 

 

With the frame differences between NER and LNER batches, is it the profile of the ends of the frames (as they lead up to the bufferbeams) you are referring to, where the height of the end of the frames are different?

 

[PaulRhB]

On 26/11/2022 at 10:08, Tim Dubya said:

Trying to figure out how one of these ended up on an ex- LSWR BLT in Devon/Cornwall in the late 50's 😜

Locomotive trials under BR, nuff said 😆

 

NER ooh yes please!

[Daddyman]

9 hours ago, Corbs said:

 

Hello Daddyman,

 

Please could I check something on this - the notes and CAD I have for 68089 have the bottom-right corner of the opening blanked off with a shroud for the handbrake (to allow it to turn) sticking out of the back.

 

The main photo ref. I have shows this arrangement with a jury-rigged tarpaulin, so hopefully this should be correct?

 

 

 

With the frame differences between NER and LNER batches, is it the profile of the ends of the frames (as they lead up to the bufferbeams) you are referring to, where the height of the end of the frames are different?

 

That's almost correct, Corbs, but the tarpaulin in your photo (a view which I've never seen  - I thought I had every picture of 68089 in existence; presumably that's Chathill goods shed in the background?) obscures the right hand side (as we look at it) of the cab back, which has been built up piecemeal with (I think) odd bits of wood rather than steel, and includes a window at top right, which changed shape in the loco's last years. (It also lost its centre lower lamp bracket at the front in the last month or so.)

 

Re the LNER frames, yes, they were deeper at the front, presumably to act as a brace for the dumb buffers. I went to have another look at Rapido's artwork to see if they'd included the shunting-pole brackets on 68089, and while that's obscured in the blackness, I was impressed to see that they've included the notches in the vertical edges of the buffer beams on 68089, so with that attention to detail perhaps all will be well.  

 

 

[The Black Hat]

Nice release. Certainly going to be interesting converting these to sound if possible. 

[Porcy Mane]

12 hours ago, PaulRhB said:

Trying to figure out how one of these ended up on an ex- LSWR BLT in Devon/Cornwall in the late 50's

 

On the back of a Pickfords (BRS) Low Loader?

Antar Tank Transporter?

Lowmac?

In the boot of a Mini?  (after Sept, 1959).

[Worsdell forever]

To whet the appetite...

My Alexander kit Class H doing a spot of shunting.

 

 

[Halvarras]

On 26/11/2022 at 10:08, Tim Dubya said:

Trying to figure out how one of these ended up on an ex- LSWR BLT in Devon/Cornwall in the late 50's 😜

 

 

 

Stunning little model 👍

 

Would the unlikely but genuine employment of a pair of WR 16xx pannier tanks in Scotland support the imposition of Rule 1? Just sayin'...... 😁

[D9020 Nimbus]

FWIW the NGS Hunslet does work fine on DC — though as I don't (yet) have one I can't say whether the stay-alive feature assists DC running or not. A lot of work went in to designing the circuit board for this model, involving NGS members with appropriate expertise.

[Corbs]

10 hours ago, Daddyman said:

Re the LNER frames, yes, they were deeper at the front, presumably to act as a brace for the dumb buffers. I went to have another look at Rapido's artwork to see if they'd included the shunting-pole brackets on 68089, and while that's obscured in the blackness, I was impressed to see that they've included the notches in the vertical edges of the buffer beams on 68089, so with that attention to detail perhaps all will be well.  

 

 

 

Thanks, I will ask about the cab back.

 

I believe it is the intention to represent the different frame types at the moment but unconfirmed as yet.

[rovex]

On 27/11/2022 at 00:23, Porcy Mane said:

 

And from a few yards further back. A crop from the original, with the numbers showing through.

 

I wonder if Rapido could replicate the sunken rivets?

 

P

 

I was just going to ask "where did they keep the coal"

[rapidoTom]

Hi all,

 

Firstly, thanks to all those who came to see us at Warley, your feedback and enthusiasm on this project is much appreciated! I'm one of the engineers who has worked on this project, so I'm going to have a go at answering some of the questions from this thread so far. Please bear in mind that the 'productionised' CAD is not finalised yet, so pretty much everything I say here is what we are planning, rather than the final specification and may not make it to production.

 

Frame shapes - we have drawn up the deeper frames to go behind the dumb buffers, as well as the shallower ones on the original batches

 

Someone asked about the J79 - never say never, but there are a lot of differences, including footplate, chassis, cab etc. The wheelbase is actually further forward on those locos too so it would need a different mechanism as well (although the wheelbase on the J78 does start in the same place as the Y7).

 

DCC sound - we are planning to offer this factory fitted

 

No 985 as preserved - there are a number of tooling differences that would be needed for this one, including smokebox, pipework and buffers. We're certainly not against it though... we would hope in the future to do another run with some other possible tooling variations as well, if the first batch sells well!

 

No. 1310 in the NER period - we've called our version "as preserved", the differences are fairly minor though. The vac pipes will hopefully be removable without leaving holes in the bufferbeam, and there are some extra black edging lines in various places that doesn't appear on the preserved one.

 

Flywheels - they do add some true inertia, rather than simulating it with a stay-alive and a decoder. We are trying to fit the biggest one we can! We'll try and keep space for modellers to fit a DCC stay-alive. Stay-alives on DC are tricky, as large enough capacitors are (usually) polarised, so they would only work in one direction (and might explode in reverse without protection diodes!). Non-polarised capacitors may also smooth out the operation of a PWM controller, and we want our models to be compatible with everyone's layout control systems.

 

Hope that helps!

 

Tom

[Steamport Southport]

On 26/11/2022 at 09:14, jamieb said:

I'd predicted this coming from Accurascale to complement the chaldrons 

I wonder how the guy trying to sell the Connoisseur kit on eBay for £200 feels about this? 

 

Got one recently for the price of a little more than if you knocked a zero off that!

 

I don't even really model the LNER apart from a little dabble but thought it was too good a price to miss. I think it was something daft like £25. Bargains are still out there.

 

 

That lined green preserved one is a possibility and would go with my Bachmann Joem.

 

 

Jason

[wilks]

I think this a really great choice of loco to model. I will be looking to purchase one but not sure which livery. I quite like the NCB version with the stove pipe chimney and the wooden weather protection on the back of the cab.

 

My question to Rapido is whether it will be easy to convert to EM? e.g drop in wheelsets for instance.

 

I have built a Connoiseur kit Y7 - it makes up a lovely model. 

[GeoffBird]

I shall certainly purchase 1310 as I had a chance as a memeber of LUURS to fire it after it arrived at the Middlegton mid 60s.  A nice engine but a bit small to bring three mineral wagons up from Balm Road sidings to the yard. 

[MarcD]

How easy would they convert them to P4?

Marc 

[Captain Kernow]

1 hour ago, MarcD said:

How easy would they convert them to P4?

Marc 

I was wondering about this and also the ease of conversion of others, especially the Hunslet 0-6-0ST.

 

I suspect it will depend on whether one can easily separate the chassis from the body and whether 1/8" axles are used (or at least 3mm ones).

 

After my experience with the Model Rail/Rapido 16XX pannier (a loco which I was very, very much looking forward to, but which I ended up selling on to someone else), I have some reasonable doubts about this, but we'll have to see.

 

[Mark Dickerson]

I suspect I will wait for the second round and see if 68088 shows up rather than alter 68089 - the latter will just have to have a spurious reallocation. There's just something about a mid-C20th. 0-4-0t passenger loco... 😉

[Porcy Mane]

3 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

I suspect it will depend on whether one can easily separate the chassis from the body and whether 1/8" axles are used (or at least 3mm ones).

 

Like you, I'm hoping it's not to difficult to separate the entire body from the chassis. Where we differ is, I'm hoping that it comes with 2mm axles so as the wheel centre can be kept in proportion. I suspect it will be a 2mm axle if the cads (I realise there at the very early stages) are anything to go off, but I feel it in my water.

 

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hugh_llewelyn_1310_(6966652794).jpg

 

Depending on the design of the model I suspect Mr High level will be looking at it once he gets the AB chassis sorted.

[rogerzilla]

Could do a Beamish tie-in, since they're building a new one?

[Worsdell forever]

5 minutes ago, rogerzilla said:

Could do a Beamish tie-in, since they're building a new one?

 

No, that's a class K/Y8, the really tiny one.

 

https://www.lner.info/locos/Y/y8.php

[wilks]

7 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

I was wondering about this and also the ease of conversion of others, especially the Hunslet 0-6-0ST.

 

I suspect it will depend on whether one can easily separate the chassis from the body and whether 1/8" axles are used (or at least 3mm ones).

 

After my experience with the Model Rail/Rapido 16XX pannier (a loco which I was very, very much looking forward to, but which I ended up selling on to someone else), I have some reasonable doubts about this, but we'll have to see.

 

I would prefer the axle size to be a whole number 2mm or 3mm as you can easily buy steel rod of this size of the shelf. Also the axle needs to be full length for ease of conversion.