Jump to content
 

Heljan LNER 2-8-0+0-8-2T U1 Garratt


AY Mod
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Ian Hargrave said:

Bling ! Bling !  And to think I ascended the Lickey on Wednesday evening in an XC voyager ( then running 20 minutes late ). It was not a success there.The one hope I have for this is that it doesn’t meet with the disasters that their LMS BG did some years ago.A bold and brave venture which hopefully will be a success 

I have a couple of first release LMS Garratts. I hoped to replace them with the updated versions but there was always something else demanding the cash. With Ben Jones licking Heljan into shape, I’m hopeful that these will be good. The O2s aren’t far off; they’ll give us an idea of what to expect, although the only complaint I have about the earlier O2s is the odd finish. A Gresley O1 would be very welcome, Heljan!

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Whenever I show people footage of my layout, my sound/ smoke/ firebox glow fitted BG is what I go for first. I’ve not had any problems with mine (unlike my first LBR loco), and the only issue I have is lacking a long enough rake of coal wagons and LMS brake wagon to go with it. I don’t even model the areas they worked- my rule 1 application is that they worked cross-country coal services to the south coast, requiring them to cross GWR and SR rails. No idea if that’s true or not. 
 

My only surprises with this are that it’s taken so long to release and that it doesn’t come with steam built in. It won’t need two decoders, two speakers in each bogie might sound good but I consider the chuff to come from the chimney anyway.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
31 minutes ago, ovbulleid said:

I don’t even model the areas they worked-

Ironically as an LNER (NE) area modeller, the LMS BG is the one I could justify, not the U1, as they ran through to York and - reportedly - occasionally further north to Teesside. Definitely photos of them on shed at York. But, as I said before, I model in N, and my long-standing EOI with Hattons for an N LMS BG is obviously ever going to result in anything. Unless Heljan want to go it alone… (hint hint).

RT

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
57 minutes ago, No Decorum said:

I have a couple of first release LMS Garratts. I hoped to replace them with the updated versions but there was always something else demanding the cash. With Ben Jones licking Heljan into shape, I’m hopeful that these will be good. The O2s aren’t far off; they’ll give us an idea of what to expect, although the only complaint I have about the earlier O2s is the odd finish. A Gresley O1 would be very welcome, Heljan!


I think there’s one in preparation isn’t there ?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
5 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

Silly question, but wouldn't it have been better to run chimney first on a 1:38, to try and help keep the firebox crown covered?

Not necessarily. Going backwards uphill, if you keep the water just visible in the gauge glass, you know the crown will covered when you get to the top and the boiler levels out. Not so much of a problem on the Lickey where the gradient merely eases at the the top of the incline, but can be an issue if there's a summit. The Bluebell has that problem at Holden summit near East Grinstead - the line goes from 1/55 up to 1/60 down in a very short distance.

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ian Hargrave said:


I think there’s one in preparation isn’t there ?

Oooo! That would be lovely. I haven’t heard of it. I remain on tenterhooks. The second batch of O2s was cancelled. Then reinstated and with improvements. Good on yer, Ben! I ordered two straight away. Then my retailer had difficulty ordering from Heljan. Then everything went quiet. It turned out that there was trouble at t’factory. Then they got going again. Then the O2 thread doesn’t seem to attach much comment. Finally, I hear they are not all that far away. I live in hope that when these great machines  appear, sense will prevail and everyone will order oodles of them. Ben and Heljan will then say, “Hm. Obviously a Gresley O1 would be a goer. Let’s get started!”

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Have I got it round my neck or wasn't the prototype U1 essentially two O2s running back to back? (mechanically speaking). In which case, a very clever choice by the manufacturer as they can reap the benefit from the development of their earlier models, commonality of parts, etc.

 

All power to Heljan's elbows in continuing to invest in the UK OO RTR steam market.

  • Like 5
  • Agree 8
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
21 hours ago, RichardT said:

Wow. The U1 is such a bonkers choice it deserves to succeed - and will probably do so, especially given the 2025 centenary.  I was almost tempted myself as I model LNER (ex NER) - but in N! (But instead I’ve ordered a Rapido Y7 - if I’m going to dabble in 4mm it’s going to have to be a micro, not with a loco bigger than my baseboard…)

 

But I do have some sympathy with the cri de cœur raised above - all the core everyday locos that aren’t produced in 4mm, let alone 2mm, of which I’d buy multiples! (V3 tank anyone?) I suspect the manufacturers don’t get these requested because the fact is most railway modellers don’t actually know very much about railways - they just want shiny big rtr toys to trundle round the loft. I look forward to seeing a procession of completely unrealistic goods trains hauled by U1s on exhibition tailchasers from 2025 onwards. And good luck to them. The pity is that at one time those gaps would be filled by kits, but no longer. And please don’t say “3D printing” - for steam locos that’s promised a lot but delivered very little, especially as many designers don’t seem to give any thought as to how the body shells they produce might be motorised, or stand up to operation (e.g. incorporating fragile bits like buffers and boiler fittings into a one-piece shell).  Anyway, going OT now. Good luck Heljan.

 

RichardT

 

I have a 00 gauge ‘Mk1’ Bachmann V3 2-6-2T that is getting on for 30 years old, which still runs perfectly - split chassis design notwithstanding. When it came out, it was a revelation in terms of quality and detail. I took it to show a work colleague in Hudson House who was suitably impressed. Of course the detail is a little dated now but I wouldn’t replace it

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

Ohh - don't!!

 

Unless you want one with a different wheel arrangment at each end, plus a rear unit with half a bunker and half an oil tank!

 

CJI

 

You’ve been criticising KR models for years You don’t like them. We know. So give it a rest now, eh? 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Agree 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, D6767 said:

 

You’ve been criticising KR models for years You don’t like them. We know. So give it a rest now, eh?

 

No chance - praise or criticism, I speak as I find. KRM seem to have the gift of b*llsing-up whatever they touch.

 

Nonetheless, I have a DHP1 on order from them, and I will sing their praises, loud and long, if it turns out to be an accurate and fully-functional model.

 

I would love to have been able to do the same for 10100, but it had to go back - being such a hotch-potch of different periods.

 

CJI.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m pretty sure the WR borrowed it in the 50s (after the Wath electrification) to trial on the gradients in the West Country. It looked a little odd on the single track china clay branches!

Im sure I didn’t just dream this…..

  • Round of applause 1
  • Funny 5
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TomJ said:

I’m pretty sure the WR borrowed it in the 50s (after the Wath electrification) to trial on the gradients in the West Country. It looked a little odd on the single track china clay branches!

Im sure I didn’t just dream this…..

If you want to run it on a GWR branch, just use rule 1 !

  • Agree 2
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So all we need now to complete the Lickey Banking Trio is 9F 2-10-0 92079 fitted with a headlamp............easy-peasy compared to the other two!

 

I know Heljan said it was a big announcement it I had no idea it was going to be this big! Not for me, but still - wow!!

 

1 hour ago, TomJ said:

I’m pretty sure the WR borrowed it in the 50s (after the Wath electrification) to trial on the gradients in the West Country. It looked a little odd on the single track china clay branches!

Im sure I didn’t just dream this…..

 

I knew nothing about DHP1 until an article and pics appeared in an issue of 'Classic Diesels and Electrics' magazine in the late '90s - its existence came as quite a surprise! I think I've had that dream too but it wasn't vivid enough to want to take the plunge......

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...