Chris Nevard Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 Cracking photo - the low level angle really suits these locos! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Captain Kernow Posted December 31, 2010 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 31, 2010 Is that what CK has in mind for Railex This is how unsubstantiated rumours start!! No, definitely not a working example - just a bit of static lineside furniture, that's what I had in mind! Now, though, if it was in P4, however?...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffers Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 Review of 7F in new Model Rail magazine. You'll have to read it of course but it did point me to the fact that there is a fall-plate between the cab abd the tender which I hadn't seen. Simply lever it up to cover the gap. Looks good. Again well done Bachmann. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Nevard Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 Review of 7F in new Model Rail magazine. You'll have to read it of course but it did point me to the fact that there is a fall-plate between the cab abd the tender which I hadn't seen. Simply lever it up to cover the gap. Looks good. Again well done Bachmann. It's clever! I guess supplied in 'down position' for set track bends(and there's nothing wrong with that)? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmcg Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 Cracking photo - the low level angle really suits these locos! Very kind, the principle I follow after years of being impressed by main line steam in the 1950s and 60s is that anything to evoke the beauty of the trains of the day is OK. My modelling skills aren't quite what they were after various accidents including age. I do rather hope the Somerset and Dorset used transition into banked curves so a 7F could look impressive as they lean into their work... various effects including hardware and steam to come. I can understand why Ivo Peters and many others loved the line and the land through which it passed. Rob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmcg Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 and hey presto clear proof of two 7Fs starting a heavy goods somewhere in the Mendips... might have been fun to watch, rear loco losing its footing a tad.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffers Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 ".....It's clever! I guess supplied in 'down position' for set track bends(and there's nothing wrong with that)?..... Chris - condemned as I am to an end-to-end set-up I can only say it goes through streamline points with no problems even when close-coupled loco and tender. But I guess tight curves might be an issue. Enhances the look though. Am I correct in thinking the 7F did not carry front steps or drain pipes from the front cylinders? This is an oblique reference to the review in Model Rail. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JZ Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Am I correct in thinking the 7F did not carry front steps or drain pipes from the front cylinders? Correct. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffers Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Thanks Julian - I thought so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmcg Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Um, 7Fs have drainpipes below the front cylinders, as do all convential steam locomotives, as water would wreck cylinders if allowed to condense. Water being incompressible, it is expelled usually by steam via cylinder drain cocks, often seen after the loco has been stationary for any length of time, especially in cool weather. 7F drainpipes are conventional but angled to keep the outlet below platform level, so far as I can know. Best, Rob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JZ Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 The arrangement on the 7F is different to other loco's that have been modelled. What they have is two 'pots' under each cylinder rather than pipework to take the water away. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalo Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 I thought those large pots were snifting valves that allow air into the cylinders when the regulator is shut. There certainly are pipes, presumably for drainage, and steam can be seen issuing from them in some photos. They are mounted further inboard on the cylinders, roughly in line with the outer face of the wheels, and are not so easy to see. However, they are present on the Bachmann model. Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Belgian Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 and hey presto clear proof of two 7Fs starting a heavy goods somewhere in the Mendips... might have been fun to watch, rear loco losing its footing a tad.. That is fantastic Robbie - perhaps this could open a brand-new load of froth - "what we want is realistic smoke and steam effects". Which manufacturer will take this up, as it's the last frontier now we've got realistic models and sound? (By the way, I didn't realise ageing was an "accident", perhaps the medics will one day cure that as well!!!) JE Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffers Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Thanks guys for your comments above. I was alluding to the comment in the Model Rail review that the "extras" bag did not include front footsteps, cylinder drain cocks, cab doors or steam heat pipes. The model does have some cylinder drain pipes. I didn't think that the real locos had front footsteps or steam heat pipes or that the drain pipes were as obvious as, say a Bulleid Pacific. Rob and Chris - your photos are a joy to see. Thanks for posting them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalo Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 ...I was alluding to the comment in the Model Rail review that the "extras" bag did not include front footsteps, cylinder drain cocks, cab doors or steam heat pipes... Must have been a pre-production sample as mine has one steam heating pipe together with a couple of spare tablet catchers and a screw coupling. Mind you, I'm not sure what I'm meant to do with it as I'm fairly certain that I've read that they couldn't be used for passenger services in winter because they lacked steam heating. I haven't seen the review, but it makes me wonder how many people out there are now fitting cab doors and front steps to 'improve' their models Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffers Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Steam heating pipe or vacumn pipe? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalo Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Well, both engine and tender have upright vac pipes alread fitted, and the one in the 'spares' is of the dangling pattern, so I'm guessing it is a heating pipe. However, it is rather crude and there's no sign of a shut-off valve on it. Edit: you can see the fitted vac pipes clearly on Chris and Robbie's photos. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffers Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 buffalo - just had a look in the extras bags in my 7F boxes. You're right - there is a "dangly" thing which must be a steam heating pipe, together with two spare tablet exchange jaws and a mock 3-link coupling. I note that there is a hole in the loco buffer beam to take the steam heating pipe as well. 53809 and 53810 did not have the vac pipe already fitted - had to put them on (there was a vac pipe in the extras bag - but they were fitted on the respective tenders) but 53806 had it already fitted. (Note to oneself - you need to get out more if you are reduced to posting about little things like this. Off to the brewery to get a polypin I think - end of note.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffers Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Ooops - I think the extra hole on the buffer beam is for the 3-link coupling hook. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Nevard Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 You won't need the steam heat pipe that goes below the front buffer beam despite there being a hole for it in the base of the beam. I fitted it before checking prototype photos, it's since been removed. I've still to pluck up courage to get it under the air and drybrush, Must de before it's public outing at the Guildford Show in 2 weeks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Belgian Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Perhaps Bachmann has provided a steam heating pipe and a hole for it in the bufferbeam because the two preserved 7Fs have these fittings . . . certainly Ivo Peters recorded that the only passenger trains on which the 7Fs were used were the Summer Saturday extras, which didn't need heating, so they didn't have them in service. JE Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalo Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Even on the preserved 7Fs it's not so simple The Bachmann hole is correct for 53809 which has the heating pipe mounted below the vacuum pipe, but on 88 (53808), it is on the other side. There is, however, sufficient material and even a hint that the moulds might be set up to allow the pipe to be fitted on the other side. Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmcg Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 Perhaps Bachmann has provided a steam heating pipe and a hole for it in the bufferbeam because the two preserved 7Fs have these fittings . . . certainly Ivo Peters recorded that the only passenger trains on which the 7Fs were used were the Summer Saturday extras, which didn't need heating, so they didn't have them in service. JE Thanks JE, I think we can accept Ivo Peters' word as being, likely ... also the 7Fs could theoretically have been used for holiday traffic all year round as double heading would allow steam heating from the 'train engine', and the 7F doing the hard work over the hills. Certainly they look at home on 1959-62 video clips at Radstock in the 'Heyday of British Steam. Vol 1' DVD, where they are clearly masters of their work, with comfortable-looking crew and engines still in apparently excellent nick. I must take a closer look and see if any show signs of steam-heating plumbing, I suspect not. Thanks also for the compliment about smoke and steam effects, my pleasure in painting such things is the result of a mis-spent youth. Rob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmcg Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 You won't need the steam heat pipe that goes below the front buffer beam despite there being a hole for it in the base of the beam. I fitted it before checking prototype photos, it's since been removed. I've still to pluck up courage to get it under the air and drybrush, Must de before it's public outing at the Guildford Show in 2 weeks. When you are in Guilford say hello to the place for me, me mum was born there in 1921, in a house owned by her grandfather who among other things was a director of the Great Northern Railway. Rob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Captain Kernow Posted January 3, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 3, 2011 Thanks JE, I think we can accept Ivo Peters' word as being, likely ... Hi Rob - there's absolutely no possibility that any ex-S&DJR 7F was fitted with steam heating in BR days - there just isn't any documentary evidence to support the notion, so unless you are modelling one of the preserved ones, you are completely right to leave the steam heating pipes off! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.