Blandford Forum

[250BOB]

Hi Guys,

If one of you out there has a model of the new Hornby loco "Blandford Forum".....can you tell me if it has the valances still fitted that are at the front of the cylinders, please.

Thanks..............Bob

[darren01]

HI Bob

Having looked through my books ,it looks like the side valances seem to have been removed during the early 50's , So I do not believe that Branford Forum should be carry them ,as she is fitted with a 5500gl tender that was given to her in 1961-64 , when she was withdrawn

I did bring this up on the Hornby area on here about this a while back.

Darren

[250BOB]

HI Bob

Having looked through my books ,it looks like the side valances seem to have been removed during the early 50's , So I do not believe that Branford Forum should be caring them ,as she is fitted with a 5500gl tender that was given to her in 1961-64 , when she was withdrawn

I did bring this up on the Hornby area on here about this a while back.

Darren

 

Yes Darren, thats quite correct, I also beleive they were removed in the early 50's. Today I was looking at a model of Dorchester in a boxed set, they are still fitted on that model, hence my question, are they still fitted on the current Hornby Blandford Forum model.???

I would like a model without the valances.

Cheers...........Bob

[ed 66 plant]

BOB,

HAVE JUST TRAWLED THRO, MY S SND D VOLUMES AND THE VALANCES HAD ALL BEEN REMOVED BY 1954--FOR EASE OF MAINTENANCE I BELIEVE.

I ASSUME IT SHOULD BE RELATIVELY SIMPLE TO REMOVE THE SPAM CAN VALANCES BECAUSE SOME RECENT CHINESE MADE VERSIONS ARE MINUS THE SAME.

THAnkyou for the info. ref 34107 BLANDFORD FORUM TENDER--VIA YOUR FRIENDS INPUT--THAT WOULD BE WRONG FOR THE MID 1950,S

REGARDS, ED

[Guest Belgian]

"Blandford Forum"* certainly lost the valances before the tender was cut-down, there's a photo of it in "The Book of the West Country and Battle of Britain Pacifics" on page 37 illustrating this (on 30 July 1960).

 

JE

 

* Has any engine had its name spelt in so many ways? Above it's quoted as "Branford Forum" and the SeMG has managed "Blnford Froum" (from "Horby"!)

[darren01]

HI All

Here is a photo of Blandford Forum :http://trains.and.buses.of.the.60s.fotopic.net/p25151854.html

Darren

[John M Upton]

Hattons pics show the model as being fitted with them (naughty Hornby... naughty!) but from memory they are very easily removable being just a small glued on piece of plastic with only some very minor cleaning up of glue residue on the frame behind required.

[autocoach]

I know this is a thread for Blandford Forum, but does anyone have a link to modifying an early WC to the as built straight cab profile.

 

thx

[ed 66 plant]

HI EVERYONE,

MANY THANKS TO ALL OF YOU WHO TOOK THE TIME AND TROUBLE TO REPLY TO THE BLANDFORD FORUM VALANCE QUERY--I HAD ASKED BOB TO POSE THE QUESTION FOR ME--I AM LEARNING HOW TO USE THE FORUM!!!

THE RESULT OF THIS HAS BEEN--

 

I HAVE PURCHASED 34042,DORCHESTER SPIT FROM THE R2908 CHILCOMPTON SET--THIS TICKS NEARLY ALL THE BOXES FO ME--(MODELLING1955/6/7)

 

# EARLY BR EMBLEM

# NO SPEEDO

# NO AWS

# SHEDDED VARIOUSLY AT BATH/EASTLEIGH/BOURNEMOUTH

 

BUT WITH VALANCES IN FRONT OF THE CYLINDERS

THRO. THIS FORUM I NOW KNOW HOW TO REMOVE--THANKYOU.

I WAS ALSO ALERTED TO THE CUT DOWN TENDER ON B. FORUM--THANKYOU

BEST REGARDS,

ED

[Graham_Muz]

I know this is a thread for Blandford Forum, but does anyone have a link to modifying an early WC to the as built straight cab profile.

 

thx

 

Autocoach

 

I have completed this conversion on a number of occasisons now I have covered it online in a number places, Firstly on my workbench blog here , secondly on the old version of RMweb here and finally on the Southern E Group website here

 

The result looks like this (note that 21C102/3 have also been modified with short smoke deflectors)

 

[Graham_Muz]

Hattons pics show the model as being fitted with them (naughty Hornby... naughty!) but from memory they are very easily removable being just a small glued on piece of plastic with only some very minor cleaning up of glue residue on the frame behind required.

 

John is correct the valences are not part of the main body moulding and simply glued in place, so it is a relatively easy modification to remove them if required.

[ed 66 plant]

"Blandford Forum"* certainly lost the valances before the tender was cut-down, there's a photo of it in "The Book of the West Country and Battle of Britain Pacifics" on page 37 illustrating this (on 30 July 1960).

 

JE

 

* Has any engine had its name spelt in so many ways? Above it's quoted as "Branford Forum" and the SeMG has managed "Blnford Froum" (from "Horby"!)

I believe it was also named simply "Blandford" up to 1952?

Ed

[bike2steam]

This is an interesting thread about 'our' loco, any mention of Blandford always helps.

[28XX]

John is correct the valences are not part of the main body moulding and simply glued in place, so it is a relatively easy modification to remove them if required.

... but modellers should not have to do it when they have parted with such a lot of dosh, when the research is so easy to do, when it will have no impact on those using set-track, and it would save Hornby a few Yen in skipping the step in the build-up process.

[Graham_Muz]

I believe it was also named simply "Blandford" up to 1952?

Ed

 

Ed, yes you are correct, October 1952 to be a little more precise.

 

... but modellers should not have to do it when they have parted with such a lot of dosh, when the research is so easy to do, when it will have no impact on those using set-track, and it would save Hornby a few Yen in skipping the step in the build-up process.

 

I agree with your sentiment but can also understand how such errors can easliy creap in to a process especially on a model where so many varients / details were different within the same class. I am still impressed at the level Hornby has gone to with its moulds to allow for so many variations.

eg:

2 different cab widths

two different safety vale positions

3 different smoke deflector lengths

AWS fittted or not

Front valances fitted ot not (sometimes )

Speedo fitted or not

Smoke box ring or number plate

4 tender variations

3 differing tender water treatment options

 

regards

[ed 66 plant]

I agree that the variations they can provide to satisfy Tom, Dick and Harry modellers is nothing shoprt of fantastic--I just wonder how good the communication lines are between here and China?

Ed

ps-- message to the overlooker----sorry about my recent communications in capitals--I did not realise this was tantamount to shouting--I do it often to make typing easier for a not very dextrous typist.

Ed

[Barry Ten]

A poor pic but here is my recently acquired Blandford; as is hopefully clear it does indeed have the valences:

 

[Guest Belgian]

I HAVE PURCHASED 34042,DORCHESTER SPIT FROM THE R2908 CHILCOMPTON SET--THIS TICKS NEARLY ALL THE BOXES FO ME--(MODELLING1955/6/7)

 

# EARLY BR EMBLEM

# NO SPEEDO

# NO AWS

# SHEDDED VARIOUSLY AT BATH/EASTLEIGH/BOURNEMOUTH

 

However, Ed, as you are modelling the mid 50s when the WC/BBs saw a lot of changes. 34042 gained a valance behind the chimney and the safety valves changed position and were reduced to two, probably in August 1955.

 

They are a nightmare to get correct. (And don't forget this engine was rebuilt in 1958/59!)

 

JE

[ed 66 plant]

Hi JE,

You live and learn--I have just checked out the aerial pics of 34107 and 34042 as featured on Hattons web site and lo and behold I am now appreciating your drift.Logically therefore I have readjusted my model time period to end just prior to your mentioned mods.!!!!However that leaves me to reconcile that move with running 35018 and 35020 in rebuilt form!! ---etc,etc-- The word compromise looms.

You will gather that I find such delvings absolutely fascinating-- there is no substitute for knowledge--but having determined the details maybe??--thankyou very much for your info.

I am intending to use 34042 on the "Pines",alternating with 73050 (yet to buy) + stanier cr/cream coaches.

Interesting to note that there appears to be no mention of these in the Hornby 2011 catalogue.

thankyou and best regards,

Ed

[S.A.C Martin]

Quick question - is Blandford Forum correct in form for 249 Squadron then, around 1958?

[ed 66 plant]

hi,

all I can determine for the moment is that 34073 recvd AWS/ATC in April 1960, therefore that is on 34107 but should not be on your model ref 1958.

Otherwise I assume the comments previously made ref. Dorchester,34042 equally apply--

 

# moulding behind the chimney

# position and number of safety valves

 

and of course no valences in front of cyls.(as incorrectly on 34107.

regards,

Ed

[Barry Ten]

The back to back of the leading driving wheel of my Blandford is a little tight, tending to clunk against the the frog on curved turnouts - not enough to merit taking it back to the shop, but I'll have to ease the spacing a little and it may be something worth checking if you have the opportunity. I wonder if it's possible to alter a Hornby driving wheel without removing it from the loco?

 

The other thing I noticed, which initially had me concerned, was that the articulated couplings rods behaved in a most bizarre manner as the loco was running, such that they appeared dog-legged rather than straight. I then tested my two other Spams, and found they exhibited the same behaviour, which I evidently hadn't noticed.

[Graham_Muz]

The back to back of the leading driving wheel of my Blandford is a little tight, tending to clunk against the the frog on curved turnouts - not enough to merit taking it back to the shop, but I'll have to ease the spacing a little and it may be something worth checking if you have the opportunity. I wonder if it's possible to alter a Hornby driving wheel without removing it from the loco?

 

Hi Al

 

As I currently run ten of the Hornby light pacifics I can vouch for the fact that this is not too uncommon. The Back to Back is one of the first thing I check with these. I find that its generally not too hard to tweak the Back to Back, usualy outwards a little.

 

The other thing I noticed, which initially had me concerned, was that the articulated couplings rods behaved in a most bizarre manner as the loco was running, such that they appeared dog-legged rather than straight. I then tested my two other Spams, and found they exhibited the same behaviour, which I evidently hadn't noticed.

 

This effect I think is common to them all and is due to the springing of one of the driving axles, but this has never to date ever caused me an issue with running.

[Barry Ten]

I tweaked the back to back of the front wheel as per Graham's suggestion and this has definitely improved the running through points. Oddly I couldn't see any evidence that I'd actually moved the wheels any distance but it must have been sufficient to make a difference - presumbly it was only a thou or so out to begin with.

[Graham_Muz]

Al

 

Glad the advice has helped, I too have found that it a very small amount something in order of a change from 14.2 / 14.3mm to 14.4 / 14.5mm to improve things, andn certainly ahrdly visible to the eye.