Guest Max Stafford Posted November 28, 2009 Share Posted November 28, 2009 Agreed. The J39 is still a nice basic tooling. Which is why I have two bodies and Comet/Markits gubbins sitting in the reception roads of the workbench...! I'd still have a J15 though as there's just something nice about them and the East Anglian territory they frequented. Dave. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulG Posted November 30, 2009 Share Posted November 30, 2009 To create the "feel" of a 1950s/early 1960 East Anglian based model layout I believe you need a high proportion of former GE steam locos. An odd J-39, WD 2-8-0, Britannia and K-2 yes, but plenty of former GE classes such as B-12, D-16, E-4, J-15, J-17, J-19, J-20, N-7, 2-4-2Ts and 0-6-0Ts. I haven't started building my Mallard "Claud" kit yet - so please Hornby/Bachmann, add one to your list!!! Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium great northern Posted November 30, 2009 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 30, 2009 I guess as I started this whole thing I'd better contribute something. Some will remember that I wrote to Simon Kohler at the end of those 30 pages of discussion. What I tried to do was to suggest strategies to him which could result in "snowball" sales over a period of time. That is what has happened IMO with the Southern recently. They asked first for big green glamour locos. Then they bought them in shedloads. Then they asked for something a bit less glamorous, but still with names ( King Arthurs and Schools)and bought enough of them to make Hornby's directors think "we're on a winner here". Only then did they ask for, and get, a T9. I bet if they had gone straight for that they would have stood no chance. That's why I suggested we suppress our natural desire to say " I want...." and identify locos that had that certain "wow" factor which might persuade people who really had no need or justification for one to open their wallets anyway. Get the ball rolling first is still my view, and do it in a realistic manner. As to 0.6.0's, the J15 was the one most said they might buy even if it didn't really fit in with their plans, so I tried to make a business case out linking it to Hornby's Britannia and Brush type 2, and arguing that retooled B12 and B17 could follow. We now have the 04 on the way.That could now logically lead to a D11, though I suppose more likely from Bachmann, as they will have the tender already. Now, if Hornby announce a J15, the logical 4.4.0 for them might become a D16...... I notice that was excluded from the MRE poll because there were very few left in 1959. That seems to me to be a bizarre argument. Why ignore 50 years of previous history? Without wanting to widen this discussion too far, or re-invent the wheel by going through the whole process again, how about this for a business case? A D16 gives these options:- A version in original GE blue for the collectors. LNER black and green Roundtop and Belpaire firebox. With and without decorative valances. Limited edition with tender for oil firing. LNER green with British Railways on tender, again for collectors. And of course two BR black versions with early/late crest. Oh, and lined and unlined black of course. How's that for a business case to get the most out of your tooling? All on the same chassis of course, and with modern methods none of the variants I have suggested would be that expensive. I could repeat the exercise for other locos, indeed I already have for the D11. I strongly believe that it is this kind of presentation that is most likely to get results. And don't forget the "wow" factor! Gilbert Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted November 30, 2009 Share Posted November 30, 2009 I really feel Gilbert could be onto something here. Whether the D16 carries full apple green or plain unlined black, there are enough decorative features on this loco to make it very attractive and give it that 'Wow' factor. Larry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Max Stafford Posted November 30, 2009 Share Posted November 30, 2009 I'd certainly be up for a 'Claude', especially a 'super' circa 1953. The huge variety of livery and form really does offer considerable commercial potential, there can be no denial of that! Dave. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 I really feel Gilbert could be onto something here. Whether the D16 carries full apple green or plain unlined black, there are enough decorative features on this loco to make it very attractive and give it that 'Wow' factor. Larry Certainly much more attractive than my attempts using a shortened B12... And yes, I think Great Northern's case is incredibly compelling. In fact - I'm convinced in all honesty. It does have that "Wow" factor and would certainly make the most of the chassis and, perhaps related - the tender could be reused behind a newly tooled B12/3... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilM Posted December 8, 2009 Share Posted December 8, 2009 Is there a standard GE pattern tender that would also fit a retooled, loco driven, B17 so that the Sandringhams could be modelled - as I expressed on the original thread there may well be additional sales generated through the many stately homes covered and the National Trust - with hundreds of thousands of members I would think a useful few hundred additional sales are possible. Talking of the original thread I am still very much up for a J15 or three. It might be enough to tempt me back from the darkside where even though I have become obsessive about another relatively unpopular railroad (the Illinois Central) the number of models on offer is phenomenal! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 The Hornby GER Tender is an abortion as, like all their products from the toy era, it is stretched vertically to give an abnormally high buffer height. The B12 to which it was coupled was also full of compromises, and so not for nothing did railway modellers avoid propretory products at one time. Only the chassis were regarded as useful for re-wheeling and putting under whitemetal bodyline kits. It seems only Hornby cannot see the potential of the B17 with their stately homes and football club names, green livery and three tender types (maybe more?). Larry G. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidw Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 what surprises me is so little noise about a V2. True it's in the current Bachmann range - but good as it was in the past it's old and tired. And true bachman have promised to re-tool one but I for one am very impatient for this. i could see at least 3 or 4 being added to the fleet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 ....what surprises me is so little noise about a V2. True it's in the current Bachmann range - but good as it was in the past it's old and tired. Excuse my niavety, but what exactly is wrong with the current Bachmann V2 that makes it old and tired? Can anyone post pictures on here showing the innacuracies? I ask simply because it looks like an okay model going off illustrations in catalogues. Larry G. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidw Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 The chimney and banjo dome are not quite the right shape. The cartazzi truck has so much daylight under the cab that it ruins the appearance. These issues are fixable - as I 've done - with the couple that I've got but it's not up to the fidelity of the A1 (forthcoming A2), A3 or A4. I know we've been spoilt by these offerings - but the V2's showing its age.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
micklner Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Boiler is joined to the footplate as its all one moulding as its made to cover the chassis block + a split chassis . I have Green Howard the chassis so far has never given any problems. p.s how did you change the Cartazzi truck?? Mick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Thanks David. I am intrigued now thats for sure so. The B1 scrubbed up well so I'm tempted to have a go at a V2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium great northern Posted December 9, 2009 RMweb Premium Share Posted December 9, 2009 Thanks David. I am intrigued now thats for sure so. The B1 scrubbed up well so I'm tempted to have a go at a V2. Hi Larry, Here is one which has had a new chimney and dome, plus a proper cartazzi truck. A Rathbone paint job helps too....... of course besides these changes to the body, there is also the problem of the split chassis. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Here is one which has had a new chimney and dome, plus a proper cartazzi truck. A Rathbone paint job helps too....... of course besides these changes to the body, there is also the problem of the split chassis. Hi, thanks for letting me see the picture. The V2 looks pretty spot on to me. When you say a proper Cartazzi truck, have you fitted new sideframe castings? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Max Stafford Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 One of these is waiting on my future projects list too; Bachmann body with Comet chassis and probably an Alexander tender. Naturally it will have to wait until I've developed my valve gear making skills sufficiently, but it's sure to be a good un when done. Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidw Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 Thanks David. I am intrigued now thats for sure so. The B1 scrubbed up well so I'm tempted to have a go at a V2. I much agree the B1 is an astonishing little model. I just shorted the tender draw bar and it improved immensly Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 The chimney and banjo dome are not quite the right shape. The cartazzi truck has so much daylight under the cab that it ruins the appearance. These issues are fixable - as I 've done - with the couple that I've got but it's not up to the fidelity of the A1 (forthcoming A2), A3 or A4. I know we've been spoilt by these offerings - but the V2's showing its age.. ....and as a latecomer, there has been some recent discussion over the flaw in the Bachmann V2 boiler as a whole. At least one modeller has gone about rectifying this, by sawing out the Bachmann boiler (forward of the firebox, which is OK) and grafting in the barrel from a Hornby A3 which has the correct parallel-plus-taper shape. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidw Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 Yes GK's solution is quite ingenious.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 I'm glad this thread has re-emerged - I was wondering whether I could put forward the case for the LNER's own RTR "Jinty". This, more than anything else, is the biggest gap we have in LNER RTR. The J72 tank engine, welcome though it is, is an older split chassis model and geographically more limited than some of the LNER's other shunters. I feel we should push primarily for the Gresley J50 tank engine, which was one of the more numerous tank engine classes, and very much a necessary model if you model anywhere on the ECML. Previously available from Lima, and scrubs up well with a new chassis and detail parts, but time, money and effort which when compared to the very much available and desirable Jinty and 57XX for the other regions, a lost class. I keep reading about a perceived demand for a J-class tender engine, but looking at what we have in terms of the shunter and all purpose tank engine, I feel the Gresley J50 is the greatest ommission and potentially has the look and desirability that would ensure sales not dissimilar to the Bachmann Jinty or Pannier Tank. In short, I feel it is this locomotive that LNER aficionados should concentrate on pushing for; if we are to push for any locomotive at all, of course. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simon hudson Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 I've just found this thread and found it interesting.I recently bought an off the shelf Scotsman Railroad model and was surprised at the standard of it.The last previous purchse was a Bachmann WD purchased some time in the Ninetees, R-T-R stuff has certainly improved.I used to think nothing of buying a new product and chopping it around etc I did this with the Lima Deltic and Dapol 56 when they where new models (it seems an eon ago)I am biased towards the NE area but as stated a K1 would fit in anywhere I agree about the J21 and J27.(I wouldn't mind a D11 as long as the chassis would fit under my DJH D20 I never could get the B thing to run the usual couldn't balance the 4-4-0 chassis) No one has mentioned the B16's I thought them being based at York in their later years they would have got pretty much all over the system I hope this hasn't come over as a rambling wish list it's just not having bought much off the shelf for a few years and reading the last posts on the old V2 and other loco's I thought as modellers thats what we did bash things about Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluex5 Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 I could froth for lots of things but a B16 would be fine. I have been lusting over the PDK kit but I know I could never do it justice. They were kings of summer excursion traffic as well as signature duties like fish trains. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simon hudson Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 I've got a Nucast B16 2/3 it's been put in the o do draw for years and it looks like a b to build although I recall DJH did the B16/1 but I think the Gresley rebuilds look nice so yes I would be definatley be interested in a R-T-R one Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Max Stafford Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 Can't see this coming before an NE 0-6-0 or Q6 though. Dave. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simon hudson Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 A proper Q6 will do me fine!! I like the look of the Dave Alexander kit haven't seen one in the flesh I kept well away from the old Nucast one for the obvious reasons that would make an ice line up J21 J27 Q6 and Q7 sorry to all you ER modellers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.