ModelRail USTC 0-6-0 Tank Loco Project USA

[dibber25]

S160s visited Tidworth via Ludgershall during WW2, Longmoor military had an S100 after ww2, The Americans Manned Tidworth in WW2, in my version of history, the S100 was there too.

So I've got a USTC liveried S100 on GWR lines

 

But I need an S160, please, please, please.

 

I know you're just waiting till I scratch build one! Anyone know of a RTR chassis with the right wheelbase?

Like the USA tank, the S160 has American bar frames with loads of daylight between frames and boiler. Sadly, there's no RTR chassis of British outline with the right wheels or the 'daylight' arrangement. That's why I went for the DJH kit, but you have to tolerate it being 'HO' scale. Doesn't worry me, as I will have it finished in Alaska RR livery and run it on my North American layout. It's not a high priority for building - it's been with the builder for two years so far. I think there could well be a good deal of interest in a 'OO' ready-to-run S160 but it's too big a project for Model Rail. You'd need a lottery jackpot win to finance anything bigger than a small tank engine these days. (CJL)

[TheQ]

Jackpot the S100 did run on GWR lines (and others), at Tidworth for me. See this thread for details

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/71017-usatc-s160-locomotive-in-7mm-scale-well-thats-the-plan/page-2

[No Decorum]

Like the USA tank, the S160 has American bar frames with loads of daylight between frames and boiler. Sadly, there's no RTR chassis of British outline with the right wheels or the 'daylight' arrangement. That's why I went for the DJH kit, but you have to tolerate it being 'HO' scale. Doesn't worry me, as I will have it finished in Alaska RR livery and run it on my North American layout. It's not a high priority for building - it's been with the builder for two years so far. I think there could well be a good deal of interest in a 'OO' ready-to-run S160 but it's too big a project for Model Rail. You'd need a lottery jackpot win to finance anything bigger than a small tank engine these days. (CJL)

Much as I should like an S160, I can see your point. The USA Tank was a very happy choice and very well executed. As the project proceeded, I could see more variants being introduced to satisfy demand. It must have been a very good feeling.

 

Industrials didn’t seem to do very well in wishlists for ages, mostly because of the variety sharing the votes. Now they’re starting to arrive. Hornby seems to have chosen well with the Sentinel, going by the number being churned out. Another hit for the big H is the little Peckett. One variant sold out at Hatton’s already and I bet they aren’t being produced by the 200 (J94) or 500 (USA).

 

No doubt you’re looking at what is succeeding in 0 scale and what 00 Works is producing. In the latter case, a choice is made of something unlikely to be produced by the big boys, is a runaway success and then gets done by one or other big boy.

 

Whatever you decide upon, I hope you can persuade Bachmann to relent and come on board again. It might happen, after all, Bachy stuff is starting to come through now.

[dibber25]

Much as I should like an S160, I can see your point. The USA Tank was a very happy choice and very well executed. As the project proceeded, I could see more variants being introduced to satisfy demand. It must have been a very good feeling.

 

Industrials didn’t seem to do very well in wishlists for ages, mostly because of the variety sharing the votes. Now they’re starting to arrive. Hornby seems to have chosen well with the Sentinel, going by the number being churned out. Another hit for the big H is the little Peckett. One variant sold out at Hatton’s already and I bet they aren’t being produced by the 200 (J94) or 500 (USA).

 

No doubt you’re looking at what is succeeding in 0 scale and what 00 Works is producing. In the latter case, a choice is made of something unlikely to be produced by the big boys, is a runaway success and then gets done by one or other big boy.

 

Whatever you decide upon, I hope you can persuade Bachmann to relent and come on board again. It might happen, after all, Bachy stuff is starting to come through now.

I watched, largely from the sidelines as first Ben, and then Richard took the brunt of the hard work on the USA tank. I know there were times they didn't enjoy it and for Richard it was particularly difficult as it was a class that he wasn't very familiar with and there was a minefield of detail variations which he had to try and understand. We should acknowledge outside help, too. I know there was some. I don't know who it was. And Bachmann's designers were a great help. There was the inevitable soul-searching about compromises - particularly the odd 'pipe' that was left off because it looked too crude if we put it on. Then there was the 'shall we do this livery or that one?' and do we think we'll sell 750 or should we only do 500 of that variant. Will we ever know if the BMC Longbridge version would have sold better than the one we chose to do instead? It's a learning curve but the biggest thing that I learned was that it's all about making decisions (and persuading people with no interest in model trains that you've made the right decisions) and hoping that you made them right. With the Sentinel and the USA we seem to have succeeded and that makes for a good feeling, especially when the ones with no interest in model trains ask you what you plan to do next.... (CJL)

Edited October 8, 2016 by dibber25

[PrestburyJack]

Whatever you decide upon, I hope you can persuade Bachmann to relent and come on board again. It might happen, after all, Bachy stuff is starting to come through now.

What have Bachmann said then?

[adb968008]

Out of interest, I see the right side bunker window is larger than the left.

This is as per prototype, and correctly modelled on the BR /SR versions.

 

But why would the SR have a larger left bunker window ?, I can't think of any other class of loco modified in this way.

It's a good catch on the model, as 30072/5 and DS237/8 have had modified bunkers / rear windows in preservation, leaving 30064 apparently the only one as "in BR condition" making this quirk of history nearly extinct.

Were the firemen of these locos vertically challenged ?

Edited October 8, 2016 by adb968008

[No Decorum]

What have Bachmann said then?

Bachmann has received a lot of flak for delays in delivering models that have been announced. To deal with the problem, more manufacturing capacity has been negotiated, new announcements paused for a while and (the relevant one) no more special commissions for a while.

 

Judging by the number of locomotives in tooling at the moment, it all seems to be working.

[Captain Kernow]

If anyone is after a 'surefire winner' in the form of a 4mm pannier tank, don't forget the 16XX.

[NHY 581]

Bachmann have produced a great range of Ex Midland Railway locos. At the risk of going even more off topic, the big gap is a Johnson 0.4.4T. Either round top or Belpaire firebox not worried. Used all over the Midland region pre grouping to almost the end of steam. Multiple liveries to choose from.

 

 

What's not to like....

 

Rob.

[stewartingram]

Out of interest, I see the right side bunker window is larger than the left.

This is as per prototype, and correctly modelled on the BR /SR versions.

 

But why would the SR have a larger left bunker window ?, I can't think of any other class of loco modified in this way.

It's a good catch on the model, as 30072/5 and DS237/8 have had modified bunkers / rear windows in preservation, leaving 30064 apparently the only one as "in BR condition" making this quirk of history nearly extinct.

Were the firemen of these locos vertically challenged ?

 

Fireman - bending down whilst shovelling coal. Driver - the Govn'r, one above sees all.....?

 

Stewart

[Steamport Southport]

Bachmann have produced a great range of Ex Midland Railway locos. At the risk of going even more off topic, the big gap is a Johnson 0.4.4T. Either round top or Belpaire firebox not worried. Used all over the Midland region pre grouping to almost the end of steam. Multiple liveries to choose from.

 

 

What's not to like....

 

Rob.

 

Surely Bachmann (or Hornby) would want such a model as a main range model rather than a commission. I think it's inevitable that someone will produce one eventually.

 

Jason

[Roy Langridge]

Out of interest, I see the right side bunker window is larger than the left.

This is as per prototype, and correctly modelled on the BR /SR versions.

 

But why would the SR have a larger left bunker window ?, I can't think of any other class of loco modified in this way.

It's a good catch on the model, as 30072/5 and DS237/8 have had modified bunkers / rear windows in preservation, leaving 30064 apparently the only one as "in BR condition" making this quirk of history nearly extinct.

Were the firemen of these locos vertically challenged ?

 

Larger window is on the driver's side, so I assume it was simply to make sure of a better view run bunker first.

 

Roy

[ChrisH]

Out of interest, I see the right side bunker window is larger than the left.

This is as per prototype, and correctly modelled on the BR /SR versions.

But why would the SR have a larger left bunker window ?, I can't think of any other class of loco modified in this way.

It's a good catch on the model, as 30072/5 and DS237/8 have had modified bunkers / rear windows in preservation, leaving 30064 apparently the only one as "in BR condition" making this quirk of history nearly extinct.

Were the firemen of these locos vertically challenged ?

 

The window is smaller on that side because the sloping section of the bunker is higher, if I remember correctly, that is to give space for the handbrake wheel to turn.

 

It's interesting to note that the green area on the bunker rear still forms a symetrical panel dispite the uneven shape of the bunker.

 

I don,'t know if it's been mentioned, but beware of the Lancing pair of locos, they were LH drive!

 

Chris

[stewartingram]

The story of how this model was done is worthy of a write up in MR surely?

 

Stewart

[dibber25]

The story of how this model was done is worthy of a write up in MR surely?

 

Stewart

Richard did once say that he would write it. However, there are commercial confidences involved in these things and one of the most 'interesting' aspects has been the management of the pricing with the inevitable increase in costs over 4 years - not something that can readily be made public. (CJL)

[Wickham Green]

That’s a clever notion. Related to the USA and I’ve fancied one ever since I saw one at Shildon when all the attention was on the APT-E. It wouldn¹t be cheap, though. Something smaller might be advisable from Model Rail’s point of view. Now, what would pry the wallets open in the same way as the USA Tank?

Surely the 'small' loco that's crying out to be ready-to-runned ( if that's gramatically correct ? ) is the ex Great Eastern J-sixty-whatever sequence ......... widely travelled on LNER metals, allocated as far north as Scotland and not unknown to venture to this side of the Thames  -  so keeping ( almost ) on topic.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Well, I do agree, but then they were common performers on my 'first twenty miles of the Southern end of the ECML' scenario. Others might advocate with equal persuasiveness for such as the Park 0-6-0T, Caledonian, Midland and North Eastern 0-4-4T, and many, many, more small tank locos besides. The success of the choice of the USA tank as a subject, must at least in part be due to its unusual appearance amongst UK steam equipment. (It would only take a hint that it actually ran in my designated area to persuade me to a purchase.) I wonder whether a crane tank - ideally based on an industrial so 'region free' - might similarly possess broad appeal?

 

..the S160 has American bar frames with loads of daylight between frames and boiler. Sadly, there's no RTR chassis of British outline with the right wheels or the 'daylight' arrangement...

 He's right you know. Years ago I had a Bachmann Riddles Austerity 2-8-0 in pieces for a friend to evaluate for potential as an S160 mechanism. No representation of bar frames for a start, and the driving wheelsets have to be replaced. More positively the chassis block is fairly 'skinny' so there would be some daylight between frame top and boiler underside, and the motor and gear train would be neatly concealed in the S160 firebox. But it all came out as better to start from a kit.

[dibber25]

Well, I do agree, but then they were common performers on my 'first twenty miles of the Southern end of the ECML' scenario. Others might advocate with equal persuasiveness for such as the Park 0-6-0T, Caledonian, Midland and North Eastern 0-4-4T, and many, many, more small tank locos besides. The success of the choice of the USA tank as a subject, must at least in part be due to its unusual appearance amongst UK steam equipment. (It would only take a hint that it actually ran in my designated area to persuade me to a purchase.) I wonder whether a crane tank - ideally based on an industrial so 'region free' - might similarly possess broad appeal?

 

 He's right you know. Years ago I had a Bachmann Riddles Austerity 2-8-0 in pieces for a friend to evaluate for potential as an S160 mechanism. No representation of bar frames for a start, and the driving wheelsets have to be replaced. More positively the chassis block is fairly 'skinny' so there would be some daylight between frame top and boiler underside, and the motor and gear train would be neatly concealed in the S160 firebox. But it all came out as better to start from a kit.

 

Yes, I've done that exercise (each time a new RTR 2-8-0 came out) and came to the same conclusion. (CJL)

[sp1]

Just a suggestion for a future project..........

How about a box set of some of the very common open wagons from each of the'Big 4' , of which there is a woeful lack RTR - if chosen carefully this could even mean a common pre-grouping type from one of the constituent companies of the big 4 which survived until BR days, giving a choice of liveries. It could even mean that you could offer say a pack of three with different numbers for each of the 4 companies, the pre-group (which could still run on grouping era layouts), and BR: four wagons, with a host of possibilities for variations?

Edited October 12, 2016 by sp1

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

It's a worthy idea, and with the LNER now - amazingly - relatively well catered for in their designs of standard general merchandise opens (Oxford's six plank, Bachmann's steel high) there's just the three others to cater for. Unfortunately the fact that the manufacturers haven't fallen over each other to produce such things (the only other RTR contender being an Airfix/GMR tooling now with Hornby of a late thirties five plank GMO of a design much like one built by all the Big Four - canny choice) might indicate the problem. We all love things that go chuff chuff, wagons, meh; any old thing will do.

[sp1]

It's a worthy idea, and with the LNER now - amazingly - relatively well catered for in their designs of standard general merchandise opens (Oxford's six plank, Bachmann's steel high) there's just the three others to cater for. Unfortunately the fact that the manufacturers haven't fallen over each other to produce such things (the only other RTR contender being an Airfix/GMR tooling now with Hornby of a late thirties five plank GMO of a design much like one built by all the Big Four - canny choice) might indicate the problem. We all love things that go chuff chuff, wagons, meh; any old thing will do.

'Any old thing will do' - or is this because that is all that is offered?

Looking at old photos of (large) goods yards reveals long lines of these, of different types, with the odd PO wagon, a few vans, and, occasionally the odd 'specialised' wagon (which were probably very rare, but we all have these because they are 'different') - what we need is lots of the more mundane.

[Wickham Green]

It's a worthy idea, and with the LNER now - amazingly - relatively well catered for in their designs of standard general merchandise opens (Oxford's six plank, Bachmann's steel high) there's just the three others to cater for. Unfortunately the fact that the manufacturers haven't fallen over each other to produce such things (the only other RTR contender being an Airfix/GMR tooling now with Hornby of a late thirties five plank GMO of a design much like one built by all the Big Four - canny choice) might indicate the problem. We all love things that go chuff chuff, wagons, meh; any old thing will do.

The old Airfix ( etc.) open wagon body only needs a little refinement to make a good L.M.S. vehicle .... I won't lower the tone of this establishment by commenting on the chassis, though.

 

It wouldn't be so easy to cater for a 'typical' Western open as they stuck with a 16'6'' length for so long and the body style changed a number of times .............. the Southern, on the other hand, standardised on an 8-plank design for most of their opens until Mr.Bulleid arrived on the scene.

[Ian Hargrave]

My impulse purchase of green 30064 has just made its debut .My thanks to the people who pre ordered to sell out status and then failed at the last hurdle and to Kernow who as ever provided excellent service..

 

All the plaudits expressed here are true. This is truly a little miracle,with performance to match its accuracy and exquisite detail. It is a joy to watch its snail like progress around the layout. It has enough clout to shift 4 of the new Hornby Maunsell suburbans,something that an M7 (Hornby ) cannot. This is a model that stands apart from the crowd.

 

Curious that there was a somewhat derogatory discussion on the role of the model railway press not such a long while ago on this forum. Model Rail magazine have just presented the perfect riposte with such a state of the art locomotive.

 

All can be justly proud of the USA tank. Many thanks,gents.

[Steamport Southport]

I seem to remember Chris ruling out wagons as not financially viable.

 

 

 

 

Jason

[dibber25]

The lack of wagons - particularly as commissions from magazines and retailers - is probably due to the fact that it is next to impossible to make any money out of them. Even the limited editions (where the commissioning buyer is only paying for the livery change, not the cost of tooling the wagon) are non-starters because by the time you've added the post packing and handling charge to the cost of the model and taken account of the 20%VAT, you're faced with a final price that is beyond what the market would deem reasonable. (CJL)