Scottish Models Required

[jbg06003]

Add my vote for the 439 - and also for the Pickersgill 4-4-0 passenger. Both very useful for Scottish BLT modellers - and not just for the Caley.

 

Can I also suggest the J36 (or really giving the game away) the wonderfully elegant D41. All those hundreds of SECR modellers take note.

 

But to echo Caledonian sentiments - we really need a truly Scottish loco to completely set the scene.

 

As someone involved in the plastics industry I'm aware of the commitment required, all I would advise is that it is not done as a half-hearted exercise - dimensionally accurate and capture the feel - you can sell the model for years. However, I feel that we are beginning to revisit that old argument which always appeared when the lack of RTR EMU stock was raised and look how long that took be addressed.

[Bob Reid]

Hows about you describe it in words for those of us who blinked and missed it?

 

All I could think of was a couple of Jumbo's

[Guest Max Stafford]

That was worse than my Yorkshire gag Bob.

Back to the script though. I'm thinking that the standard 5'0" Scottish goods loco had a very similar wheelbase for the most part, e.g Caley Jumbos, Highland Barneys etc. It's possible that a generic chassis may well do for a number of NB, CR, HR and possibly even G&SW classes without significant material compromise.

 

Dave.

[Caledonian]

I remember we once had a similar conversation about Atlantics and the potential for different models using the same chassis, but it was pointed out that the real cost lies in the body shell, which is why I think we need to focus on something specific and at least as an initial exercise promote the 439.

 

We've heard on other threads how the Southern group(s?)successfully lobbied for what they wanted this way and I think its fair to say that Hornby's 2010 announcements show the same thing. There's been pressure for a while for something (other than Pacifics) for Eastern region; bedevilled by a lack of standardisation. However if anybody could be said to have got their act together and made a decent case it was the "Great Eastern" crowd. The L1 and B17 were both useful engines but they are most useful for London and East Anglia.

 

We need to do the same and rather than run through lots of permutations and potential candidates, focus on the one loco which is both distinctively Scottish, calculated to be most useful right across Scotland, and therefore most viable.

[Jamie]

We need to do the same and rather than run through lots of permutations and potential candidates, focus on the one loco which is both distinctively Scottish, calculated to be most useful right across Scotland, and therefore most viable.

 

So have we cut that down to Caley 0-4-4T / 0-6-0 now?

I don't think the NB types spread as far post-grouping out of their home turf - could be wrong.

 

Again, logically, the 0-6-0 would make a better choice as it isn't as "branch" or "station pilot" stereotyped, whilst the 0-6-0 could cover most bases.

 

However, taking the logical hat off and putting the impulse buyer hat on, the 0-4-4T probably wins that one.

[Guest Max Stafford]

My thoughts weren't intended to distract from the fact that the 439 is the most logical step Stuart, I remain 100% behind that as the 'first push'.

Incidentally Jamie, I believe a couple of J36s found their way to Ayr sometime around 1960!

 

Dave.

[pH]

My thoughts weren't intended to distract from the fact that the 439 is the most logical step Stuart, I remain 100% behind that as the 'first push'.

Incidentally Jamie, I believe a couple of J36s found their way to Ayr sometime around 1960!

 

Dave.

J37s at Ayr, Dave. The J36s were at Ardrossan.

[Guest Max Stafford]

Thanks Peter. Happy to be put right by someone closer to the action than I could ever be!

 

Dave.

[Russ (mines a pint)]

However, taking the logical hat off and putting the impulse buyer hat on, the 0-4-4T probably wins that one

It'd certainly result in a Ballachulish line layout for me, the 439s went up there too though on goods! + 2MT and green 27- job sorted !

which is why I think we need to focus on something specific and at least as an initial exercise promote the 439.

You are quite right in many respects, I (reluctantly )potentially agree that there is more CR/LMS route mileage than the NBR/LNER possibilites, and more spreadover for the BR era.

Just supposing a 439 and the 'passenger tank' where produced- what would you, particularly passenger stock! run with it?

[Caledonian]

It'd certainly result in a Ballachulish line layout for me, the 439s went up there too though on goods! + 2MT and green 27- job sorted !

 

You are quite right in many respects, I (reluctantly )potentially agree that there is more CR/LMS route mileage than the NBR/LNER possibilites, and more spreadover for the BR era.

Just supposing a 439 and the 'passenger tank' where produced- what would you, particularly passenger stock! run with it?

 

Staniers to start with, especially if Hornby or Bachmann could finally be persuaded to make all sorts of people north and south of the border happy by producing non-gangwayed stock - and generally speaking there's that classic shot of one working the Killin line in the snow with a mixed train comprising one Stanier coach, one steel bodied mineral, one five plank wagon, and a brake.

[Guest Max Stafford]

The other signature coach type for the BR era in Scotland is the Thompson non-gangwayed stock, mostly built in 1950-51 and seen all over the system, often behind a 439!

 

Dave.

[sulzer27jd]

Living just a short distance from the former Strathmore line and surrounded by it's branch lines I would certainly support a RTR 439. I have built a couple from DJH kits but these could do with a refurb.

 

Whilst group standard locos can be used in Scotland and round these parts Forfar had an allocation of Crabs and a 4F, Dundee had a couple of Black 5's, plenty V2's, B1's etc there is nothing that would stamp the location onto a model more than a pre-group 0-6-0. So I would be voting for a Caley Jumbo or a J37. (or both!!)

 

The downside for me is the lack of pre-group locos is the only thing preventing me from moving periods backwards and that would mean lots of V2's and A2's - oh dear!

 

J

[Dick Turpin]

As well as suiting the needs of as many Scottish region modellers as possible, the choice to press for should have the potential to sell more generally. There is a Malcolm Root picture of a 439 in this year's Bachmann calendar, and very impressive it looks too in its CR blue livery. I can imagine that such a model sitting in any model shop showcase would draw the eye straight to it, so I personally think that you could be on to a winner with this one.

 

Otherwise, as an LNER modeller, I would be happy to support any NBR prototype. I have heard that D34 Glen Douglas is no longer part of the National Collection. Maybe it might be an idea to investigate whether the Glasgow Transport Museum (if they are still the owners) might be open to some sort of limited special production run in similar fashion to the recent City of Truro; just a thought.

 

James.

[sulzer27jd]

I have heard that D34 Glen Douglas is no longer part of the National Collection. Maybe it might be an idea to investigate whether the Glasgow Transport Museum (if they are still the owners) might be open to some sort of limited special production run in similar fashion to the recent City of Truro; just a thought.

 

James.

 

No doubt somebody will correct us all, but my understanding was that it remains part of the Scottish collection but is at SRPS Bo'ness on loan.

 

Both a Scott or a Glen would be useful engines with long pedigree, multiple variations over the years and a number of different liveries.

 

J

[64B]

Add my vote for the 439 - and also for the Pickersgill 4-4-0 passenger. Both very useful for Scottish BLT modellers - and not just for the Caley.

 

Can I also suggest the J36 (or really giving the game away) the wonderfully elegant D41. All those hundreds of SECR modellers take note.

 

But to echo Caledonian sentiments - we really need a truly Scottish loco to completely set the scene.

 

As someone involved in the plastics industry I'm aware of the commitment required, all I would advise is that it is not done as a half-hearted exercise - dimensionally accurate and capture the feel - you can sell the model for years. However, I feel that we are beginning to revisit that old argument which always appeared when the lack of RTR EMU stock was raised and look how long that took be addressed.

 

 

It would be great to have any of the models so far suggested '439, J36, Pickersgill 4-4-0, D41. For me first and second choice would be '439 and J36.

regards

Neil

[Guest Max Stafford]

We appear to have reached a consensus with great speed, which is a credit to all. We now need to turn our energies to an effective lobbying of the manufacturers. I suggest Bachmann for the 439. Once Hornby realise there that a number carried names, they'll be falling over themselves to do a J36!

 

Dave.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

And what resounding names those J36s carried, I'll have a couple of double headers: French Horne in the evening, Somme Haig as a nightcap...

 

Regarding the 439, is the class 92 similar enough to be made as a variant? Anything to strengthen the case by providing variations on the base model.

[Guest Max Stafford]

As I understand it, the 439 class was simply a 92 class without the condensing gear required for operation on the L&D system. So I think it's reasonable to consider it as an option.

 

Dave.

[Caledonian]

According to my 1954 Ian Allan;

 

19 class with railed coal bunkers introduced 1895 (total 2)

92 class, introduced 1897 developed from 29 class (presumably misprint for 19 class)with larger tanks and highsided coal bunkers; both classes originally fitted for condensing on Glasgow Central Low Level Line (total 6)

 

439 or Standard Passenger Class (total 59)

 

Then there were the four Beattock Bankers - with cast iron front buffer beams

 

And another 10 post-grouping variants

 

These, obviously, are just the ones which made it through to March 1954 and the outward differences clearly don't amount to much.

[Jamie]

I don't know if pointing a specific idea to a specific manufacturer is worth it. A good business prospect should hold regardless. There's probably an argument for either company, though the M7 shouldn't be forgotten for precedence.

 

Now, the thread does seem to have converged quickly - as long as that's due to everything being said and it's a done deal and not that there's only a dozen individuals interested and we're all of similar thought!

 

The poster who mentions the Scottish preserved locos could have a point. Glasgow will shortly be getting a new transport museum (bit of a carbuncle IMO, but that's neither here nor there) to house those from the Kelvin Hall. Perhaps the City Council could be persuaded to think about it as a commemorative issue? Caley Single, Jones Goods, whichever!

[Caledonian]

I think we now have to face up to practicalities. Its very encouraging that we seem to have come so quickly to a consensus on the 439; yes, there are other very worthy candidates, but I've no doubt they'll follow if everybody does that clever trick with co-locating their money and their mouth and thus proving to the manufacturers that there is a viable market for distinctively Scottish locomotives.

 

However, how do we translate this amity into a campaign, or more precisely how do we mobilise all the other Scottish modellers who haven't yet participated in this thread to enlist their support for the 439 project so that when we go to Messrs Bachmann and Hornby with this wizard wheeze, we can demonstrate the strength of the support for a model of this iconic locomotive?

[Pennine MC]

 

Now, the thread does seem to have converged quickly - as long as that's due to everything being said and it's a done deal and not that there's only a dozen individuals interested and we're all of similar thought!

 

 

I've hovered a few times and I think I'd have to support the two Caley types (0-4-4T and 0-6-0); the latter would easily be my favourite although I'd probably succumb to the former once I'd had one in my mitts (and both might not be asking too much)

 

Dave mentioned non-corridor stock and *if* that is seriously ever on the agenda, I would agree that the Thompson variety has a lot going for it

[darrel]

Glen Douglas is to be returned to the museum of transport when the new museum opens.

the shop in the present museum is rubbish unless u like pencils and bouncy balls. the new museum also looks like crap. the cars are to be mounted on the wall 20 foot up the bicycles will be hanging from the roof. and the ship models will be on a moving conveyor belt, like a maritime version of the generation game. queen Mary QE2 cuddly toy.

[Guest Max Stafford]

Part of the general 'dumbing down' of British museums these days - they seem to be geared to the entertainment of ADD kids these days, with lots of flashing lights and pushy buttons rather than actual thinking and learning. I suspect No 103 will be painted red and named James before too long. 828 had the sense to scarper when it had the chance...!

 

Dave.

[karabuni]

Locos are not really my thing, but how about trying OO Works in Robertsbridge, East Sussex.

 

His RTR locos are not that much more expensive than Hornby & Bachmann ones, and the proprietor has Scottish connections. A run of 100 - 200 is the sort of thing he does.

 

 

Barry

Cambrian Models.