Hornby T9 30310 - Wrong Tender.

[toboldlygo]

Having acquired Richard Derry's 'The Book of T9 4-4-0s' for Christmas. I was dismayed to see that it appears Hornby have made a mistake and have supplied T9 30310 (Cat No. R2713/X) with competely the wrong Tender. It should have a 6 wheel tender, not the watercart supplied to be prototypically correct. All the photo's in the book of 310 show it with a six wheel and not a watercart as well. I have emailed Hornby to see if they are aware of this.

[Butler Henderson]

Fitted with a watercart tender in this 1954 picture

http://www.railphotoprints.co.uk/index.php?module=media&pId=102&id=7989&category=gallery/SteamLocomotives/Southern&start=0

 

Also reference exists on the Southern Yahoo Group to a late tender change which returned to it a watercart tender. Hornby are very specific that it is modelled as running from Bournemouth c 1958 and there is a picture of the real loco with a watercart tender on the rear of the packaging outer sleeve.

[Graham_Muz]

Hi Jim

 

From the same book, in the locomotive record section you will notice that 30310 gained tender 297 (a watercart tender) on 14/11/57 so the Hornby model as mentioned above by BH is correct post that date until withdrawn in May 1959

 

regards

[toboldlygo]

Hi Jim

 

From the same book, in the locomotive record section you will notice that 30310 gained tender 297 (a watercart tender) on 14/11/57 so the Hornby model as mentioned above by BH is correct post that date until withdrawn in May 1959

 

regards

 

Oh ######...

[CHARLIE5]

Hi Jim

 

From the same book, in the locomotive record section you will notice that 30310 gained tender 297 (a watercart tender) on 14/11/57 so the Hornby model as mentioned above by BH is correct post that date until withdrawn in May 1959

 

regards

 

Having purchased Derry's book I was left confused as to the correct tender type for 30310. Thankfully, I had a picture of 30310 at Bath Green Park on 17 April 1958 with a watercart tender. I suspected that 297 was refering to a watercart tender but, no where in the book, could I find a list of tender numbers for this type.

[nnich]

If you want a wide splasher T9 which had a watercart tender throughout the 1950's and not just the couple of

years that 30310 is correct for, use Modelmaster pack 4010A which contains complete cabside numbers for 30338

 

I have commented elsewhere that Hornby seem to delight in producing models with a very limited time period

in which they are 'correct', 30310 is one of these and another recent one was M7 number 30031 which was

depicted as a long frame push pull fitted variant when the real one was a result of a combination of 30031 and the long frames

from 30105, I believe - don't have my Bradley volume in front of me. Anyway the resultant hybrid loco only rolled out

of Eastleigh works in 1961 and lasted another 2 or 3 years so is only 'correct' for 1961 to 1963 or so.

This is one of my pet peeves with Hornby - they are usually correct, but they could pick

other members of the class with a much wider time span in which they are correct ;)

 

Norm

[Bernard Lamb]

 

This is one of my pet peeves with Hornby - they are usually correct, but they could pick

other members of the class with a much wider time span in which they are correct ;)

 

Norm

I take the opposite view. I love 'em for taking the time and trouble to actually ask questions about the variants of the class they are depicting. They probably went too far with Bude. It does mean that we just might, one day in the not too distant future, get a long deflector loco in BR green.

Bernard

[nnich]

I take the opposite view. I love 'em for taking the time and trouble to actually ask questions about the variants of the class they are depicting. They probably went too far with Bude. It does mean that we just might, one day in the not too distant future, get a long deflector loco in BR green.

Bernard

 

 

Bernard

Yes, I'd forgotten about 'Bude' - classic example of 'only correct for a limited period' However I feel that is a slightly different case since it also involves modelling a slice of an historical event

 

Don't get me wrong - I have no problems renumbering the offending locos - I just wonder why Hornby do it in the first place. In my post I referenced M7 number 30031 as being only

correct for 1961-1963. If they'd just numbered the thing as (for example) 30028 or 30029 it would have been correct for the entire 1950's decade plus first few years of the 60's (if you disregard what crest they

choose to apply). This is really a trivial 'whinge' as I really appreciate Hornby producing these fantastic models - I'm just curious why they choose to lock down such a short time period for each

specific model when better choices are available. Taking just these two examples - if you are strict about 'correctness' (and I know - some people are - some aren't and some like

myself are but they allow a few years leeway ) you cannot actually operate

Hornby's depictions of 30310 and 30031 on the same layout - they just didn't exist in the condition modelled at the same time. However if they had chosen to number the T9 as 30338 and the M7

as 30029 then you could have had considerable overlap in real life

 

Norm