Jump to content
 

Hornby GWR Hall


Bulwell Hall

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151647597205843&set=a.10150197267445843.309835.53107985842&type=1&theater

"R3205 BR 4-6-0 ‘Rood Ashton Hall’ 4900 Class

Pre-production – Build and Running Sample"

 

An image of "Rood Ashton Hall" from Hornby's facebook page

It doesn't look bad and while I understand it is the 'upmarket' version we appear to be getting into a total confusion of 'standards' from Hornby.  The 'Star' looks to be comming with moulded handrails on the rear of the cab sidesheet while this one seems to have them separate, but on the 'Hall' the tender rear vertical handrails look as if they might be moulded with a web visible, the top lamp bracket is in full detail but the smoke box door handle is moulded.  I do find it extremely difficult to understand quite where the 'cleverness is in all of this - it just looks as if they have Monday-Thursday designers and toolmakers and another lot who only do Friday afternoons and are looking forward to getting away for the weekend.  Fortunately the midweek blokes seem to have done the basic shape.

 

Obviously this pic is very 'pre-production and has been published in a rather haphazard and and not deeply explained - really does show the need for a proper newsletter system from Hornby which might at least give them room to explain soem of the apparent inconsistencies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • RMweb Gold

Looking at that, Bachmann will be getting my mone for halls! The moulded hand rails are bad, but the moulded steam pipes are truly awful!

(Yes I realise its pre production, but Hornby don't exactly have a reputation for retooling to fix this sort of error...)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Looks like design clever means steampipes solid to the smokebox and its saddle. Not sure about the angle of the pipes either.

 

attachicon.gifHornby-hall.jpg

From the photo the angle looks about right for a Modified Hall!  As I said earlier the look I managed to get at them - from a not very good angle - at Swindon suggested to me something wasn't quite right at the front end; I continue to reserve judgement but the steam pipes do not enhance my optimism thus far.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Are they tooling up for yet another model of the 4000 gallon tender?  If so, why? It doesn't look a patch on the one behind my Grange.

 

Looking at the rear three-quarter view, those steam pipes look rather too vertical to me.

 

John

Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I right in thinking that the Churchward tender behind the green Hall was uncommon behind the class after the late 1930's? Most of the picture I've seen would indicate this. If so, I would therefore speculate that we're going to get yet another early Great - Crest - Western livery. Ergo; no Hawksworth livery!

 

Also, why limit the main range to one tender? Surely the correct tooling for the 4000 gallon tender already exists for the Castle, which would allow for future variants? Personally, I'd buy half a dozen Halls in Hawksworth livery with various tenders. (Or god forbid, wartime black!).

 

CoY

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

We GWR modellers could do with a decent new book on the Hall class.Something in the 'Power' series or the 'Book of' series from Irwell would be perfect.Is it just me or do Hornby seem a tad sloppy on their GWR engine research.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You could be correct about the tender, the green one in the photo shows the water pick pipe sitting low but as they are using several factories to produce items it looks like a different tooling from the Grange which was one of Hornby's best models of late, it remains to be seen what turns up in the boxes they would have to be up to the standard of the Grange for me to trade in my 2 Bachmann ones.

Original 4901-5920 batch Hall with original small tender option never made available by Bachmann despite having all the components. Inline tender brakes rather than Bachmanns broad gauge spacing,  I'll give Hornby a chance. As for my Bachmann original Hall -long sold on as haulage power was not good.I have kept my Bachmann oil fired conversion, but it only has to haul seven Hawksworths, which is just about its' limit.

 

Mike Wiltshire

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Yeah I found the haulage on my Bachman hall was rubbish too. Personally I'm willing to sacrifice things like moulded handrails, etc because I prefer to run my models than scrutinise every tiny detail. Just my opinion though! I am a little miffed that it appears to be a moulded coal load but again this can be covered with a thin layer of real coal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I right in thinking that the Churchward tender behind the green Hall was uncommon behind the class after the late 1930's? Most of the picture I've seen would indicate this. If so, I would therefore speculate that we're going to get yet another early Great - Crest - Western livery. Ergo; no Hawksworth livery!

 

Also, why limit the main range to one tender? Surely the correct tooling for the 4000 gallon tender already exists for the Castle, which would allow for future variants? Personally, I'd buy half a dozen Halls in Hawksworth livery with various tenders. (Or god forbid, wartime black!).

 

CoY

 4901 - 4980 appeared with small tenders as built. Many had a replacement 4,000 gallon type by the mid 1930's though much tender switching still went on. Allocations influenced which tender appeared. There was a trend of West Country engines retaining small tenders as they travelled much shorter distances between stops and could take water on a regular basis, compared to Midlands and London area engines. This was not just specific to Halls. Hornby's 5011 Tintagel Castle built new with a 4,000 gallon tender, when working out of Newton Abbott, was retro fitted with a 3,500 gallon tender for a short time in the 1930's.

 

Mike Wiltshire

Link to post
Share on other sites

Disregarding for a moment the aesthetics of moulded handrails and how much it costs the enthusiasts to carve off and fit replacements, I do not understand Hornby's tender logic on pure economic grounds. Spending a lot of money on new body tools for the 4000g and 3500g tenders will not compensate for the saving of a few pence in handrail attachment assembly (to the current and proven Castle and Grange mouldings). And the subsequent spares situation doesn't bear thinking about.

Am undecided whether a lhs lubricator cover, even as a 'stick on', is a good idea - some locos had them and others did not. (Shades of the 28xx debate!)

I think the cover plate at the top rear of the boiler was a rare BR modification??

Can anyone remember which batch(es) had coupling rod knuckle pins on the front rod?

Btw, having a tender scoop in the lowered position is not a particularly clever idea…

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

From the photo the angle looks about right for a Modified Hall!  As I said earlier the look I managed to get at them - from a not very good angle - at Swindon suggested to me something wasn't quite right at the front end; I continue to reserve judgement but the steam pipes do not enhance my optimism thus far.

 

I thought it looked fine? :dontknow:

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the steampipe angle, judge for yourselves:

 

attachicon.gifhall-end-elevation.png

 

The Modified Hall front end was very different to the above, with a steeper steampipe angle, and with the top of the steampipe flange nearly at the boiler pitch axis. See here and here.

 

 

[Edit: urls re-instated.]

 

Simon Kohler's kindly dropped me an email with respect to this question with a cautionary note on interpreting GA drawings. He's actually supplied a detailed drawing that they're working from.

 

Hhall_dwg.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...