Hattons announce 14xx / 48xx / 58xx

[Andy Y]

Well I suppose I was always going to go for at least one anyway, but it would be nice to know a bit more about its gearing/slow running capabilities...

 

I've not had it apart yet but the drive and gearing is a lot quieter than some J94s were, for example. It's not run in yet to the letter of the instructions but it was quiet and smooth with good slow-speed control even over insulfrog short radius crossovers. It's had four Mk1 coaches behind it on a 3rd radius oval with no sign of problems.

[Neal Ball]

I think back on page 1 or 2 I said, that it was a great looking loco... and clearly better than the old Airfix one. I think i then added that someone would start arguing about the left rivet being out of place by a thou....

 

I should have put a bet on it, as in the main we have had 30 plus pages of "rivet issues". It's a cracking loco and will look great trundling into Henley with an Autocoach (re painted Bachmann Hawkesworth - don't tell the purists ). No-one has thus far mentioned that if you want the perfect 48xx it should be P4 those OO dimensions are so wrong! LOL

 

Bravo to DJM and Hattons for producing a great looking model, can't wait to see it in the flesh, then there's the King to wait for.

 

Btw Andy, if you can't get to Robin via the M6 you are welcome to come down the A24 and run it on Henley ahead of the imminent shipment arriving in the U.K.!

 

Now let's get back to some modelling and see some examples of everyone's work - more photos of models please. It is after all the season of goodwill.

[amdaley]

I do not have a problem with 'reasoned points' and I don't think others do but it just seems, particularly of late, that I hear a continual high-pitched whining noise across so many product topics but there again maybe I'm developing tinnitus? You may feel that unjust but I know it's a cause of other tinnitus sufferers choosing not to read the site.

 

Well I suppose we can say its a lot more promising than another GWR model being discussed elsewhere on the forum.

[Froxfield2012]

I am looking forward to actual delivery of my own pre-order.  The missing ashpan is a pity as it features quite prominently on the initial graphics provided by Hattons.  See this link. https://hattonsimages.blob.core.windows.net/products/H1413_3117985_Qty1_2.jpg

 

Seems that it went missing sometime during development.  I am bound to wonder if there was some reason for this beyond oversight?

[Edwardian]

Well I suppose we can say its a lot more promising than another GWR model being discussed elsewhere on the forum.

 

Yes, I suppose we can!

 

I am looking forward to actual delivery of my own pre-order.  The missing ashpan is a pity as it features quite prominently on the initial graphics provided by Hattons.  See this link. https://hattonsimages.blob.core.windows.net/products/H1413_3117985_Qty1_2.jpg

 

Seems that it went missing sometime during development.  I am bound to wonder if there was some reason for this beyond oversight?

 

Intriguing, though I can hardly imagine what that might be!

 

Aftermarket opportunity there for a 3D printer or resin caster!

 

Spread the Joy

[90rob]

I have to say (and I apologise in advance if this has already been mentioned - I haven't read the whole thread) that I do wish that Hattons had not gone for the rather heavy weathering on one or two of the models. The black engines in particular seem to have a rather nice finish - I thought the grey-black on 1474 in its pre-weathered version (shown half way down at https://albionyard.wordpress.com/page/4/) was particularly good, and the images  1470 shown here seem to bear that out. Only an opinion I know, but I don't think the images of, for example, H1412 on the Hattons site really do the fine detail justice...

Edited December 15, 2016 by 90rob

[GWR8700]

I hope they do another unlined black 14xx in the future without the heavy weathering.  I would have had one of them otherwise, but it's just a little too much for my liking.  Still, I'm already getting too many so they've done my wallet a favour.  Can't wait!

[tomparryharry]

Knobgate seems the most ridiculous of all; there's an easy cure for it if it offends.

 

"The unkindest cut of all?"

[6892 Oakhill Grange]

I confess, I have a bit of a 'thing' for 517s, so it would have taken a spot-on in-period 4800 to give that class some priority, for me. 

 

It will be interesting to see how many variants of the 517 that the SE Finecast kit will cater for.  I was reminded, however, that the Malcolm Mitchel kit of the 517 is still produced, by David Geen, and I am assured it is straight forward and covers the variants.

 

More representative of the archetypal '30s branch train than a 4800 and steel-bodied autocoach is a venerable 517 with a wooden panelled autocoach.  But, for post 1932 settings, a 4800 would have been a perfectly acceptable alternative.

 

So forgive me if I try to give my earlier posts some context.  Perhaps it will then be accepted that there is some justification beyond the 'they don't make what I want' complaint that I seem to have been taken to have made.  Hopefully,also, with something of an explanation, the subject won't trigger so much evident hostility!  Well, I live in hope.

 

For the railway modeller's classic inter-war GW look that many of us grew up with, which is really the c.1928-35 era of plain chocolate and cream and crested tenders, life has looked up in recent years (not least thanks to Hattons with its King commission, which makes the omission of the 'as built' 4800 all the more bizarre).

 

For your 1928-1935 mainline you have a perfectly good Hornby 2800 (just remember to buy the ones without the outside steam pipes), soon to be a choice of 2 new RTR Toads. 

 

For mainline passenger services, we are truly blessed.  Choice of Kings, excellent Hornby Castle, slightly compromised, but essentially good and fixable Star, choice of Halls.  The major omission, a fact reflected in the polls, is an up to date 4300 Mogul.  What cracked the period open to RTR, however, was the release of the truly excellent Hornby Bow-Ended Colletts. 

 

For branch services you have 2 Bachmann small Prairies and the venerable ex-Airfix B Set.  But, if you want to fill that bay platform at your junction, or build a modest 'Ashburton' BLT, you are still in kit-building or conversion territory for your auto-train.  A gap has been left that could relatively easily have been filled.  I think that is a bit of a missed opportunity. 

 

I hope that, having set it in the context of the recent trend of GW RTR releases, my point about how an early condition 4800 would have made a lot of sense is a bit clearer.  I sincerely hope I don't trigger an apoplectic fit by adding this explanation.

 

I will add that I am content to supplement RTR with kits.  Always have been.  But I simply want to make the point that Hattons' decision leaves a gap, an unnecessary and regrettable gap, just when accumulated releases of recent years are putting the 1928-35 era within the grasp of the RTR modeller.

 

Except that if you worry about the steps on the 4800 you have to worry about the sandboxes on the small prairie. All the 4575 are wrong due to the motion bracket and as far as I am aware that pattern of sandboxes did not appear til the BR period so the 4500 is out as well not withstanding the fact that the running plate casting limits you to 20 of the 75in any case.

[6892 Oakhill Grange]

Offhand, I can't think of a GWR loco whose prototype no longer exists that has been made available in model form, at least in the last 30 years or so. Irrespective of whether something made it into the BR period, if it doesn't exist now, it is not scannable, and there is little evidence that modern RTR manufacturers are capable or willing to use 'old-fashioned' drawings.

 

My heart doesn't want to disagree with you, but my head does.

Grange?

[6892 Oakhill Grange]

Offhand, I can't think of a GWR loco whose prototype no longer exists that has been made available in model form, at least in the last 30 years or so. Irrespective of whether something made it into the BR period, if it doesn't exist now, it is not scannable, and there is little evidence that modern RTR manufacturers are capable or willing to use 'old-fashioned' drawings.

 

My heart doesn't want to disagree with you, but my head does.

47xx

[6892 Oakhill Grange]

I thought the 80s/90s Saint was concerned about accuracy as your average tabloid hack and in terms of percentage to prototype fidelity was at a level that would make Oxford Rail blush. Perhaps they would have been better off waiting.

As far as I'm aware, there's only one 4mm kit around - the SE finecast version. Which given I have hankering for the straight framed version would mean modification to even that kit. Given it is the progenitor of so many 4-6-0s, it's a surprisingly badly served class by both rtr and kit manufacturers

David

And given my general ambivalence towards the 12 in to the foot model industry, it is the only one that I think has any historical significance.

[Miss Prism]

I knew I would get shot down! Yes, the Grange, but that really should not have been too much of a problem, given the origins of its constituent bits. (And to be fair to Hornby, they made a good job of it.) As for the 47xx, I hope Heljan is using:

http://www.4709.org.uk/Media/47XX_Frame_Plan-1.pdf

[Hilux5972]

I knew I would get shot down! Yes, the Grange, but that really should not have been too much of a problem, given the origins of its constituent bits.

Another one of those "All GWR Locos look the same" people are we lol.

[Edwardian]

Another one of those "All GWR Locos look the same" people are we lol.

 

Don't they, then?!? 

[Mad Carew Too]

This proves something I have long suspected, people will "like" any pretty picture.  Uncritically.

 

We appear to be near release.  It is clear from these pictures that there are outstanding issues.

 

- The ashpan.  Where is it?  It has been mentioned several times.  Why have we had no response from Hattons?

 

We are told simply that 1466 has been carefully measured.  Does it not have an ashpan?  I think that most steam locomotives tend to need one.  Where is yours?

 

The issue of liveries has not really been addressed:

 

- Given that the pre-war liveries appear to pre-date the physical changes that the tooling represents, can Hattons show us the evidence they have of their tooling matching all the livery/identity options announced?

 

- Can Hattons give the dates for these versions?  It is all very well saying, "we did not  tool for 'as built' because one tooling can support all liveries", but it does not follow that the chosen tooling can support the dates those liveries were applied!  

 

If the tooling represents physical changes made in, say, 1942, the model is no more capable of representing an earlier period just because it wears an earlier livery that it may, or may not, still have been wearing in 1942.

 

- It is frankly disingenuous to dismiss the 'as built' condition as "every minor variation".  Is it not much more likely that the curious and apparent miss-match of early livery and late condition that Hattons has chosen to model is a "minor variation"?

 

- What about the handrails on the cab?  The rail should end at the knob, not stick through it.  Obvious from the photographs. Perhaps this can/will be fixed, but given the imminence of the release, perhaps we can ask for an assurance that it will be?

 

Well, it is a pity that Fat Lieutenant's style might have detracted from his message, because, I, too, thought they were reasonable points.

 

There is no need to inflame the highly inflammable "pro" lobby, not least because the cold water buckets seldom seem to be emptied in their direction. 

 

Really, Season of Good Will, guys.

 

I gather that these are the production models, so, much as I am surprised to find that the production model omits the ash-pan and has those untidy hand-rails, it seems that it is what it is. 

 

As Andy Y and Edwardian said, people will or will not buy this model, no doubt having considered their needs and the various pros and cons of the finished product.  What I find disappointing is the militant tendency to rubbish the quite sensible queries raised about the model; reasoned critique should not cause others to kick off.  As tomparryharry said "Kicking off on here makes us look like a bunch of yokels".  

 

So, it is what it is.

 

Buy or don't buy.

 

But, let's not be rude to one another about it.

[cctransuk]

Aftermarket opportunity there for a 3D printer or resin caster!

 

 

... or the opportunity to do a little modelling ? How hard can a box with knobs on be?

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Edwardian]

How hard can a box with knobs on be?

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

I don't know.  Ask Dave?

Edited December 16, 2016 by Edwardian

[Porcy Mane]

Maybe Hattons have been having a bit of fun and purposefully omitted the ash-pan from the samples but will supply a clip on one within the packaging?  

 

P

[Mad Carew Too]

... or the opportunity to do a little modelling ? How hard can a box with knobs on be?

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

Well, apparently, harder than you'd think!

 

Alternatively, leave as is and super-detail the track with Geoscenics Ash600, 200g for £10: http://www.geoscenics.co.uk/railway.html

[Roy Langridge]

Well, apparently, harder than you'd think!

 

Alternatively, leave as is and super-detail the track with Geoscenics Ash600, 200g for £10: http://www.geoscenics.co.uk/railway.html



 

For that approach you would also need to model a few lineside fires and scorched fields from previous incidents.

 

Roy

[cctransuk]

I have, this afternoon, received a private e-mail from an old friend, who takes me to task for suggesting that the addition of an ash-pan to the forthcoming Hattons 14XX / 48XX is something that those who perceive it to be essential should be capable of adding themselves.

 

In setting down my response I was conscious that I was spelling out, at some length, why I object to the activities here of certain specialist modellers, who repeatedly insist that the RTR manufacturers are ignoring their needs / failing in their duty.

 

Since I have evidently offended that group, both as members and non-members of this forum, I am herewith going to post my response to my friend's missive - if only for the avoidance of misunderstanding of my own motives; (I have made a couple of very minor omissons in order to protect the identity of my friend) :-

 

"I'm afraid that we look upon RTR models, and RMweb, from different perspectives.

 

I see RTR models from the likes of Hornby, Bachmann, etc. in the same way that I have always done - mass market models / toys intended for the less discerning market. That their models are now much more accurate; (though by no means perfect); is to be welcomed, and therefore they appeal to a much wider market than hitherto. What they have never purported to represent is an off-the-shelf equivalent of the skilled kit-built or scratchbuilt model.

 

However, just because great strides have been made in the fidelity of these new generation RTR models, this does not justify the expectation that the models should be detailed to the last 'widget', nor that they should be available in every possible variant in which the prototype might have existed ..... and all this regardles of cost, or the financial viability of the model in question.

 

It is my belief that anyone who is knowledgeable enough / cares enough to demand all of the 'widgets' and variations, should be prepared to make the usually minor amendments to the RTR model in order to produce their particular specification / variant. It has always been thus, and I see no reason why the general improvement in RTR should, at a stroke, eliminate the need to undertake any real modelling.

 

It was through the use of your invaluable range of 'bits and kits' that so many of us of the older generation were enabled to improve the RTR offerings of the day, and move on to the more skilled arena of kits and scratchbuilding.

 

No, I don't have works drawings of the ashpan of a 14XX / 48XX, but if I was in the market for such a model, and it lacked that feature, and I judged it essential to provide some representation of it, I would have no qualms about seeking the necessary information, and setting to with plastic card and scalpel.

 

Indeed, in days gone by I rather suspect that you would have done the same, and offered an after-market ashpan for the discerning to fit themselves - and thereby add some additional mass.

 

As to RMweb, there seems to be a belief that it should be something that it is not; it's a mainstream forum for the mass market of railway 'modellers' - a great many of whom are strictly box-openers.

 

I'm afraid that those members who continually bemoan the absence of what they perceive as indispensible detail, or every possible variant, regardless of the financial viability of their requirements, are bound to 'get up the noses' of the bulk of the membership. Let me state unequivocally that I am right behind Andy York in his aversion to the repeated protests of the niche modellers who feel that they are 'hard done by'. There are plenty of fora (?) dedicated to those with specialist knowledge, and I subscribe to the odd one. Significantly, the posting traffic in these groups is markedly low, compared to that of RMweb.

 

In conclusion, mainstream RTR is essentially mass-market and will always lack, for financial reasons, elements and variety that the specialist modeller will consider essential. That sector has always previously been prepared to adapt RTR to their own purposes, or build better alternatives from kits or scratch - why no longer"?

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Edited December 16, 2016 by cctransuk

[Wheatley]

I am right behind Andy York in his aversion to the repeated protests of the niche modellers who feel that they are 'hard done to'. There are plenty of fora (?) dedicated to those with specialist knowledge, and I subscribe to the odd one. Significantly, the posting traffic in these groups is markedly low, compared to that of RMweb.

I think you might be missing the point John. The 'niche' modellers to whom you refer just get on with it and make the ashpan or whatever. Niche armchair critics who don't make anything are another matter entirely, and most of the ones I see are on high traffic sites.

[tomparryharry]

I wouldn't mind betting there is an ashpan. This post is here just to wind us up!

 

Knobgate? He He He!

 

Next, it'll be 'wonky whistle gate'....

 

I'm still getting one, so there!

 

Happy Christmas, everyone!

 

Ian

[Edwardian]

 I obtained a scale drawing

 

Careful, Coach, you maybe accused of "accuracy"

 

The Frothers will come for you in the night ...