RMweb Premium Mallard60022 Posted February 22, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 22, 2015 That looks like one seriously good locomotive. Should I increase my pre orders to just one more.........ummmmmmm? P Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDJR7F88 Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 Wow indeed! So glad I got one on order! This has brighten my day after hearing the 700's have been put back to June. Though, it sound like all the locos I have on order will arrive then, including this one according to Hornby and the Magazines so far, which could be a major issue Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 Wow indeed! So glad I got one on order! This has brighten my day after hearing the 700's have been put back to June. Though, it sound like all the locos I have on order will arrive then, including this one according to Hornby and the Magazines so far, which could be a major issue Given Hornby's tendency for delays, you should be fine with this one. I'll see myself out... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shunny Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 This was at Model rail Scotland on Hornby's stand and the model is looking superb should as good or even better than the N15 from them, I have to say all of Hornby's pre production models were showing a real return to form I am glad I have pre-ordered 2 of these. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 weathering, crew, lamps, P4 conversion................ This leads me to wonder when the first wrecked / damaged ones will turn up on eBay..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bert Cheese Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Looks fab (aside from backwards leaning cab... interfaces needs checking me thinks). A return to Hornby at its best? Hopefully...a few short years ago I could not believe my luck with the quality of the Q1, King Arthur, Rebuilt Light Pacifics and new Schools classes released. Then "Design Clever" struck and I could not bring myself to part with similar money to acquire the much wanted but ultimately lumpy GW 72xx & BR Britannia that emerged...sorry but they were a big step backward with some clumsy detailing standards worthy of Lima in the 80's. It saddens me that I grew up with a purely Hornby fleet and always looked forward to locos like the SR examples mentioned and the 31/50/60 in diesel terms, but in the last couple of years I rarely bother looking at what they have to offer... Here's hoping...the money is waiting, otherwise I'll spend it on my new found hobby of collecting single malts...two bottles of Ardbeg or one loco? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigherb Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Then "Design Clever" struck and I could not bring myself to part with similar money to acquire the much wanted but ultimately lumpy GW 72xx & BR Britannia that emerged...sorry but they were a big step backward with some clumsy detailing standards worthy of Lima in the 80's. Britannia design clever? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Britannia design clever? I think he meant the DoG, on the basis that one Standard pacific looks much like another.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bert Cheese Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Yes...I got my Standards mixed up as I vented spleen...can't think what my reason for not buying a Britannia was in the end. Most likely a lack of cabinet space as they are approaching saturation point, you can't have every model you want and I've plenty of similar-ish locos as it is. The S15 should be a cracker hopefully though, and is bound to sell well if so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium melmerby Posted February 23, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 23, 2015 Well on the way. Just needs smoke deflectors and some transfers and it'll be done! Didn't have deflectors when first built. Several different tenders - I wonder whether Hornby can do them all? Keith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 ...can't think what my reason for not buying a Britannia was in the end. Lack of availability of the really good (late production) ones. They seem to go for silly prices on eBay. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
darren01 Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 looking very nice, if this loco turns out to be a winner, then i can see myself getting a few more, So make a lot Hornby!. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted February 24, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 24, 2015 (edited) Didn't have deflectors when first built. Several different tenders - I wonder whether Hornby can do them all? Keith Yes, but I don't model the few years during which they ran without them. All but one of the 1927/8 batch had deflectors added by the end of 1930 and 826 got them the following year. The later ones (838 onwards) all had deflectors from new. Some ran with six-wheelers of which (I think) the ones already done for the King Arthurs are the right sort and a couple got ex-Schools tenders late on. John Edited February 24, 2015 by Dunsignalling Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium brushman47544 Posted February 24, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 24, 2015 looking very nice, if this loco turns out to be a winner, then i can see myself getting a few more, So make a lot Hornby!. Not too many, or we may not see the loco/tender combination I want in a later batch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium melmerby Posted February 24, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 24, 2015 Yes, but I don't model the few years during which they ran without them. All but one of the 1927/8 batch had deflectors added by the end of 1930 and 826 got them the following year. The later ones (838 onwards) all had deflectors from new. Some ran with six-wheelers of which (I think) the ones already done for the King Arthurs are the right sort and a couple got ex-Schools tenders late on. John At least two different bogie tenders (short and long) maybe three, unless the later photos are earlier tenders modified. I haven't seen any pictures with the "water cart" (inside bearing) type as on some T9s. Maybe somebody knows a picture with this combination? Keith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted February 24, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 24, 2015 (edited) At least two different bogie tenders (short and long) maybe three, unless the later photos are earlier tenders modified. I haven't seen any pictures with the "water cart" (inside bearing) type as on some T9s. Maybe somebody knows a picture with this combination? Keith According to Peter Swift's 'Book of the H15 and S15 4-6-0s', the only Maunsell S15 to run with a Watercart was 833, which was paired with 4000 gallon Drummond tender No.224 between November 1934 and March 1935. In view of the short duration, I'd think the odds are against finding a photo of this unique combination. The tender came from withdrawn C8 4-4-0 No.294 and, after the short period with 833, it was exchanged with Urie 5000 gallon bogie tender No.3212 from Urie S15 No.508. Other Urie S15s to receive ex-C8 tenders were 504-7, 509/10. The Urie tenders from these went to the N15x locos when they were converted from the Brighton Baltic tanks. AFAIK all the Urie Bogie tenders were the same length as were the Maunsell flat-sided ones built for 833-847 (which just look longer) though there were more subtle variations. However, as was typical on the Southern, a certain amount of swapping took place over the years, both within the S15s and with other classes. Anyone contemplating renumbering the Hornby locos would be well advised to refer to Mr Swift's volume first! John Edited February 24, 2015 by Dunsignalling Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Colin Posted February 24, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 24, 2015 (edited) As I understand, the bogie tender with 847 on the Bluebell was at one time a Urie version, which as part of restoration to prewar SR condition, the Bluebell rebuilt to a more authentic type. Presumably there had been a tender swap in BR days. This would perhaps appear to prove that the differences between Urie and Maunsell bogie tenders are largely restricted to bodywork above the running plate? Edited February 24, 2015 by Colin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold toboldlygo Posted February 24, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 24, 2015 As I understand, the bogie tender with 847 on the Bluebell was at one time a Urie version, which as part of restoration to prewar SR condition, the Bluebell rebuilt to a more authentic type. Presumably there had been a tender swap in BR days. This would perhaps appear to prove that the differences between Urie and Maunsell bogie tenders are largely restricted to bodywork above the running plate? If memory serves there are different types of bogies too Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted February 24, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 24, 2015 As I understand, the bogie tender with 847 on the Bluebell was at one time a Urie version, which as part of restoration to prewar SR condition, the Bluebell rebuilt to a more authentic type. Presumably there had been a tender swap in BR days. This would perhaps appear to prove that the differences between Urie and Maunsell bogie tenders are largely restricted to bodywork above the running plate? The Southern tradition of tender swapping appears to have continued in Woodham's yard.......... John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium melmerby Posted February 24, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 24, 2015 According to Peter Swift's 'Book of the H15 and S15 4-6-0s', the only Maunsell S15 to run with a Watercart was 833, which was paired with 4000 gallon Drummond tender No.224 between November 1934 and March 1935. In view of the short duration, I'd think the odds are against finding a photo of this unique combination. The tender came from withdrawn C8 4-4-0 No.294 and, after the short period with 833, it was exchanged with Urie 5000 gallon bogie tender No.3212 from Urie S15 No.508. Other Urie S15s to receive ex-C8 tenders were 504-7, 509/10. The Urie tenders from these went to the N15x locos when they were converted from the Brighton Baltic tanks. AFAIK all the Urie Bogie tenders were the same length as were the Maunsell flat-sided ones built for 833-847 (which just look longer) though there were more subtle variations. However, as was typical on the Southern, a certain amount of swapping took place over the years, both within the S15s and with other classes. Anyone contemplating renumbering the Hornby locos would be well advised to refer to Mr Swift's volume first! John In the OPC volume on Southern Locomotives there seems to be two bogie tenders shown where the bogies themselves are different wheelbases. There are also pictures with coal rails and also flared top (e.g like GWR) variations. Keith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted February 24, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 24, 2015 (edited) In the OPC volume on Southern Locomotives there seems to be two bogie tenders shown where the bogies themselves are different wheelbases. There are also pictures with coal rails and also flared top (e.g like GWR) variations. Keith Are you looking at tenders attached to MAUNSELL S15s or just Drummond tenders attached to any 4-6-0? Hornby are doing both Urie and Maunsell tenders but (for now) only the Maunsell loco. Bear in mind that the tenders with inside bearings attached to King Arthurs 448-457 when built were second hand ones from scrapped Drummond 4-6-0s. The H15 rebuilds (330-335) started off as Drummond 4-cylinder engines so also had watercarts. All these tenders had four coal rails which were plated over on the inside quite early on. The ex-C8 tenders mentioned in my earlier post only had three but they were similarly plated over Urie discontinued the use of inside frame tender bogies for his own locos, hence the LSWR N15s had newer tenders than the first SR King Arthurs. Note that the drawing on P.269 shows a Maunsell "Eastleigh Arthur" which had a water cart tender but is incorrectly labelled as a Urie N15 which did not. The "flared top" is standard on Urie tenders (and similar to that on some Drummond tenders) but no Urie tenders had coal rails. What looks a bit like a single one is a beaded edge used to stiffen the portion of side sheet above the flare. There were, to my knowledge, at least three different styles of bogie used under Urie and Maunsell bogie tenders, hence my comment about taking care over renumbering. What the drawings in the OPC book show are wheelbases of 5'0" + 4'6" + 5'0" which applies to tenders with inside frame bogies (Drummond) and 6'6" + 6'0" + 6'6" which refers to those with outside frame bogies (Urie and Maunsell). John Edited February 24, 2015 by Dunsignalling Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSpencer Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 That looks like one seriously good locomotive. Should I increase my pre orders to just one more.........ummmmmmm? P That is what I just did.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-BOAF Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 As I understand, the bogie tender with 847 on the Bluebell was at one time a Urie version, which as part of restoration to prewar SR condition, the Bluebell rebuilt to a more authentic type. Presumably there had been a tender swap in BR days. This would perhaps appear to prove that the differences between Urie and Maunsell bogie tenders are largely restricted to bodywork above the running plate?W Would appear to be the case re tender tank; 30847 at Sheffield Park in 1979. As Colin said, does this mean the Urie and Maunsell bogie tenders are identical below the running plate? http://www.crjennings.com/1970%27s%20and%201980%27s/70,80%20bluebell/70,80%20bluebell%20images%203/bluebell%20Images%2021.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 If memory serves there are different types of bogies too There certainly are: flat bottom, and arched bottom, if I remember correctly. Unfortunately, I can't remember which type came first! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium melmerby Posted February 24, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 24, 2015 Are you looking at tenders attached to MAUNSELL S15s or just Drummond tenders attached to any 4-6-0? Hornby are doing both Urie and Maunsell tenders but (for now) only the Maunsell loco. Bear in mind that the tenders with inside bearings attached to King Arthurs 448-457 when built were second hand ones from scrapped Drummond 4-6-0s. The H15 rebuilds (330-335) started off as Drummond 4-cylinder engines so also had watercarts. All these tenders had four coal rails which were plated over on the inside quite early on. The ex-C8 tenders mentioned in my earlier post only had three but they were similarly plated over Urie discontinued the use of inside frame tender bogies for his own locos, hence the LSWR N15s had newer tenders than the first SR King Arthurs. Note that the drawing on P.269 shows a Maunsell "Eastleigh Arthur" which had a water cart tender but is incorrectly labelled as a Urie N15 which did not. The "flared top" is standard on Urie tenders (and similar to that on some Drummond tenders) but no Urie tenders had coal rails. What looks a bit like a single one is a beaded edge used to stiffen the portion of side sheet above the flare. There were, to my knowledge, at least three different styles of bogie used under Urie and Maunsell bogie tenders, hence my comment about taking care over renumbering. What the drawings in the OPC book show are wheelbases of 5'0" + 4'6" + 5'0" which applies to tenders with inside frame bogies (Drummond) and 6'6" + 6'0" + 6'6" which refers to those with outside frame bogies (Urie and Maunsell). John Thanks for the clarification. Weren't some of the bogies used re-claimed from other uses? Keith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now