Steamport Southport Posted October 19, 2016 Share Posted October 19, 2016 I've seen loads of photos with the coal piled high like that. Probably more than I've seen with empty tenders that modellers seem to prefer. Just Google Image GWR Dean Goods to see what I mean. Obviously ignoring locomotives that are out of service or "on shed" awaiting coaling. Jason Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opelsi Posted October 19, 2016 Share Posted October 19, 2016 Speaking of coal loads, it makes you wonder if the loco crews were ever in danger of a landslide, possibly while under heavy braking. Never heard of this happening though looking photos of mountainous coal loads I could perceive a risk! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Bigcheeseplant Posted October 19, 2016 Share Posted October 19, 2016 The lined Oxford Model Dean goods still does not look right in addition to the points raised so far with a copper capped chimney the chimney should be parallel and slightly taller rather than using the later cast iron taper type with a copper cap painted on! I expect the prototype photo the dome is painted rather than brass. If the dome was brass I would have expected the smokebox door hinges to be polished too. David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwardian Posted October 19, 2016 Share Posted October 19, 2016 I think it looks better than the Oxford offering - the cabside cutout is a better shape and the washout plug holes are streets ahead of the weird things on the Oxford model. It is let down by some detail items but they are all the sort of thing which are fairly simple to deal with and overall I think it has stood the test of time remarkably well considering its origins. I find I am bound to agree. As I have inter-war Dean Goods, inside and outside framed, in the form of white-metal kits, I am likely to want just a single belpaire example pre-(Great)War. I had hoped that would be the Oxford model. The Mainline body captures the prototype well, particularly the cab-side cut-out and the firebox profile. I suspect the answer might be to use Oxford's chassis and tender and attempt to graft the Mainline loco body onto it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted October 19, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 19, 2016 Speaking of coal loads, it makes you wonder if the loco crews were ever in danger of a landslide, possibly while under heavy braking. Never heard of this happening though looking photos of mountainous coal loads I could perceive a risk! Only if the brakes were good enough. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted October 19, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 19, 2016 I've seen loads of photos with the coal piled high like that. Probably more than I've seen with empty tenders that modellers seem to prefer. Just Google Image GWR Dean Goods to see what I mean. Obviously ignoring locomotives that are out of service or "on shed" awaiting coaling. Jason Logically, any photo showing a really big pile of coal will have been taken on-shed or within an hour or so of the loco entering service. The abundance of photos showing it will have been influenced by insensitive contemporary photographic emulsions causing a bias towards pictures being taken [a] during the brighter times of day and of locos standing still. They are also cleaner before they have done much work and that has always attracted a disproportionate share of photographers' attention. If operating a layout to a timetable a part-loaded tender is less likely to attract comment than one either piled high or in need of replenishment. I generally aim at three-quarters full which still reveals some internal detail but clearly doesn't portray a loco that should be heading for the coaling stage. John 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted October 19, 2016 Share Posted October 19, 2016 Speaking of coal loads, it makes you wonder if the loco crews were ever in danger of a landslide, possibly while under heavy braking. Never heard of this happening though looking photos of mountainous coal loads I could perceive a risk! The bigger risk in normal service was pieces falling off a loco in motion if there was a kick or lurch. Brake force was typically insufficient to disturb the coal heap. In case of collisions, then there are reports of injured loco crew trapped in cabs and in the worst cases crushed against the boiler backhead by unrestrained coal from the tender having moved into the cab by its own momentum. This was a sufficiently common occurence that after the Castlecary collision the Investigator noted that the high all steel front of the tender of the A3 had prevented such injury to the footplate crew, despite an estimated 60mph impact. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gismorail Posted October 19, 2016 Share Posted October 19, 2016 I think it looks better than the Oxford offering - the cabside cutout is a better shape and the washout plug holes are streets ahead of the weird things on the Oxford model. It is let down by some detail items but they are all the sort of thing which are fairly simple to deal with and overall I think it has stood the test of time remarkably well considering its origins. Those are my feelings at present and I believe the Commet chassis is fairly straight forward . Will have a look at the model when it arrives Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steamport Southport Posted October 19, 2016 Share Posted October 19, 2016 Logically, any photo showing a really big pile of coal will have been taken on-shed or within an hour or so of the loco entering service. The abundance of photos showing it will have been influenced by insensitive contemporary photographic emulsions causing a bias towards pictures being taken [a] during the brighter times of day and of locos standing still. They are also cleaner before they have done much work and that has always attracted a disproportionate share of photographers' attention. If operating a layout to a timetable a part-loaded tender is less likely to attract comment than one either piled high or in need of replenishment. I generally aim at three-quarters full which still reveals some internal detail but clearly doesn't portray a loco that should be heading for the coaling stage. John Many of the photographs I'm looking at are on trains. Mainly in BR days in the wilds of Wales. https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=gwr+dean+goods&biw=1366&bih=651&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjbwfKVvufPAhWLAcAKHef8DIgQsAQIJw#imgrc=_ I'm trying to ignore anything pre grouping. Jason Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
asmay2002 Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 The other thing that looks different to me is the smokebox door. The photo of 2309 has the early type with the raised ring around the edge whilst the model seems to have the later one but it's a bit difficult to tell from the angle of the photo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwardian Posted October 21, 2016 Share Posted October 21, 2016 I'm trying to ignore anything pre grouping. You should get a job with Bachmann, Hornby or Kernow; they'd pay you to do just that! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Carew Too Posted October 21, 2016 Share Posted October 21, 2016 One of the great things about this site is the expertise. It seems to me that the degree to which a lack of detail or an inaccuracy is tolerated is a matter of personal preference. Personally, I wouldn't say that the criticism have been trivial. Lacking the Nth degree of possible detail or making a reasonably necessary compromise on accuracy is one thing. For me, avoidable accuracies are harder to accept. Reluctantly, I have come to the conclusion that there are too many mistakes and inaccuracies on this model. It would need a lot of attention, some straightforward, some quite serious. Given this and that, for me, the ancient Mainline loco shell captures the shape and look of the prototype, I am pretty unpersuaded by this release. To come in second, cosmetically speaking, to a 40-year old moulding is pretty poor, to be honest. My only question is whether this model - £95 from a box shifter - is worth it for the chassis and tender? The comet chassis is £20 - what do you get for that, just an etch of the loco chassis? With a new tender u/f, wheels, motor, gears etc, I wonder which option is the most economical? Somewhat galling to take a brand new, modern, full-price release only to chuck away a major part of it, and buy a second hand model to canibilise, but might it be the best option? Somehow the Mainline/Comet route appeals more, and feels as if it would lead somehow to a more "honest" model. I cannot explain why I feel that. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clearwater Posted October 21, 2016 Share Posted October 21, 2016 I'm 75% through a mainline / comet rebuild. It is enjoyable but there are other costs - tender frames, motor, gear box, consumables etc. It should work out cheaper unless you include your own time (at £10/ hour you'd have around 6h to break even... ) It is, however, enjoyable. I do have an Oxford one on order - largely as I suspect I will paint br black (a cowardly decision but one taken by many fine modellers) but I'd like one with the shiny colours! David 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quarryscapes Posted October 21, 2016 Share Posted October 21, 2016 One of the great things about this site is the expertise. It seems to me that the degree to which a lack of detail or an inaccuracy is tolerated is a matter of personal preference. Personally, I wouldn't say that the criticism have been trivial. Lacking the Nth degree of possible detail or making a reasonably necessary compromise on accuracy is one thing. For me, avoidable accuracies are harder to accept. Reluctantly, I have come to the conclusion that there are too many mistakes and inaccuracies on this model. It would need a lot of attention, some straightforward, some quite serious. Given this and that, for me, the ancient Mainline loco shell captures the shape and look of the prototype, I am pretty unpersuaded by this release. To come in second, cosmetically speaking, to a 40-year old moulding is pretty poor, to be honest. My only question is whether this model - £95 from a box shifter - is worth it for the chassis and tender? The comet chassis is £20 - what do you get for that, just an etch of the loco chassis? With a new tender u/f, wheels, motor, gears etc, I wonder which option is the most economical? Somewhat galling to take a brand new, modern, full-price release only to chuck away a major part of it, and buy a second hand model to canibilise, but might it be the best option? Somehow the Mainline/Comet route appeals more, and feels as if it would lead somehow to a more "honest" model. I cannot explain why I feel that. The comet chassis is just frames, spacers and coupling rods. The tender chassis kit is woeful, however if you don't mind a bit of hacking you can get just the 7'6" underframe and make that fit the plastic frames, which looks infinitely better. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG John Posted October 21, 2016 Share Posted October 21, 2016 Perseverance do loco and tender chassis kits too, for about the same price. I've got a Pannier one, but haven't built it yet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Mikkel Posted October 21, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 21, 2016 Having noted that the great B12 wheel scandal has just imploded in a single short reply from Hornby, I shall wait until the actual model appears before dismissing it. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwardian Posted October 21, 2016 Share Posted October 21, 2016 (edited) Having noted that the great B12 wheel scandal has just imploded in a single short reply from Hornby, I shall wait until the actual model appears before dismissing it. Fair enough. I continue to liaise with Oxford. Some potential issues are best judged upon release. That said, it must be admitted that there are some demonstrable issues with 2309. It remains to be seen if they can and will be corrected. Edited October 21, 2016 by Edwardian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldSutt Posted October 21, 2016 Share Posted October 21, 2016 I obtained a Hornby Dean Goods R 2064A some time ago, which had a tender motor. It was a fair representation of the prototype but I could not stand the motor noise, so it had to go. Hornby Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
6892 Oakhill Grange Posted October 21, 2016 Share Posted October 21, 2016 I find I am bound to agree. As I have inter-war Dean Goods, inside and outside framed, in the form of white-metal kits, I am likely to want just a single belpaire example pre-(Great)War. I had hoped that would be the Oxford model. The Mainline body captures the prototype well, particularly the cab-side cut-out and the firebox profile. I suspect the answer might be to use Oxford's chassis and tender and attempt to graft the Mainline loco body onto it. As both seem to have oversized splashers, I would be tempted to use Oxford's running plate to get the rivets. Oakhill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clearwater Posted October 24, 2016 Share Posted October 24, 2016 I was in Swindon today so took the opportunity to have a good look at 2516. One suspects, logically, that Oxford Rail have examined / measured / scanned the only surviving prototype. One thing that struck me in particular was the smoke of rivets.. Also a picture of the firebox - I took lots of other snaps. Available on request! David 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted October 25, 2016 Share Posted October 25, 2016 ... One thing that struck me in particular was the smoke of rivets... The curse of predictive text? It is usually possible to work out the intended word, but I confess myself stuck here. But it would make a nice collective noun for rivets, which to the best of my knowledge don't enjoy one. We only have to use it enough, and it will get into the OED. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted October 25, 2016 Share Posted October 25, 2016 I'm sure he means smokebox rivets. I alluded to these carbuncles earlier. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted October 25, 2016 Share Posted October 25, 2016 Obvious now you mention it, how could I have overlooked that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwardian Posted October 25, 2016 Share Posted October 25, 2016 Someone, intended to say "firebox" on the Castle Aching topic, but mistakenly posted "firebomb". I swear my computer slowed down for 2-3 days while the Spooks crawled all over it. Damn, I've done it again! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clearwater Posted October 25, 2016 Share Posted October 25, 2016 The curse of predictive text? It is usually possible to work out the intended word, but I confess myself stuck here. But it would make a nice collective noun for rivets, which to the best of my knowledge don't enjoy one. We only have to use it enough, and it will get into the OED. I'm sure he means smokebox rivets. I alluded to these carbuncles earlier. Thanks Coachmann and 34c - correct on both counts. I suspect apple's dictionary and algorithms don't assume you are trying to type smoke box! David 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