New Hornby N15 Peter Waterman Model

[robmcg]

I see Hattons now stock this model, and the watercart tender appears correct.

 

Can somene say whether the tender is 4-pin plug or older standard connection?

 

http://www.ehattons.com/StockDetail.aspx?SID=32108

 

Rob

[Fireline]

I see Hattons now stock this model, and the watercart tender appears correct.

 

Can somene say whether the tender is 4-pin plug or older standard connection?

 

http://www.ehattons.com/StockDetail.aspx?SID=32108

 

Rob

 

I suspect this will be the original, older connection version. There tends not to be a re-design for the release of a single model.

[coachmann]

Is it a new wider tender or the narrow one off the T9?

[nnich]

I see Hattons now stock this model, and the watercart tender appears correct.

 

Can somene say whether the tender is 4-pin plug or older standard connection?

 

http://www.ehattons.com/StockDetail.aspx?SID=32108

 

Rob

 

Hattons have posted some more photos now and it looks ( hard to make out for sure) as though it has the 2 or 4 pin plug.

I suspect the decoder may now be in the tender as with the T9

 

Norm

[Fireline]

Hattons have posted some more photos now and it looks ( hard to make out for sure) as though it has the 2 or 4 pin plug.

I suspect the decoder may now be in the tender as with the T9

 

Norm

 

Ok, seen it now. Yes, very nice. I won't be buying one, though. Never been a fan of the way water cart tenders look....

[nnich]

Ok, seen it now. Yes, very nice. I won't be buying one, though. Never been a fan of the way water cart tenders look....

 

But nothing screams ex London South Western and ultimately Drummond influence more

 

Norm

[Fireline]

But nothing screams ex London South Western and ultimately Drummond influence more

 

Norm

 

Nope. I'll freely concede that one. I'm just one of those Luddites that likes frames OUTSIDE the tender wheels!

[robmcg]

Hattons have posted some more photos now and it looks ( hard to make out for sure) as though it has the 2 or 4 pin plug.

I suspect the decoder may now be in the tender as with the T9

 

Norm

 

Thanks for that reply, and others. Looks like the correct slightly larger N15 tender to my uneducated eyes, but looks like the old style standard coupling. Cannot see evidence in Hattons' pics of 4-wire harness.

 

 

 

btw we had a 7.1 Richter quake here 9 hours ago in Christchurch NZ but the infrastructure is mostly working... bloody unnnerving, few injuries, much damage mostly to commercial premises lucky it occurred during the quiet hour at 4.38am.. my place (1860s double-tongue-and-groove wooden) undamaged, power back on water part-pressure, many houses damaged. Lots of aftershocks.

 

And Hattons advise that the N15 'Sir Meliagrance' is already on its way by tracked airmail... very nice! If my hands stop shaking!

[Guest Belgian]

Is it a new wider tender or the narrow one off the T9?

 

The originals were the same external size as the T9 ones, although their water capacity was enhanced by 500 gallons by means of increasing the height of the water tank and fitting a well without changing the external dimensions when built originally for the Drummond G14s and P14s. This addition was most visible as a "hump" on the tender which could be seen behind the coal space. To maintain the coal capacity the coal rails were increased to 5 instaed of 3 rails. For the wider-cab N15s the door-flaps at the front of the tender were splayed out to line the doors themselves up with the cabsides.

 

So it is the same narrow one as the T9s, and Hornby have correctly made the three alterations to it.

 

Few things are as complicated as the transfers of tenders between Drummond classes. To complete the story, there were only 20 of these 4,500 gallon tenders built, the other 10 being fitted to the Drummond T14s when built, but transferred to the D15s when the monster 4-6-0s proved too thirsty. They were fitted with a much larger 5,800 gallon version of the watercart tender, which they retained until withdrawn in the early 1950s. It may be these that you were thinking about, Larry. The 4,500 gallon ones were then tranferred to the L11 class by the Southern Railway when the D15s took their 6 wheel ones, the tank extensions and wells later being removed to convert them to standard 4,000 gallon ones.

 

5 more 4,500 tenders were created in 1910-12 by extending the tanks of the 4,000 gallon ones fitted to Drummond's strange E10 "Double-Singles" which were also somewhat thirsty. One went to the superheated 0449 when its "King Arthur" rebuild was built (proof that the latter weren't really rebuilds, just replacements), and then, presumably, like the other four E10 ones, was scrapped alomg with the engine. (Bradley's famous books on LSWR engines give some contradictory stories about the source of 0449's tender - in the original RCTS book he states it came from one of the D15s - sorry, I'm rivet counting, and probably writing too much information, so I'll stop).

 

Jeremy English

[Hilux5972]

Thanks for that reply, and others. Looks like the correct slightly larger N15 tender to my uneducated eyes, but looks like the old style standard coupling. Cannot see evidence in Hattons' pics of 4-wire harness.

 

 

 

btw we had a 7.1 Richter quake here 9 hours ago in Christchurch NZ but the infrastructure is mostly working... bloody unnnerving, few injuries, much damage mostly to commercial premises lucky it occurred during the quiet hour at 4.38am.. my place (1860s double-tongue-and-groove wooden) undamaged, power back on water part-pressure, many houses damaged. Lots of aftershocks.

 

And Hattons advise that the N15 'Sir Meliagrance' is already on its way by tracked airmail... very nice! If my hands stop shaking!

 

We felt it quite strongly down here in Geraldine too Rob. Had a few smashed glasses but nothing too serious. Glad to know your safe and well.

[Oldddudders]

(Bradley's famous books on LSWR engines give some contradictory stories about the source of 0449's tender - in the original RCTS book he states it came from one of the D15s - sorry, I'm rivet counting, and probably writing too much information, so I'll stop).

The day RMWeb discourages learned discussion of detail, including substantiable, rational critique of published info, is the day I will leave. I happen to be a Southern enthusiast, but would be just as happy to read factual discourse on any other railway's equipment in this fashion. How else do we learn?

[coachmann]

Thanks for the gen on Watercart Tenders Belgian. I looked at just about every photo I could find of the Arthurs running with these inside bearing tenders and the tender only looked marginally narrower than the Arthur running plate. As the T9s had a narrow bufferbeam with tenders of the same width, and the Arthurs had wide bufferbeams, I presumed the T9 tender would look obviously narrower, but it doesnt in photos. I did however spot a short length of wider footplating rivetted to the tender to match the width of the Arthur. Such details are the bread 'n butter of research....

[Guest Belgian]

Thanks for the gen on Watercart Tenders Belgian. I looked at just about every photo I could find of the Arthurs running with these inside bearing tenders and the tender only looked marginally narrower than the Arthur running plate. As the T9s had a narrow bufferbeam with tenders of the same width, and the Arthurs had wide bufferbeams, I presumed the T9 tender would look obviously narrower, but it doesnt in photos. I did however spot a short length of wider footplating rivetted to the tender to match the width of the Arthur. Such details are the bread 'n butter of research....

 

Most photos are, as we all know so well, front three-quarter views. From that angle the "kick-out" of the tender cab doors is hardly noticeable, so I'm not surprised you didn't spot that the tender was narrower - the Southern did a good job of hiding the discrepancy in widths! If you look at Hattons photos of the model from above or rear three-quarters you can see how much the offset actually is/was.

 

There's a good photo of no. 448 in Bradley's Wild Swan LSWR locomotives book (taken from front three-quarters but very low down) which shows the discrepancy very well. The tenders were 8' 1" wide and the "N15s" 9' 0½", measured across the "platform", or running footplate.

 

Jeremy

[Peter Bedding]

The originals were the same external size as the T9 ones, although their water capacity was enhanced by 500 gallons by means of increasing the height of the water tank and fitting a well without changing the external dimensions when built originally for the Drummond G14s and P14s. This addition was most visible as a "hump" on the tender which could be seen behind the coal space. To maintain the coal capacity the coal rails were increased to 5 instaed of 3 rails. For the wider-cab N15s the door-flaps at the front of the tender were splayed out to line the doors themselves up with the cabsides.

 

So it is the same narrow one as the T9s, and Hornby have correctly made the three alterations to it.

 

Few things are as complicated as the transfers of tenders between Drummond classes. To complete the story, there were only 20 of these 4,500 gallon tenders built, the other 10 being fitted to the Drummond T14s when built, but transferred to the D15s when the monster 4-6-0s proved too thirsty. They were fitted with a much larger 5,800 gallon version of the watercart tender, which they retained until withdrawn in the early 1950s. It may be these that you were thinking about, Larry. The 4,500 gallon ones were then tranferred to the L11 class by the Southern Railway when the D15s took their 6 wheel ones, the tank extensions and wells later being removed to convert them to standard 4,000 gallon ones.

 

5 more 4,500 tenders were created in 1910-12 by extending the tanks of the 4,000 gallon ones fitted to Drummond's strange E10 "Double-Singles" which were also somewhat thirsty. One went to the superheated 0449 when its "King Arthur" rebuild was built (proof that the latter weren't really rebuilds, just replacements), and then, presumably, like the other four E10 ones, was scrapped alomg with the engine. (Bradley's famous books on LSWR engines give some contradictory stories about the source of 0449's tender - in the original RCTS book he states it came from one of the D15s - sorry, I'm rivet counting, and probably writing too much information, so I'll stop).

 

Jeremy English

 

 

Hello Jeremy

 

Your discourse above must rank as the most succint and comprehensive description of the differences between the Greyhound and Arthur types of smaller tenders. My sincere congratulations and thanks. The one thing that I have yet to run to earth is why the two normally infallible experts (Bradley and Swift) quote different capacities for the Arthur variant of the double bogie Drummond tender. Bradley quotes 4,500 gallons; Swift quotes 4,300 gallons. The T9 basic tender was always 4000 gallon.

 

I doubt this will affect the model. My very real dilemma now is to decide: do I wait for this model to appear in Southern livery (Bulleid black), or order the odd half dozen in the BR livery, and go cap in hand to my chum who can do perfect repaints.

 

Why do the manufacturers go to such lengths to produce near-perfection, and then overlook such a fundamental issue. I guess the retail buyers must make more effort to be heard!

 

With tongue in cheek,

 

PB

[Wicor Models]

I can confirm that it has a 4 pin plug and socket to the tender which looks like Hornby have used the T9 tender chassis with a modified top. Like the T9 the DCC decoder plugs into a standard 8 pin socket in the tender.

 

Dave

[robmcg]

I can confirm that it has a 4 pin plug and socket to the tender which looks like Hornby have used the T9 tender chassis with a modified top. Like the T9 the DCC decoder plugs into a standard 8 pin socket in the tender.

 

Dave

 

Thankyou Dave, and others especially Jeremy and PB for the excellent replies, it really 'makes' this forum. The 4-pin vs older standard coupling makes little difference to me except in ease of 'setting up' a new model for running. I think the Hornby N15 series really is a superb example of all that is good in the ready-to-run ranges on offer, and I'm pleased to see the watercart variant finally offered. In the 1950s I had a 1958 H C Casserly 'Observers Book of Railway Locomotives of Great Britain' pocketbook and always thought the watercart a little ugly, but with the added perspective of LSWR and Drummond and SR history I think they have marvellous character.

 

Rob

[Guest Belgian]

The one thing that I have yet to run to earth is why the two normally infallible experts (Bradley and Swift) quote different capacities for the Arthur variant of the double bogie Drummond tender. Bradley quotes 4,500 gallons; Swift quotes 4,300 gallons. The T9 basic tender was always 4000 gallon.

Hi Peter,

That's something I have also wondered about, and when I was writing the little bit of spiel I started by describing them as 4,300 gallon tenders, until I saw that Bradley showed them as 4,500 in all the references to their building dates. However, in the two LSWR locos books Bradley states that the tenders were stripped of their wells and feedwater heaters when fitted to the Eastleigh "King Arthurs" and thereafter carried 4,300 gallons. Thus the Hornby model is of a 4,300 gallon tender (although there can have been no external evidence of this alteration!).

 

JE

[RFS]

I can confirm that it has a 4 pin plug and socket to the tender which looks like Hornby have used the T9 tender chassis with a modified top. Like the T9 the DCC decoder plugs into a standard 8 pin socket in the tender.

 

Dave

 

I suppose one reason for doing this is that the new Hornby Sapphire decoder is too large to fit in the decoder cavity in the smokebox of the loco, so this resolves that problem with this variant of the model. At least it now means DCC users can fit the decoder of their choice.

[toboldlygo]

However, in the two LSWR locos books Bradley states that the tenders were stripped of their wells and feedwater heaters when fitted to the Eastleigh "King Arthurs" and thereafter carried 4,300 gallons. Thus the Hornby model is of a 4,300 gallon tender (although there can have been no external evidence of this alteration!).

 

 

Just to add the tenders were quite possibly reskinned, before fitting to the Eastleigh Arthurs, hence there would be no external evidence of the alterations.

[Peter Bedding]

Hi Peter,

That's something I have also wondered about, and when I was writing the little bit of spiel I started by describing them as 4,300 gallon tenders, until I saw that Bradley showed them as 4,500 in all the references to their building dates. However, in the two LSWR locos books Bradley states that the tenders were stripped of their wells and feedwater heaters when fitted to the Eastleigh "King Arthurs" and thereafter carried 4,300 gallons. Thus the Hornby model is of a 4,300 gallon tender (although there can have been no external evidence of this alteration!).

 

JE

 

 

Just to add the tenders were quite possibly reskinned, before fitting to the Eastleigh Arthurs, hence there would be no external evidence of the alterations.

 

Thank you, gentlemen. Issue resolved! I shall be thinking of this when I come to unpack my first purchase, albeit in a BR livery.

 

Is there a Forum reader with recent, and satisfactory experience, of a source of loco nameplates, with which to create a few ringers? Exmouth Junction and Salisbury line ups.

[toboldlygo]

Thank you, gentlemen. Issue resolved! I shall be thinking of this when I come to unpack my first purchase, albeit in a BR livery.

 

Is there a Forum reader with recent, and satisfactory experience, of a source of loco nameplates, with which to create a few ringers? Exmouth Junction and Salisbury line ups.

 

Fox Transfers and Jackson Evans (available through Modelmaster Decals to name one stockist) both do King Arthur nameplates, both of which I've used many times..

[nnich]

Fox Transfers and Jackson Evans (available through Modelmaster Decals to name one stockist) both do King Arthur nameplates, both of which I've used many times..

 

Yes, ModelMaster decals. I ordered the gold series decal pack for 30448 Sir Tristram at the same time I ordered the new Hornby model.

 

The pack contains the cab side numbers, the name plates and the front number plate. The cunning plan is to back date my 30453 "King Arthur" by swapping

the bodies of it and the new Sir Meliagrance.

 

"King Arthur" gains a watercart tender "as nature intended" and Sir Tristram was one of the first, if not the first to be given the Urie 8 wheeler in 1955 so the two

can co-exist in the same time period. I'll have to change it to an early lion and wheel emblem of course

 

Norm

[Wicor Models]

I suppose one reason for doing this is that the new Hornby Sapphire decoder is too large to fit in the decoder cavity in the smokebox of the loco, so this resolves that problem with this variant of the model. At least it now means DCC users can fit the decoder of their choice.

 

The Sapphire only just fits in a T9 tender, it's a shame Hornby decided to ditch the Sapphire Mini as it would have been a far more usable decoder.

 

Dave

[Fireline]

Yes, ModelMaster decals. I ordered the gold series decal pack for 30448 Sir Tristram at the same time I ordered the new Hornby model.

 

The pack contains the cab side numbers, the name plates and the front number plate. The cunning plan is to back date my 30453 "King Arthur" by swapping

the bodies of it and the new Sir Meliagrance.

 

"King Arthur" gains a watercart tender "as nature intended" and Sir Tristram was one of the first, if not the first to be given the Urie 8 wheeler in 1955 so the two

can co-exist in the same time period. I'll have to change it to an early lion and wheel emblem of course

 

Norm

 

Am I right in thinking you'll have to swap the loco chassis' as well? From memory, 30453 has the older style drawbar arrangement.

[2ManySpams]

Fox Transfers and Jackson Evans (available through Modelmaster Decals to name one stockist) both do King Arthur nameplates, both of which I've used many times..

 

I too use Fox plates, plus those from 247 Developments. For renumberings I now only use the HMRS transfer sheets - no carrier film problems. Those locos previously renumbered using Fox and Modelmaster numbers are being progressively redone with HMRS. HTH