Jerry Rugby

Pedantic points time!

 

As the prototype was outshopped in March 1948 and the model represents her in as built condition, shouldn't her number be E 532*? It's nice to see valve gear where the crossheads are in the correct position for once, though the return cranks are as usual in the wrong angle (or angles as they are different!).

 

Now I don't really need another East Coast Pacific, but......

 

* It's touchy as the decision on BR numbering was taken in March 1948 as well. I hope I'm wrong, as it will save me having to renumber.

The livery and condition is correct for the first year. Blue Peter was outshopped in apple green numbered 60532. The GBL model is also correct with the paired number on the front buffer beam. 60532 was painted BR green in Sept 1949 when it was fitted with a double chimney and multiple valve regulator. Interesting that GBL have picked this livery and it is historically correct when there were so many options to get this wrong! I don' t know if Bachmann produced a version on 60532 in this livery and with a single chimney.

I like the idea of using the boiler to build an A2/2 perhaps using a V2 cab.

Yes, what a completely unexpected and pleasant surprise to find the model is not as illustrated on the magazine cover, but looks to have been copied quite nicely from Bachmann's A2 with a correct tender type attached.I think a lot of folk will change their minds and grab this issue when they set eyes on it.Sorry, no photo available today, too much going on with my PC system being upgraded. I'm sure someone will download piccies quite soon.Regards,John

Interestingly I think this is the first time in the series that the model is not as shown on the cover. The A2 copy to me seems to be a good one with the rivet detail well reproduced. The Bachmann model is much better than the Trix version. Stricktly speaking it is incorrect for Blue Peter as the model is a single chimney version whereas 60532 was built with a double chimney. Must get another couple of these for conversions.

It looks like this is going to have similar painting problems to the pannier, namely a lack of black paint on the front end! Except that instead of the smokebox and chimney being green, the footplate on the Britannia at the front is green. The lack of (visible) combination lever on the valve gear makes me suspect that this one is copied from a loco-drive Britannia, but one of the early Tri-ang ones, as does the elongated shape of the cab front spectacles. There's also a glint on the tender axleboxes - the visible ends of the Tri-ang axles, perhaps, meticulously copied? Hard to tell from a picture that size, but I suspect I won't be getting a Britannia.

I agree. Unfortunately GBL have chosen to copy the earliest of Triang (Hornby) Britannia models. This was a loco drive model. The model was a poor representation with a wrongly shaped cab and an unconvincing boiler and front. It dates from the 1950s. They seem to have copied the early valve gear which lacked the piston links and the early chassis and tender. The 2nd Hornby model was better and was tender drive and the 3rd (current) version is very good. A pity that GBL have chosen this base model. I don't think there is much that can be done with it. Probably offer for swaps or sale.

I can identify with this! I bought a few Mallards (thinking I will eventually get around to hacking them into representations of the Great Gathering locos with odds and ends) and several of them I can't get the tenders off the display bases. I've chewed up the screws and am not looking forward to Dremelling through the base to release the screws. It seems like the screws are applied with a power tool, or by a bodybuilder...[/quot

 

I certainly had this problem earlier on with Mallard and some other models. I managed to find a Phillips screwdriver which fitted exactly and I have not had any problems since. The screws are often very tightly fitted presumably by machine. I think the answer is to get a good solid screwdriver which fits exactly with a good grip.

Airfix/GMR-based, then, judging by the very long smokebox door plate.

It is copied from the Mainlne / Bachmann version. The Airfix model did have the long front number moulding but the body was quite different with larger (too large) splashes and a better represenetation of the buffer beam. The copy is not bad but the original Mainline model had a number of inaccuracies. The long front number was there to represent "the Royal Scot" plate carried only the unrebuilt 6100 when touring the USA. It was not in fact carried by the rebuilt 46100. On the mainline model copied by GBL, the cab is too high above the firebox which makes the overall profile look a bit wrong. On the GBL model it seems to me the smokebox door is again a bit too thick the lining on the cab is set too far in from the edge and the numbers are too small. Cab window glass is also missing. To me the shade of green is also too light.

 

Overall this is not a bad copy given the source and the faults on the GBL version are mostly minor. Bachmann split chassis for this model are often available and were the same for the Jubilee and Rebuilt Patriot although wheels were different. A pity they did not copy the current Hornby Version as this is much more accurate but still for 8.99 it give a cheap and reasonable Scot which could be upgraded and improved. Having got a Hornby Scot and and Airfix one upgraded on a modified chassis I'm not sure I need another but it could be a static stored loco in the shed.

I doubt very much if there is a suitable R-T-R chassis for them. They were the largest and most powerful 0-6-0 to run in this country.

Great Eastern 0-6-0 chassis seemed to have a different chassis and wheel spacing which was not followed by most other railways so finding a chassis for a GE loco would be difficult. The old Triangle B12, still produced and will be copied by GBL dates from 1959. Good in it's day but rather inaccurate. The body is too short, the boiler too small and the chimney is too tall. However the model is quite attractive and I am think whether it would be quite simple to convert to a B12 /1 or B12/2 or even a GER 1500. Need to make a decorative slasher and a belpair firebox but could be a possibility. The old Triangle/Hornby GE tender was quite good.

Anyone like to hazard a guess at the origins of the Scot, now that the oracle has gone.

Cheers

Shane

It is the old Mainline model later produced by Bachmann for a time. You can tell by the shallow front buffer beam, height of the cab, shape of the dome and the front steps. The old Airfix model was better than the mainline in some respects especially the buffer beam but the slashers were too large on the Airfix model. The best Scot is clearly the modern Hornby version but that was a bit too much to expect. The mainline one is not a bad substitute and it will be interesting to get a closer look when it comes out. From the low resolution picture it looks as if the running plate sandbox is missing and the cab numbers are too small. However it is a god basis and old Bachmann split chassis can still be obtained through eBay on occasions. The chassis used was the same for the Jubilee and Rebuilt Patriot but with different wheels.

JerryRugby

No sign yet on the GBL website of what is to follow the Standard Class 4 . The next model is usually posted on the website on the Friday of the week in which a magazine is in the shops. Are we reaching the end, is it time to get concerned? Still a few listed models not yet issued such as J39, N, Royal Scot and Britannia.

Hope they are just bit slow but we shall see.

Hi,A 'King Arthur' might just happen but from my info the Terrier is much less likely and the Q1 almost beyond any chance at all.The 'Terrier' in LBSCR livery would make an attractive subject but it might be felt a bit 'small' - although the 'Rocket' beats it hands down of course!.The Bulleid Q1 is considered too ugly and untypical of a 'great British locomotive' so is very unlikely indeed.The 'King Arthur' 'might' just provide some tooling issues if copied from the modern Hornby version - although these can be overcome they could result in a copy that proves a great dissapointment to modellers. For these reasons the old KA 'Sir Dinadan' might get dusted off - we will have to wait and see.Needless to say the above comments have been made from the point of view of the target market for the GBL releases not the model railway market - which has no influence at all on decisions.As has happened before with the GBL range things can change depending on the sales of given issues in the intended market - remember that supplies have not been so plentiful of recent releases.Regards

It is good to see the GBL series continuing. Announcements seem to be getting ahead of the releases! For future releases my personal preferences would be for an unstea lined Duchess and a Stanier 8F. These could be reasonably simple for GBL as they could use the chassis from the streamlined Coronation with modified cylinders and the class 5 tender for an 8 F. They could even use a princess tender for a Duchess although this would not be strictly accurate. I realise the market is not for modellers but they are useful for projects. I don't suppose there is much chance of my wish list being matched but we can but hope - once they get past the models already announced.

I found on the Black 5 that no filing was necessary, as the smokebox plus front ring was already the correct overall length. What *was* wrong was the rivet pattern, which had been incorrectly rendered on the main smokebox moulding instead of around the ring end. This misled a lot of people (myself included) into thinking that the smokebox was too long.

 

Thanks, I'll have to go back and measure against the original Hornby model and the GBL. And also against drawings. The rivets should be at the edge of the S/B as they are there to attach the end ring. It may be that some types of class 5 boilers were longer than others, there were certainly differences in firebox lengths. I think the only way to really overcome this is to file down the outer edge of the smoke box ring so it fits inside the smokebox, however this might be difficult to do neatly as it is a circle. Possible need careful use of filler.

Anyone tried anything other than filing the back thinner?

On both the GBL LMS class 5 and the princess and possibly the standard 4 mt tank, the smoke box door ring is stuck on the end of the boiler and sticks out more than on the original model. I know this was mentioned in earlier threads about the class 5. In fact the smoke box front needs to fit inside the boiler rather than in front.

Has anyone yet solved this problem and found a way of making a correct fit for the boiler front? The outer ring could be filed down but this might be difficult to do easily and neatly.

 

Any advice would be helpful.

 

Jerry

I've just done some mods (with a hacksaw) to the 8P and it looks fantastic and almost P4!S1670006 by Shane Wilton, on FlickrS1670007 by Shane Wilton, on FlickrS1670008 by Shane Wilton, on Flickr[url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/50531694

 

Brilliant Wolf27. Can you tell us or show where you made the cuts. It seems to have solved the chassis height problem.

Hi,

Whilst a lot of what you say is correct John you are completely missing the point that JohnMartin has been making.

It doesnt matter what the product is and who they are selling too or what that 'target market' expects the marketting company behind the GBL range have very clearly fallen short of decent standards of customer service on many reported occasions.

As to the products themselves, again it matters not a jot whether the prodct is aimed at 'joe public' or us modellers.

Either way the product should be of a decent standard of finish without distorted parts or missing parts or livery - all of which we have see on GBL items.

To say that the 'target market' does not 'expect' good service or products at the price is an insult. It does not matter whether GBL models are priced as they are or ten times the price they should still meet a decent standard and when they do not the company should act rather better than they have done. 

Obviously any sensible person will not expect a GBL loco to achieve the standards of finish of one costing ten plus times more but they should still be able to expect the 'cut down' or simplified finish to be of a good standard and not poorly applied.

Likewise the price has no bearing on incomplete models being sent out to subscribers or shops.

 

As you say you have read all the posts in this thread you will see that I have on many occasions stated that if nothing else the GBL models have given the hobby a boost. As you quite rightly say they have encouraged many to, using your very apt words, 'get the tools out' and do some modelling. 

The GBL models have enabled several experienced modellers (such as SACMartin if I may single out just one) to achieve some superb models at reasonable cost and without any shadow of a doubt have brought new blood onto our ranks.

Had the GBL models never appeared our hobby would be much the poorer as a result.

To those out there that have 'taken the plunge' via GBL I say very personally from someone with 55 years in the hobby, but i'm sure I speak for other like me, a very very warm welcome to the ranks - its a real pleasure to have you among us.

 

Regards.

Why help such a disgusting company with no moral fibre get even richer?

 

Crowd sourcing would be better.[/quote

 

I Agree with these views. GBL for all its faults has been good for us modellers providing reasonably good static models as a base for convertions. It depends on the donor model, but overall they have been reasonably accurate and cheap to permit much sawing and cutting. A bit like a modern version of Kitmaster. No doubt some customers have suffered from poor customer service but it seems these are mainly those who took out subscriptions. Personally I put a standing order for 1 of each through my local newsagent and purchased more from high street stores if I thought they were good enough and wanted more. I have not had any problems but accept some are better finished than others. As modellers we can usually correct these and anyway I accept the variable quality for the price. So long as the base model is dimensionally ok I am satisfied.

As a general comment I think most of the copies have been fairly good, some excellent. Some of the G W models have not been so good but this is mostly because of the donor model.

Referring to the list of models mentioned by GBL but not yet produced, the packing card also mentions an LNER V2. This would have to be copied from Bachmn and would be welcome.

I too have a number of Hrnby Priness Royals. Photo of my valve gear and trailing frame conversion might be of interest. This was done using fine brass and plasticard from Princess drawings published in Railway Modeller.

 

Jerry

I thought that, can't remember how the pony truck was dealt with on the Coronation.

The chassis is GBL's version of the current Hornby Priness. You can tell by the motion bracket and cylinders. The streamlined Duchess GBL chassis has a different trailing axle and frames and the wheel spacing is different. The model is copied from the current Hornby model and looks from the low res. picture to be a reasonable copy. I don't think there is anything wrong with the chassis other than it looks to sit too high which is probably easy to correct. Duchess and Princess chassis were very different particularly the frames at the rear.

Now this is one I did want for she who must be obeyed and in the livery I wanted (nearly bought a motorised one in Chester so am glad I held off)

 

They certainly looked like they had issues below the running plate with this banana-shaped thing and had the Farrish skateboard idea.  Whilst it looks too long to be the Tri-ang version, the pony trucks like it may well be, going by that picture.  Chimney looks tiny, vacuum pipe isn't even straight - one would have thought for a photograph for publicity purposes, that one would have used a decent one.  I wonder how much of this falls under "prepared to be disappointed"?

 

The first thing I thought when I saw the picture, before coming here, was Turbomotive and how soon someone would have a go at that.  Mind you, the condition my 9F came in without the valve gear at the side, maybe I should have done a 9F turbomotive...

This looks to be a reasonable copy of the current Hornby version. You can tell be the cab roof, trailing frames and valve gear. The second Hornby model (the tender drive version) had a domeless boiler and a less accurate body. The picture is low resolution but it suggests 46203 in maroon as preserved (it was only ever green in BR days).  The Hornby model version copied is reasonably accurate but was the first of the detailed china models so is a bit dated for today. It is let down but the split rear frames which were necessary for tight curves. I have modfied a number of mine by altering and adding full frames and altering the pony truck . This makes a big difference to the appearance.

The GBL model seems to follow the Hornby Model but seem to set a bit high on the frames and the driving wheels don't seem to line up with the slashers. The cab roof should be in line with the tender coping top. Probably easily rectified. The bottom of the cab would then be in line with the tender.  Could be useful for static models especially if modelling 1961/2 when a number of the class were stored at various sheds for a time. A pity they have chosen maroon as only 4 Priness Royals were red, nos 46200/04/07/08. The rest were green.

 

Should be welcome for conversions and looks a reasonable copy. Pity the T9 has not appeared yet but the GBL models are well out of order. Seems to disprove the suggestion that only old out of production models would be copied in future. it will be interesting to see what comes next. A reasonably accurate cheap model suitable as a base for altering and conversion. Not bad for £8.99 - can't go far wrong. A couple more static but enhanced Princess Royals will join my stable.

As it has brake rods and without gettng my NCC model out to compare with the small picture it, looks very Bachmann to me, the look of the front looks lower than the Hornby one. In a way I was hoping it was going to be the Hornby one as have a Railroad diesel shunter I was going to dontate the chassis to, lets see what clearance there is. Was also hoping it would have been a late BR version but not hard to redecorate.

 

Two quick questions for those who are more knowledgable than myself. What is the pipe thing on one side of the boiler, between the smokebox and the tanks? I have been looking at several pictures of Jinties in recent weeks and not every one has them, like the keyholes on the tanks. When were these Jinties withdrawn from Birkenhead? I think I read somewhere that the9Fs ended up doing Jinty work in the end.

 

Anyway, stick me down for half a dozen. Let's see if the smokebox door is attached to where it should be and not somewhere silly like the top of the chimney or included in a cake making set...

The pipe on the right side is for the vacuum ejector. This was only on locos with Vac. brakes although most were fitted. The hole in the tanks is the filler for the rear sanders. Originally the sandbox filler was on top of the tank and then on later batches moved to the keyhole on the tank side. This was not successful so it was moved again to below the running plate. Only certain btaches had the keyhole feature. The last Jinties were not withdrawn until Oct. 1967. I believe those at Birkenhead lasted until the end of steam or at least not far short.

Incidently the position of the top feed on the model is wrong for 44871 but correct for 44781, which was one on the last batches built. The magazine cover phot shows 44871 but other advice from GBL suggests 44781. Can't read the number on the model picture but it is probably modelled on 44781.

I see from the GBL website they have posted information about issue 8 which will be the LMS Class 5 44871. This is in line the the advised list of issues posted earlier in this forum. From the picture on the front of the magazine the model appears to be based on the current Hornby class 5 rather than the earlier tender drive version or that in the Railroad range. Although the picture is not entirely clear, the version can be identified by the position of the top feed and the shape of the boiler, cab and tender. If this is correct this is good news as the current Hornby model, although not perfect, does provide a good basis for improvement. Might be possible to motorise with a chassis kit or provide a good static model. For those modelling 1967/68 shed lines of Black 5s waiting to go for scrap were a features. In any event a reasonably decent Black 5 for £8.99 can't be bad.

 

I shall buy a few for for static use and possible motorising assuming my assumptions about the model are correct.

Bought a schools today.  Quality is very good for the price  For a copy the finish is very good, I'd like to know how they make the copy. Do they create a mould from an existing model and then add details? Presumably a bit similar to the rather crude black "Coal" loco shelf models which have been sold for some years.  Use of the current schools is quite encouraging for future models - i do hope GBL use the up to date model for the LMS Class 5. One small point on the livery finish.  Both the loco and the tender carry the loco number 828 which is incorrect, the number was either on the tender or the loco at different times but not both.

Personally I'm not too bothered about moulded hand rails - these can easily be replaced.It is the basic shape and dimensions of the body that is key to being a useful model that can be adapted. I don't think any of the first 3 (A$, Duchess and FS) could be considered as obsolete models although the 28xx is. Comparing the GBL models with Hornby's actual products, the bodies clearly come from the same tooling. Hornby continues to use some of the inaccurate models in their Railroad range. Just hope some of the later GBL models use the modern tooling- especially the Black 5 from my point of view. No dount the Deltic will be the Hornby Railroad  (ex Lima) tooling.

 

Still, can't complaint at model prospects at this price - they would sell a few more to modellers if the model base is reasonably good.

I bought the 28xx magazine but was a bit disappointed as they have used the old Hornby moulding for the body. For all of the models so far the producers have used Hornby mouldings as a base but as Hornby often have more than one version of a model, the accuracy depends on the version used. For Mallard, the Duchess and Flying Scotsman they used the more up to date models which provide a reasonable base for conversion. Mallard is the later super detail version which is more accurate than the earlier A4 which is now used by Hornby for Railroad. The A3 is also quite good even down the Scotsman's rivited smokebox door hinges! the Duchess used the scale Hornby streamlined body although the painting is a bit off with "sloping" gold stripes on the side towards the front. I intend to do a dirty black version anyway. The 28xx is the old Hornby tender drive version which can be seen by the oversized splashers and the smokebox and front end is too long. This could be cut to make the model a bit more accurate although the boiler taper is also wrong. A pity they used this mould rather than the later one. I would have bought more than one for conversion had they done so.

 

Most of the planned models appear to be based on Hornby prototypes so it depends on the model version used as a base. If the schools is the earlier one it will be less accurate. I do hope they use the later model for the LMS Class 5 rather than the Railroad version. Only a few such as the K3 and Butler Henderson are not modelled by Hornby. Presumably they have a deal to use Bachmann moulds, (maybe the magazine's connection with the NRM has facilitated this).

 

We'll no doubt have to wait a see what we get. A bit of swings and roundabouts but even the £9 for a model is not bad for a shed road or scrapyard but if models use earlier Hornby moulds then they certainly arn't worth more the one!