pom-pom

On 24/03/2024 at 10:15, kevinlms said:

Serves them right for reusing a trading name - they should be more original!

Agreed. And the modern-day "LNER" is a publicly owned DfT Operator of Last Resort. The adoption of the LNER title is simply brand-engineering. How the modern-day organisation can even be compared with the LNER of 1923 - 1948, let alone know anything about it or claim its history, beggars belief.

On 06/08/2023 at 01:44, Steam here! said:

Hi all, I picked my P2 on the other day 2003 “Lord President” and have just noticed in the accessory pack it’s missing the guard irons.

 

is anyone missing there’s?

 

Apart from that a really nice loco.

The main guard irons are missing from mine too. They are also missing from the R3246 P2, Cock O' the North and from the W1 although please see the attached picture - the vestigial guard irons attached to the pony truck are present on all models. Whilst Hornby state, I believe, that these models will impressively cope with radius-2 curves, the attachment of the main guard irons could well prevent the models negotiating almost any model curves. Perhaps they are simply missing from all Hornby P2s: 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2005. I have yet to see any despite there being a video review presented earlier in the thread where the author stated they were in the accessory pack - I could not see any myself.

Something for you guys that is hopefully of interest. My partner lost her Uncle Ron in February last aged 93. We have necessarily been sorting through his affairs and I happened into these documents. Ron was a senior engineer in BR until he retired in 1992 and I believe was based at Stewarts Lane although the Ransomes and Rapier steam crane certificate below mentions Hither Green. Quite a few of his tools have 'BR Hither Green' stamped on them too.

I also have several photographs of the breakdown teams working in the 1970s/1980s if anyone is interested. I'm not sure if this is the correct forum.

Ron was almost totally deaf in his latter years and of those I have known him quite well for about five years. He often spoke enthusiastically of his work. Had I known of these documents and other things in his possession I would have engaged him in most interested discussion. For example, I found several large quality prints of a LNER 04 presumably at Stewarts Lane - no notes, nothing, so no idea of the why and wherefore of these! He worked on the Southern Region most of his working life, having had an initial engineering apprenticeship at Short Bros. in Rochester. His love of aluminium and of fabricating all manner of things out of aluminium never ceased!

Stuffed and mounted with a 1930 contemporary. Wish I still had a layout to run it on... :-/  Did anyone have to prune the overly long sandpipes, I wonder?

My commiserations to those out there with broken ones. I feel your pain. My last Hornby QC upset was over one of the first 'ski jump' A3s and as many of us now know, a bad one looks truly awful. Well done there @micklner for posting on Hornby's Facebook page - let's hope it gets noticed and acted upon.

Nick

6 minutes ago, wainwright1 said:

 

I was told some years ago that when they were restoring the loco to SE & CR condition for exhibition, they could not find a correct pattern chimney, so had one manufactured in wood ! Also that they restored the lubricators at the front of the loco, as original condition, but left the later ones inside the cab. So it has double lubricators !

 

Now a question. It has been confirmed that there are traction tyres on the front drivers. They don't last forever, will these be available as spares ?

 

Just waiting for my two to come.

 

All the best

Ray

Hi Ray,

there are two spare traction tyres in the box and the "Owner's Manual" lists a comprehensive parts list to boot.

Enjoy,

Nick

Apologies to @tractionman - I didn't realise you had already mentioned the NLS map viewer. Still, it's a great resource for modellers and worth mentioning twice perhaps.

Nick

On 17/06/2019 at 12:32, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

old-maps.co.uk has a very clear image from a 1956 OS map.

 

Illustrates well the point that I was making. Starting from the road overbridge going southwards, the station is about 450 yards long, about 18' in 4mm scale. And that takes you onto an embankment so no easy scenic break at that end.

You can also reference The National Library of Scotland's excellent online 'side by side' map viewer for most localities in the UK. So for example, Rothley in the Edwardian period would be: https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/side-by-side/swipe/#zoom=18&lat=52.7041&lon=-1.1587&layers=168&right=BingSat 

Note that I had road names switched off in the satelite view but you can just as easily switch them back on again and also switch maps on the other side. Don't go viewing the dismantled and carelessly discarded sections of the line though... it will bring a tear to your eye.

Regards,

Nick

Mine arrived this morning courtesy of Rails, minor niggle with a slightly wonky cab step on the right hand side (an easy fix, once I get in onto the workbench in the New Year). Mine runs very smoothly and quietly and it has a certain wow factor about it.

 

851_lhfan.jpg

 

851_rhfan.jpg

Certainly does have a "wow factor" about it, looks fantastic. If the Rails photos and others are anything to go by then that wonky right-hand cab step is how they all are perhaps. Probably easy to detach and reattach. It looks like the tender bogies could do with a thin shim to lift the tender body a fraction as it doesn't seem to be in line vertically with the footplate... could be that the wheels are of the wrong diameter. Otherwise, a magnificent representation.

I for one really like it, it's a fantastic improvement over the last version especially the new faceted search. I expect that once you've ironed out the few implementation/hosting issues that are influencing page load/refresh speeds then folk will appreciate the speed at which the product view panels update without reloading the whole page.

Nicely implemented as a responsive website too - a big thumbs up.

I think the design is nice and clear and a definite improvement too... good use of white-space to ventilate what will always be busy pages.

One thing I don't like is the main navigation menu in full desktop viewport widths - the drop-down menus look rubbish, half-finished. And making the menu items jump around in font size is not a good idea in terms of usability and instilling user confidence. Furthermore, the drop-down menus seem to be inaccessible to keyboard-only users. Conversely, the drop down dynamically built menu driven by the search form field is rather nice.

One other thing - the "Text size +/-" control... it doesn't really work well in Firefox (I haven't tested in other browsers) as the increase in size creates overlapping text. This type of control was in existence on the previous website but is really an outdated concept nowadays. Users can simply use the 'Ctrl' plus '+/-' keystrokes to the same effect. I don't use the general browser 'zoom' function but using 'zoom text only' works very nicely on your new website using the keystrokes previously mentioned.

All the best,

Nick

The cylinders aren't lined in the Crusader photo either. Good luck if you to buy it , simply not good enough and should have been never put on sale after Book Law fiasco.

Lined cylinders with that Sir? I'm afraid we only do those as part of the Authenticity Upgrade Kit -

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Hornby-X9561-Class-A1-A3-Loco-Cylinder-Block-/312109125076

;-)

The GCR link across the MML at Loughborough isn't being deviated round a car park, it will go over it. The slight change in alignment of the new MML bridge and linked structures is due to the loss of the previous alignment and the need to get the best angle across the MML. Most people won't notice it. Yes there will be a speed restriction, but the latest plan is to run on the original double track formation right up to the canal bridge, for which there is currently a restoration appeal.

 

And wouldn't it be great to have a 'Pom-pom' [J11] new-build loco to run on it...

 

Dava

Yes, I understand, thanks. It would seem to be some small miracle that more of the alignment was not lost over the years in what is a mostly urban environment. I expect the important thing is to reinstate the formation in any form just to protect the route. As is the nature of many railway preservation activities involving the line itself, progress can often seem akin in speed to geological processes, so with reastablishment of the route all these 'nice to haves' such as double-track and even a double bridge over the Midland can be potential projects for the future and indeed future generations perhaps.

A J11 would be grand... although I do believe we're getting a D7!

The G/WR is a former mainline railway, but it has always seemed to be a bit lost without its second track. It just doesn't look and feel right. They lost a great opportunity when they decided to extend and not to double the track.

Perhaps it's wiser to extend rather than double initially as the latter can always be done later whereas the former is not always possible as the formation dissolves away under road-building and house-building encroachments...

It doesn't really have that main line feel though, being all wayside stations in the Cotswolds, whereas Loughborough Central is undeniably a fairly significant main line location.

 

There's more to a "main line" than the number of tracks though. There's loads of 2 track branch lines around the country (eg Norwich to Lowestoft), and then there's the single track Highland main line.

Although the preserved section of the GCR is an ex. mainline there can be a loss of the 'mainline feel' due to the restriction of most trains to a branchline 25 mph on what was one of the fastest sections of the line (speeds of 80 mph through Loughborough were common). Unfortunately, it could be also be argued that the Loughborough 'gap' reduced to a single track and deviated round a carpark(!) may also add to this loss of a 'mainline feel'. But we are lucky indeed to have what we have and all credit is due. It's also useful to bear in mind that whilst railway enthusiasts may want a retention of a 'mainline feel' the families that come for a day out and largely fund the existence of the railway perhaps don't and certainly not the speeds associated with a mainline; they want to be entertained with sights, activities and food, an experience. In this respect, the stations along the line could be said to have lost that typical bleak, remote 'mainline GCR feel'... they are now more overly decorated, slightly twee, a synthesised nostalgia aimed perhaps at pulling in those revenue generating family visitors. I have every faith that the GCR are doing exactly what's needed to attract suitable revenue. And let's face it, those stations do look prettier than they ever have done!

GNU is a wildebeest.

I was lead to believe that GNU is a recursive acronym for "GNU's Not Unix", please check your references...

my pictures which hopefully illustrate my points.

 

 

L1.jpg

L3.jpg

 

Richard

Hi Richard,

I'm curious if you're still around, this being quite an old discussion - where did you get those 'Great Central' transfers or is this lettering something you have made yourself? It looks remarkably close to the original typeface used by the GCR. And I wonder, does anyone know what this typeface is called perchance?

Regards,

Nick

I am interested in the LNER ex GC B3 Lord Faringdon class.

 

Robinson's 4 cylinder 4-6-0s later designated B3 by the LNER  were the GCs most powerful passenger locos on a tractive effort basis, only six were made and they seem to have a poor reputation.

In 1923 when the LNER was formed Robinson was offered the CME job but declined in favour of Herbert (Nigel) Gresley.

When formed the LNER had two Gresley A1 pacifics and 5 (?) Raven A2 pacifics  and the next most powerful and modern express locos were the 6 B3s.  The B3s were therefore rapidly transferred to Kings Cross for GN line services.  It is said they were unsuccessful yet they seem to have remained on heavy Leeds services until 1927 by which time I believe 40 A1 class pacifics were in service.

It is said the Ivatt Atlantics were superior to the B3 yet it is also reported the original Ivatt 251 class did not steam particularly well until rebuilt by Gresley with 32 element superheaters from 1922 onwards.

 

On returning to GC metals it seems three B3s were at Neasden and two were rostered to heavy overnight passenger trains to Manchester, the implication being this was a secondary duty yet elsewhere I read that at this time the heavy GC overnight Newspaper train was one of the most tightly timed trains in the UK. 

 

Can anyone point me in the direction of further info on these locos and the services they operated. 

Hello David,

you can find a fair bit of information in various publications, to name but a few - "J . G. Robinson. A lifetime's work", Jackson, D., 1996, "Great Central Steam", Tuplin, W. A., 1967 and there's an interesting account of the standard vs. Caprotti valved engine performances over the London Extension in "Essays in steam", Clay, J. F., 1970.

General consensus seems to be that they had performance issues in the ashpan and cylinder steam passages - breathing problems and coal consumption no less. Otherwise they lasted for 30 years putting in good service from what I gather. The more numerous but otherwise very similar B7 was probably more interesting in that having smaller diameter driving wheels the ashpan airflow was improved. I'm no authority on the subject but Gresley's A1s also had high coal consumption until long-travel valves replaced short-travel versions and Gresley's experimentation with Caprotti valvegear reduced coal consumption on the B3. 

Here's an unusual angle on the prototype locomotive, without doubt a handsome machine.

Thought I would share a photo of my LNER B12 Renumbered to 8559 - I was lucky enough to source photographs of the actual loco in LNER Apple Green and fortunatly matched the loco with the steam pipe added to the side of the smokebox.

Fantastic weathering - your overall grime really sets the scene. I like the puddles in the ballast/ash too, a nice touch.

Nick

Yes pom. Didn't mean to sound narky at all. I know of some 'young' people that wouldn't blink about spending £200 on clothes or booze.

Each to their own I suppose.

Phil

Hi Phil, no offence taken at all. I think you've just nailed it - I actually did spend just over £200 without a moan on a jacket and a pair of shoes for work a couple of days ago... with inflation lately, £200 is just not a lot of money these days yet we perceive it to be so for a highly detailed model locomotive. Perhaps it's because many of us can justify spending that on a jacket to our other half but find it more challenging when it comes to a model locomotive.

Matey, when I worked for a big Model Shop in the South over 20 years ago they were a main dealer for a top producer of Continental HO stock. Some loco's then were priced at more than £200 and they were not DCC. We have been very lucky in this country and still are really and yes, I understand that £200+ is getting challenging when you don't have an income that can support such purchases, but the quality of models now is easily as good as these Continental models were back then.  

Phil

Fair enough, I have no exposure to HO models other than an ancient Lima GWR King class loco, I think, when I was a kid in the '70s - so it's interesting to hear of the price and detail comparisons echoed on here. I would imagine that £200+ is very challenging for all but the middle-aged who have often worked up to a suitable earnings bracket.

List here 

 

http://www.hattons.co.uk/stocklist/cataloguetypes.aspx?supCatID=218

 

Scary prices on some pieces, I am sorry to type !!

It seems at first glance that the locos hitting the eye-watering £200+ mark are those that have DCC sound fitted as standard. Not using DCC at the moment I'm hoping this doesn't become the standard!

Lovely GCR engines.

 

Is there rhyme or reason to the differences in handrail and detail painting on the two 4-4-0s? The front wheel hubs look at little better on 'Mons' too but it might be lighting?

 

In any event, in my quest for a photo of a clean pristine 9F I made this...  and of course 92192 would unlikely to have been cleaned in its short life, sadly only 6 years. Built 6/1958 withdrawn (I think) 6/1964.

 

92192_9F_portrait25_3ab_r1200.jpg

 

Cheers

I'd be inclined to trust Bachmann's accuracy on the handrail painting and other livery details on the two GCR 11Fs. Note that the tender lettering is also of a different size and typeface; that on "Mons" being the correct rendition. The livery details seen on "Butler Henderson" reflect the livery as preserved.

I believe the mistake in the tender lettering was inexplicably made by Gorton of all places before No. 506 went to Clapham museum way back. And since that time the same old incorrect lettering has been painted again and again, I have no idea why. But of course Bachmann have faithfully reproduced this error as their model is presumably of the locomotive as preserved. The same goes for the handrails presumably - most pre-grouping period photographs show a polished steel handrail.

Another interesting livery detail is the tender lettering on the 9J where the words "Great Central" interspersed by the armorial crest are somewhat awkwardly centred on the crest itself over the centre tender axle, leaving unequal gaps between the lettering and the ends of the tender. The majority of contemporary photographs show the lettering and crest centred as a whole unit over the length of the tender - as on "Mons" - which seems far better balanced. However, again Bachmann have most probably got it right as the occasional 9J did have its tender lettering/crest offset as in the attached photograph. I have never seen a photograph of No. 316 but looking at the position of the chimney it is superheated, unlike No. 984.

Nick

This thread has drifted so far from the Bachman releases that they are almost lost in the mists of time.

The merits or otherwise of certain 'real' locomotives could/should be discussed elsewhere. This might allow more balanced thinking to be posted and those that have studied the particular loco or its' workings and history in detail can present their case(s) in a more appropriate environment.

Personally I couldn't give a to## if a Jersey Lilley smelled of flowers or could not pull hardly anything downhill with a tail wind. What I want to read and discuss on here is what Bachman can do for us, the other 95% of modellers that can't be arsed to be on RMW and the Company, to further our great hobby. I'd even enjoy a bit of "I do hope this means that the next (product) will add to this (whatever) range".

A polite request here to get back to discussing the 2018 announcements before I kick this PC down the stairs.

Thank you

Phil

I quite agree and can only apologise for my brief comment about the 'Jersey Lilys', it was meant as an aside only, not  to divert the main topic. I had no idea it would encourage an inflammatory response inciting a small riot of sorts.

Nick

Like this one in Dorringo  

Poor old girl... at least they capped the chimney to prevent rust from within.

I've said it about the Bachmann version before but if the world has too many real GCR 8k locomotives then there's a 'Jersey Lily' fighting to get out amongst those components, Churchward was perhaps the best but not the only advocate of standardisation.

They are the lamps which I fitted onto the edition which I have. I believe they are GCR pattern, but could be wrong.

 

Best regards,

 

Rob.

Here are some examples of GCR lamps for comparison. It looks to be that Bachmann have accomplished this task well.

Nick

 I'd be more optimistic, that between the various manufacturers now bidding for a piece of the OO action these are the sort of subjects that will now get a look in, for so long as there are customers wanting steam locos. There's only disappointing sales prospects in duplicating where a good standard model exists, and the 'never previously available RTR' pool is now dominated by pre-group designs. The popular Southern and Western classes that made it into the final decade of steam operation have been hoovered up for the most part, so there should be some 'Look North' going on. (This may mean we also get such as the Princess and A2/3 from manufacturers wanting a flagship steam model.)

 

That Bachmann haven't offered a GCR design tank loco to round out a well chosen selection of Gorton's workhorse types, is something of a surprise. Probably the A5 or N5 would be the top candidates. If they do venture that, I'd guess at the N5 as the likely suspect, since they don't have an Eastern 0-6-2T in the range.

A GCR tank loco would be fantastic. In fact there appears to be a paucity of RTR LNER tank locos when taking into account the diversity that existed.

Bachmann already have the tender from the Director and the boiler/smokebox/firebox unit from the 8K/O4 in a considerable head-start to producing a model of Robinson's aesthetically pleasing 4-4-2 tender loco if they so wished...