Edwardian

Too much information

Quite

I suspect we are getting seriously off topic, but, I think there is more to it than that. It would be wrong to point to various pre-1948 releases and claim that they amounted to even the beginnings of adequate coverage of the Grouping or pre-Grouping scenes. Everything flows from the single salient fact that Blue and Red Box only tool for the BR modeller. For Grouping and pre-Grouping designs this allows manufacturers in most cases to livery the models back to the late 1930s with ease. After that, it becomes a bit more hit and miss, and by the time you have arrived pre-WW1, there is very little. This means that the available items represent patchy coverage to say the least. One accurate LBSC tank, one accurate LSWR tank, one accurate SECR six-coupled goods, coaches announced relevant to only one of the foregoing, etc. In my non-pre-Grouping Ranter incarnation, I model the Great Western in 1935. You would be amazed what an exotic choice even 1935 can be, compared with 1936, say, or 1938, let alone 1947 or the Nationalised scene. Until the incomparable Hornby Colletts came along, and by goodness they were a long time coming, there was not a single suitable passenger vehicle to modern RTR standards for a GW layout set in 1935 or earlier. Even now, you cannot go south of 1928. Hattons' "4800" has deliberately excluded tooling for the pre-War as built appearance, so even when some recent releases allow better representation of the GW in the Thirties, retrograde steps are still being quite consciously taken. Hornby and Kernow decisions have denied Southern modellers pre 1936 and pre 1933 ex-LSW coaching sets respectively. It is not merely pre-Groupers who are cut out of RTR LSWR coaches, but anyone who might want to try the first 10-13 years of the Southern. Early Grouping is just as badly covered as pre-Grouping. Once you go earlier than 1937/8, coverage shelves off very dramatically.

Fair point! A package arrived in the post today. I am thrilled and ever so grateful! It will spur me on to some serious mediaeval building!

Ditto. But only if there is a suitable pre-Grouping era model. Bachmann have done to Midland designs what Hornby has done to South Western. They're no bl**dy good for pre-Groupers.

Sweet

Couldn't agree more. I'm 47. I wasn't around in the '50s and '60s. Blue diseasels score a Zero nostalgia rating with me. There were 125 years of FASCINATING and COLOURFUL railway history before 1950. Sorry if that comes as a shock to anyone!!! (please someone explain this to the RTR industry)

A, B, C, P, P1, 1001, G6 BTP, 398, G, 901, 1440 plus, lots and lots of hoppers and lots and lots of clerestories. Well, a chap can dream ....

Pah, nothing to what we have in Barney (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4YggCiDRI0)!!!!!!!!

Pictures of this layout are pure joy! Brilliant effect with the hut.

Or possibly Hornby is releasing it with the PP set because that's as much as it will be able to pull? I have not any means of testing my M7, but I read that others have found it lacks pulling power. Might not the H Class suffer similar issues? I hope not.

I took a deep breath and counted to 10.

Me too!

Goodness, yes, why would anyone want to model the pre-Nationalisation scene? More BR Era only coaches. Wonderful.

Good point. I take it all back. Does this mean Hornby's is the right shade for GW green?

Great - one Dean Goods with an inaccurate firebox and another in Hornby's special version of GW green! Come back Mainline, all is forgive!

The connection, presumably, being a pagoda?

No, the BR and late Grouping modeller has been spoilt for ex-LSWR stuff in recent years. If you will permit me to amend your list for LSWR modellers: Tanks Engines: M7 - was released in Urie sage as a Ltd Edition and, now, finally in Drummond green Adams Radial 4-4-0 (by two manufactuers) - Both Adams livery versions are "as preserved" - the tooling does not cater for pre-Grouping, albeit it can probably be fairly easily altered O2 (that's two 0-4-4 types for the LSWR) - No LSWR version. That's still 1 type of 0-4-4T, indeed, just 1 tank engine, for the LSWR. Beattie Well tank - ditto and still the Dapol dock tank to come Tender Engines: T9 - Tooling incompatible with a LSWR, innards may be too. Urie sage green version a preservation fake. 700 - Tooling incompatible with a LSWR, innards may be too. N15 - a bit late for me, but certainly no LSW version produced And don't forget the 4 LSWR coaches recently released by Hornby with Kernow push pull stock and a break van on the way. - no, Hornby give you ex-LSW coaches from 1935/6 and Kernow ex-LSW Gate Stock from 1933. I don't call 1 tank engine and no coaches "spoilt" As for future releases? Great if I want to model a dock. Not having a go at you, and I adopt your enthusiasm for the release, but it seems fair to point out that producing tooling with the sole interest of the BR period modeller in mind, as Red Box consistently does, does not equate to coverage of a pre-Grouping company. Rant over, I'll take a pill and lie down in a darkened room for a bit ....

These days I temper my enthusiasm, knowing that Hornby only tool for the BR modeller, which means many pre-Grouping livery models are merely models of "as preserved". But, if the reality is that I can only buy models of the prototypes the outline of which was not changed between WW1 and withdrawal under BR, then I should still have something to be very pleased about should the model of the H Class be released in full Wainwright livery. Provided of course, that Hornby can match Bachmann in that regard. Hornby's liveries in a few instances have been off in the colours, and I never thought the black green-lined Class 700 was quite as good as Bachmann's black green-lined C Class, though still impressive. I hope Hornby do not spare their efforts if they attempt this livery, because I am sure their best can be good enough. If I were the Bluebell, I'd want a fully lined Wainwright liveried version in my gift shop. It would be a logical choice, and I refuse to despair of logic occasionally applying to the crazy world of RTR releases. So, close to delight. Hope for fully lined delight in due course. It is good to see Hornby producing such a model, despite its difficulties. I hope it is an model I, for one, can fully support in due course. It's always best to have something to be positive about!

Likely the 'P'

Well, if one of the 3 liveries is the full Wainwright, I'd say they still need to work on it:

No, there are many other reasons why they all look the same.

Thank is helpful, thanks. My assumption is that one of the arc-roof 1909 pairs went to the branch more or less straight away. If so, the set is likely to span the operation of both O2s, introduced in 1906, and the Radials, from 1913. I am guessing that the Radials would have been in Drummond livery by that stage. I confess that I have not researched the point, so I do not know which 415s went there in 1913 and, therefore, which builder/variation, but there must be a reasonable prospect of converting and repainting a Hornby Radial to suit. I do not know which O2s served on the line and it is not a class I have studied either, so I do not know whether the Kernow model can be back-dated to its pre-WW1 condition. For the Grouping Era modeller, I suggest that this is a very useful pair that could be combined with a 48' Third, an even easier Triang conversion. Potentially, then, your olive green O2s, Radials and M7s need not be forced to skulk solely in late Thirties; suddenly another 13 years of sunny West Country summers opens up for you! A pair, or trio, of these coaches would have allowed Hornby to support their M7 and Radial from pre-WW1 pre-Grouping to 1936. That might strike some as a better choice, but, Hornby only ever tools for the BR modeller. Shame.

P.S. While I think Robin has done a smashing job on the repaints to LSW livery, if you're content with a non-lav. branch set, the old Triang clerestories are an easier and vastly cheaper alternative. In response to someone considering re-painting the Triangs as LSWR coaches in the LSWR M7 topic, I had a bit of a trawl and came up with this: If you are prepared to cut and shut (and build just 3 incy-wincy sections of side(!)) you can use the Triangs to form a pukka branch set for your Radial and M7. Your post prompted me to return to Volume 1, as I had a feeling that the Triangs would work best as short 1890s bogie coaches. I know that the Triangs as LSW stock is not a new dodge, but I've not looked into the possibilities before, so it's new to me! May I start by giving you three pieces of good news: •One problem you have with the Triangs is that there is nothing helpful for representing the lavatory compartments that seem to have been so relatively plentiful in SW non-corridor stock - but I have identified 3 lavless prototypes that work together. •Further good news is that the panel style is consistent with SW practice. For instance, the waist panels are at the same height, and Third and Second Class compartment spacings are a reasonable match. •In fact, as I have just started trying to convert Triangs into pukka GW Van Thirds, I assure you, it looks easier to make a LSW branch set than it does to turn the coaches into anything resembling a GW diagram! And one piece of bad: •You would need 8' Fox bogies. Mailcoach produced plastic ones. They are ostensibly available separately from the Cooperdaft website. Good luck with that. 247 Developments once upon a time produced white-metal ones, but I believe the new management is still looking into what bogies they may be able to obtain (they don't have the moulds). Back to the coaches. In 1909, the SW took a number of 42' Thirds and 45' Tri-Composites dating from the early 1890s and converted them to Brake Thirds and Brake Compos respectively. They were formed in pairs for branch work. Some had an arc roof, and some the more recent semi-elliptical (like the Roxey coaches). The pairs had matching roof profiles. One of the arc roof sets is pictured at Lyme Regis, nicely in time for your Radial to arrive in 1914. I have not researched the branch, and am not the person to tell you what coaching stock ran on it, but judging from the picture they did have one of the sets from circa 1909. (1) The Brake Third. For this you require 1 Triang brake coach. The Third Class compartment spacings are a good match and you have enough of them. The double luggage doors and 3 blind panels, ditto. The bit in between (3 blind panels, projection/ducket and Guard's door) you cut out and discard. Replace it with a wider SW style ducket and a narrow vertical strip of blind panelling. The resulting coach is a little shorter that the Triang. If modelling the arc roof, I suggest the Ratio Midland Suburban coaches have ends and sides that are likely to be of a similar profile (but I have not checked). (2) The Brake Composite. For this you require 1 Triang brake coach and 1 non-brake coach. The brake end is exactly like the Brake Third: End section of your Triang brake plus the narrow panel and ducket section you will need to build. You will find that the Triang non-brake coach has compartments that work well for Second Class. To reproduce the next 4 compartments (Second, First, First, Second) just take 2 pairs of the Triang compartments and add a thin sliver between them to give you the additional width between the 2 First Class compartments. Then add a Third Class compartment from your Triang brake coach. That is all you need do. And, I suggest, even Hornby's M7 could pull it! Weddell says that later, these sets were often strengthened by inserting a 48' Third in between, though the only photographs he shows of this arrangement date from Southern days. These Thirds date from 1894 and have the semi-elliptical roof profile. Weddell has 2 photos from Southern days. One shows the Third inserted between an arc-roofed pair, and the other between a semi-elliptical-roofed pair. You will guess that this conversion involves compartments from 2 Triang brake coaches in order to make up the 8 compartments you need. Certainly, for me, second-hand Triangs at no more than £10 a pop are preferable to this latest expensive release of limited utility.

Indeed, John, you may choose to re-wheel, but you should not have to do so simply in order to achieve an acceptable level of performance of a standard with other modern RTR coaches.