Headstock

Whilst awaiting the drying of paint, I began the first course of action in rescuing my sad RTR A2/3. Hornby have made quite a job of paying tribute to the problematic front end arrangement of the original locomotives. Five points required my attention at the front end, as shown in the image below. 1. The right hand superheater cover was badly positioned on the smokebox. Fortunately, it was also badly glued in place, it was easily removed without damage, by pressure applied from a finger nail, carefully inserted under the edge of the cover. 2. The middle platform, alongside the smokebox of the right hand running board, was sloping down hill from left to right. Who ever put the deflector on, put it on straight in relation to the Smokebox and boiler handrail. However, this left a gap at the bottom edge, one that increased in size towards the front of the deflector. On the front lower platform, above the bufferbeam, the gap was about half a mil between the platform and the underside of the deflector. On dismantling the loco body, it was discovered that the saddle was distorted, it being higher at the front than the rear. As a result, when the running board was screwed on to the body, the saddle distorted the middle platform, bending it downwards towards the front. 3.Not visible in the photo is the daylight gap between the chassis and the body. This was caused by the brass insert threads for the body retaining screws, being glued in place at an angle and the body being force screwed in place on the chassis. The fore and aft positions, are shown in the photographs below, after I had filed the wonky brass thread inserts, flush with the underside of the body. This was required in order to get the body to sit down on the chassis. The body retaining screws have been inserted to show the extreme angle of the threads. 4. As pointed out by Tony G, the cylinders are wrongly located in relation to the running board, with a rather unsightly gap. This is due in part to the problems mentioned in 3. but all areas of the chassis and its associated brackets, that came into contact with the body, required fettling to get everything to sit down nice and square. 5. I removed the sandbox fillers from the upper platform for a number of reasons. They were interfering with straightening out the running board, a certain amount of flash/ sprue attachment required removing and they were misaligned and were also standing to vertically compared to the real thing. The running board itself, required a combination of carefully support and robust tweaking around the dropdown to straighten it out. Most of the above is now complete, with the cylinders on both sides fitting snugly up under the running board. The Saddle has been reprofiled, the unsightly daylight gap is now gone and the running board is now nice and square, The body now screws on to the chassis without distortion. In the process of the above work, the valve gear fell apart on the right hand side, par for the course with RTR I'm told. It has now been repaired and is fully operational. The reversing leaver and speedo bracket both fell off and will be re-fixed along with super heater covers. While the deflectors are off, I will fit brackets, as they are rather flimsy in their attachment to the platform, it will also look better. I will also cut off the lubrication and atomiser pipe runs on the smokebox and replace them with 5 amp fuse wire. I will probably make my own drain cock pipes as well. For whatever reason, to my eye, the little plastic RTR ones supplied, always look super fake . I can start to see the attraction of modern RTR. I didn't appreciate in the past, the amount of hours of modelling enjoyment they provide. The loco is starting to look a little happier and so am I. P.S. I also sorted out the return cranks, both were facing backwards. Much improved bogie wheels though.

You can't use a frame from Brief Encounter as an example! Its a Lean film with with Robert (The Third Man) Krasker as cinematographer. There were so many banks of lights set up on the platform, its a wonder the canopy didn't burst into flames. It probably did, hence wonderful shadow effects in the dark. Krasker was greatly influenced by the light and shadow of German expressionist cinema, nothing about the lighting is genuine in the platform scene shown above. Evening Phil, it looks reasonable for night time, it wouldn't be visible during the day, hence the white lamps. Turn them off for better realism, red paint is about spot on for daylight tail lights. The 'Trains in the Night' record cover, has some typical itty bitty oil lamps shooting out their non existent beam of darkness. .

Nobody expects the Spanish Clayton track cleaning gang. Coming to an exhibition (two meters) nearer to you in 2131.

Good afternoon John, I have very much admired your blue P2, it looks very handsome and well executed. Three things spring to mind, the removal of the ACFI water feed apparatus is sort of logical for your imagined locomotive. However, the casing on the boiler should also be removed. Secondly, Naming the locomotive after a dramatic Scottish title or object of power would be most appropriate and in keeping with the other six locomotives. Finally, a slightly glossier but subtle finish, applied to both locomotives main livery paint work, would lift them above their plastic origins. Thank goodness you didn't paint the wing deflectors black. You are correct as far as Earl Marischal's tender is concerned, for whatever reason, it remained unchanged throughout its existence.

Evening Tom, I have purchased A2/3 Chamiwhatsit. It's a disgusting colour! I was going to rename it as 555 Mushy Peas or Mint source. It will get a repaint into LNER/BR green as E 522 with British Railways on the tender. The tender is correct with high bulkhead and streamlined fairing as built but when it came out of works in 1948, the bulkhead was cut down with the fairing reinstated. I have already sorted out the dimensions for the new lower bulkhead curve, its just a case of marking it out and filing it down. If I'm careful I may be able to remove the fairing fettle it a bit and reuse it. If not, it shouldn't be to hard to make a new one out of plastic sheet, using the original as a template. I suspect that I may even Have a spare brass or cast whitemetal one in stock. You could use the proportions of the bulkhead shape and fairing from the model of Thane of Fife, as this is correct. P.S. I forgot about the curved side sheets on 60501, what a mess!

An update for you Tom, I forgot that I have a set of prints of the ex works Bugatti front end P2's. I thought that these were of the last four locomotives but one is of Cock o' the North. I can confirm that when the loco was ex works with the Bugatti front end, the forward tender bulkhead was also raised in height to the match the cab roof, in order to facilitate the fitting of sheeting between the loco and tender. No streamlined fairing was fitted, a lot of models, some very expensive, have this wrong. The streamline fairing was fitted after the bulkhead was cut down in height in 1948. What does this all mean for the Hornby tender? Basically, they have produced a new variant of LNER eight wheel tender that never existed in the real world.

Good evening Tom, the green books says that the front bulkhead was raised in height on one of the two 'new style tenders' in 1938, presumably that fitted to Cock o' the North. As seen above, the cab sheet is obviously pretty straight between the roof and the tenders front bulkhead, this would confirm what the green book has to say. The green book goes on to say, the bulkhead was then cut down in height in 1948, along with those on the tenders fitted to 503/4/5 and 6. It doesn't make clear if a streamlined fairing was added at the same time the bulkhead height was raised. However, after the bulkhead was cut down in 48, 60501 did have a streamline fairing, identical to that on the other ex P2's (with the exception of 502) and the A2/3's after their bulkhead with original streamlined fairing was reduced in height. As a result, there is the possibility that the tender supplied by Hornby for its Cock o' the North model and it's forthcoming Earl Marishcal (if the same tender moulding is used) are actually no more than complete fantasy. The picture below, ironically used by Hornby, shows the significantly lower cut down forward bulkhead, with streamlined fairing as it appeared from 1948 onwards on 60501. Also, 60502 with the plain fronted bulkhead, exactly as originally built.

The Clayton track cleaning gang ready for action. Watch out for contaminated track pins!

Good evening Clem, another reboilered loco I'm afraid, it being 63851, so not underbuilt. I could actually get away with it in its 6299 guise but 63851 does roll of the tongue nicely, decisions, decisions. It did end up at Colwick though, I'm sure you have one, though I may be confused. A different style of dome will be carried again, I think that it's more of a GN looking thing. Its' a shame that a lot of the after market stuff has gone. Even the most modern RTR locomotives, could benefit from improved or alternative parts, such as chimneys and domes. I scratch built a similar brake pull rod and cylinder arrangement for a B16/1, again its quite visible at the back end. That provided on the Bachmann O4 is quite good and it was retained on my own efforts with the O4/8. I didn't have any problems with altering the angle of the cylinders or slide bars. As I recall, it was just a case of elongating the slots in the motion bracket to allow the repositioning of the slide bar ends. They were then re fixed in place by filling up the the lower part of the slot. In addition, a packing piece was filed up to the right shape, to realign the angle of the the cylinder transverse support bracket. Even if the lengthening of the reversing rod and the shortening of the pony truck, was the only alteration that could be made, a lot of people could significantly improve the appearance of the Bachmann model by doing so. I think Shipley reopens on the 18th of May, There probably won't be much to see, unless the Clayton lot have secretly being breaking lockdown, I wouldn't put it past them but I had better go pay my subs, or at least push it under the door. P.S. I also have a Gibson kit for another Annesley stalwart, 64375. Not a eight legs I no but

Good afternoon Clem, I really like you freight trains, they always seem very genuine and well observed, with the right kinds of vehicles for your area and time period, quite rare. I always thought the Bachmann O4 a slightly strange looking thing but I couldn't put my finger on why, until I measured one up. It has bags of potential though, I have another conversion in the offing, I think it's the same number as one of yours but when it was an Annesley engine, it's allocated to the southbound steel runner. The running board needs a fair amount of heavy duty sawing but as you have shown, it's well worth the effort. The newly exposed frames show up quite well, as is very apparent in your moving pictures. I'm not too sure of the dome on the Bachmann model, I haven't looked at it too closely, as my engines are all reboilered variants. I'm sure it could look better but an original O4 expert may have more information. One thing that is worth adding, is the injector pipe work at the rear, it is quite prominent and fills in the gap. I include a screen shot, one of several I used when doing my locomotives. Talking of screen shots, I shall do one of your grass and send it to Hornby.

Good evening Tony, to be honest, I haven't really thought about it in terms of value for money, I'm not sure how you would judge that in terms of a RTR model railway locomotive. If it makes you happy, its good value for money, if it makes you sad its not? My A2/3 is a bit of a bum, that makes me sad. However, being a bum, I kind of feel sorry for it. Perhaps with a bit of TLC it might become a contender. What is more annoying to me as a RTR newbie, is that the computer artwork and images used to sell the locomotive, just don't resemble what you are going to get. That's not right. Hornby should think more about that.

Good evening Tony to my professional eye, photo one is quite nicely colour balanced and probably represents a true record of the conditions that the photo was taken. Photo two and three both have colour casts that wouldn't be visible to the naked eye. Two being oversaturated with yellow and red, three being slightly blue in the midtones. It is well known that the two locomotives in photo one were painted different colours. Whether this would have been the case in LNER days, is a different question. Scotsman is also quite dirty compared to the K4. There are slight colour irregularities in the blacks and the grey midtones, that can be explained by the low sun, the limitation of the film stock the nature of reflective surfaces and the colour absorption and replication properties of flat midtones against a low strong sun. All of the representations of LNER green in photographs are on the warm end of the spectrum. This is were they should be and they are relatively vibrant with the genuine warmth of organic colours. The A2/3 representation would not sit comfortably alongside them as a related variant of the colour. It has little vibrancy and is way down the cold end of the colour spectrum. All the above could be described as grass or apple green, the A2/3 is defiantly mint green, or at best Exorcist pea soup green, yuck. LNER green in its various shades above = the rolling fields of the British countryside on a summers day. Hornby A2/3 green = mushy peas, looking for a spoon full of mint sauce on a foggy day in February.

Chrome green appears on the 1954 specification. The original just says dark green. I have been told that Brunswick green comes from the Humbrol shade. Back in the day, it was the only paint available that approximated the real thing. That may be an apocryphal story though.

Then some other loco that survives in its original BR green livery, there must be one, City of Whatsit maybe? Its not a colour that I have used on a model in decades, I've just read the BR documentation and seen the swatches.

Good afternoon David, using Klear/future/pledge or any gloss varnish will make the colour more vibrant but it doesn't get around the basic problem. The green being used is the wrong colour temperature, it's too cold, too blue. LNER green was much warmer and towards the yellow end of the colour spectrum, it was officially called grass green but is often referred to as apple green. I would not associate either names with Hornby's colour, it being more like mint green. BR never used Brunswick green on their locomotives, it was available at the time, being somewhat warmer on the red spectrum than the official BR shade. BR chose to mix their own colour, officially it was described as ''dark green after the style of the Great Western''. Swatches of the colour were handed out to works and they mixed their own paint based of the swatch. This resulted in quite a few variations of BR green. Eventually, BR realising the problem and decided to produced their own paint mix specification and had it made up by an outside contractor. From 1954 BR dark green or chrome green was batch produced away from the works. The original BR green based off the swatch, probably survives on the mock up Britannia cab preserved at the NRM. Locomotives such as Winston Churchill, that still carry their original BR livery, will still retain the outside manufactures green as specified by BR.

Good morning Tony, I'm a bit of a virgin when it comes to modern RTR locomotives, given the amount of praise they receive, I'm left slightly bemused. My impression is that the loco could do with a strip down into its component parts. A bit of fettling and re assembly would do it a world of good and then sort out the paint job. With regard to the cylinders, there is a poor fit between the running board and the chassis at the front end, with daylight visible were it should not be. Sorting this may resolve the problem. The super heater covers and the tender buffer beam are also wonky, they would have to come off. There is a lot of good in this model, mechanically it's quite impressive. However, it would require a fair amount of work to bring it up to standard that I would be happy with. I am a modeler, so work to improve it may actually be quite satisfying. It was intended as a back up locomotive, so not a priority. I am currently considering whether to get rid of it or add it to the things to do in a model railway lifetime list.

Good morning Tony, I purchased one of the LNER liveried A2/3's recently. My first RTR locomotive in almost 10 years, imagine my excitement and anticipation, until I got it out of the box. My heart sunk, I was most despondent at the execution of the livery, Robs picture above must have been digitally altered, as the colour on the model, is nothing like LNER green, rather a washed out minty pea soup colour, Yuck! The cost of a pro paint job is irrelevant to myself, Isn't the finish offered by Hornby supposed to be professional? I'm told by a friend, from a suitable distance, that the rendition of green on the BR models is just as repulsive. Both LNER and BR colours looked pretty sad in the display cabinet down at my local, I'm sure anti Corona masks don't effect the perception of colour. Could I do a better job? Darn right. I'm left with the impression that Hornby needs to hire one of those good value for money pro painters to teach them about colour. I include a pic of the real colour on the model and an LNER grass green/apple green swatch for comparison, also note the wonky boiler bands and the mark on the boiler that was literally a lump of dried paint that could be flicked off No doubt I should be gratefully to Hornby, I remain disappointed.

Good afternoon Steve, the digital image looks to have a number of problems for 60502. Hornby could also correct the tender on 60501, or even better, produce the original boiler version of the locomotive with the V fronted cab. That would be right for the tender as supplied and produce more livery variants, not Hornby's strongest point I know, a bit costly for both options I suppose. More importantly, I'm sure a modeler of TW's calibre could quite easily cut off the streamline fairing and file down the bulkhead on his model, it would make for quite an interesting article and be cheaper than a retool.

Good morning Tony, one thing missed in the consultation, is that Earl Marischal, both as a P2 and an A2/2, was the only locomotive out of the six, that never carried a streamline fairing to the forward tender bulkhead. It was identical in height and form to the 'new style tenders' fitted to class A3 and the rebuilt Great Northern. The forward bulkhead on Earl Marischal was also significantly lower and with a flatter curve, than that fitted to the other five locomotives across two tender types. They all had their forward bulkheads cut down to match that of Earl Marischal in 1948. However, they retained the streamlined fairing in the new lowered position, as featured on Honeyway above. Honeyway also originally had the higher front bulkead as featured on the Hornby LNER mint green versions of the A2/3. Honeyway, like all the A2/3's, also had the tender fairing cut down in height in 1948. The tender on the model is not correct for Earl Marischal, the locomotive had a unique tender amongst all of the variants of A2. Cock O' the North also carried a similar beaded 'new style tender' but differed in that it had the streamlined fairing. However, the high style provided on the Hornby model of Cock o' the North and featured on the model of Earl Marischal above, is only right prior to 1948 and only for Cock o' the North. After that date it should be like that on Honeyway on that particular locomotive.

My apologies if I've offended you Andy, I thought it was a bit of banter but you are obviously deeply upset. To make amends, I promise never to comment on your posts again.

Evening Greenie, I don't have your deep pockets, so I have to be more discerning on what I spend my modelling budget on. Your kit discrepancies provide hours of fun, the domed roof ended tourist twin, that apparently wasn't a tourist twin, rather something new, is still my favourite. It will be a sad day for discrepancies, when you stop asking for prototype info after you have completed a kit and start asking for prototype info before you have started a kit. You could work for Hornby!

Evening Greenie, just to add to your woes, Hornby have got the tender wrong for 60501 and the upcoming 60502. As produced, it's only suitable for the loco up until 1948, not in BR green.

Good afternoon Simon. The streamlined fairing is clearly cut down in that photo, but it's a late period photo, Hornby have modelled 60501 early. However, I can find no evidence that the high fairing was carried by 60501 or 60502 in BR green, either with the P2 or Pep boiler. Checking with the green book, fairings were cut down on 2001/3-6 in 1948, Apparently 2002 had a different front plate style to 2001, though they shared the same tender type. As a result, it didn't require cutting down. This is interesting, as some photographs seem to show no fairing at all on this locomotive! I think Hornby have it wrong for both 60501 and the up coming 60502. The cut down fairing is correctly modelled on 60505

Thanks Tony, from what I can tell from a cursory examination of photographs, the tall streamlined fairing was retained on rebuilding but cut down after the locomotive was repainting from plain black into LNER green. Once repainted into BR green, the tall fairing was gone, even when still fitted with the original P2 boiler. Perhaps Hornby have tried to save a bit of dosh by reusing the tender from their P2 model? Not having seen either as a model, I wouldn't know if the tender is the same tooling. That would make Thane of Fife the more accurate of the two models.

Good morning Tony, I have a query that I'm sure you will be able to help with. it concerns the recent Hornby model of Cock o the North. Is the tender correct for the loco as produced, with the high streamlined fairing above the front tender bulkhead? Unless you know better, I'm not sure that this is right for either Cock o' the North or Earl Marischal, at least as depicted by Hornby and certainly not with the late crest as on Eric's improved wiggly pipe example. I would appreciate your opinion, as I can't find a photo that shows this tall fairing in the condition as modelled by Hornby.