7007GreatWestern

Really nice footage of one of them running on 'Alexton':- Andy.

With the greatest respect Ray, whether the Bachmann WD beats the Heljan 47' depends on the criteria you use to compare them. I own both. The WD runs well enough but is distinctly 'growly'. In contrast the Heljan model is very smooth and extremely quiet. Another thing to bear in mind is that although the decoder is in the tender on both locos the WD doesn't even 'pick up' from the tender wheels - the Heljan model does. I'd be very interested to see a head-to-head comparison of the Heljan model's pulling power against the WD and other existing eight coupled engines. Over on 'A Nod To Brent', Bob (81C) has already done a very impressive trial of the 4700's haulage prowess:- http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/69664-a-nod-to-brent/?p=3127990 Charisma is a very subjective thing and probably entirely personal. But owning both I'd take the 4700 every time.......IF you can get one that survives the journey to your layout! Andy.

Hi, The ex GCR ROD 2-8-0 locos used on the GWR weren't 'vacuum fitted' hence no 'brake hoses'. For this reason they could never be used on passenger trains. They would be stopped by steam brake and handbrake only. I seem to remember Bachmann had to issue a notice to customers explaining that no vacuum hoses should be present on the model. I think I'm right in saying the GWR only paid £50 per loco for each of them so what do you expect? Andy.

Ok. Point made! ;-) Andy.

I find it very hard to believe that the kind of damage seen on models like Rob's would have been present when the model left the factory. For it to have done so there would have to be no Quality Assurance at the factory whatsoever. So if that's the case you have to wonder where in the distribution chain it's happening. On the wagon from the factory to the docks in China? On the ship from China? How much shock is an ocean going container ship really subject to? My own guess (and I admit it is only a guess) is that much of this damage is happening once the goods are in the hands of couriers in the UK. Having recently worked for a well known UK national parcels company I've seen the casual way packages are just thrown around, dropped and left at the bottom of huge piles of other parcels. The emphasis in these companies is using cheap, agency, mainly EU labour to 'tip' artic trailers as fast as possible in order to turn the wagons around ASAP. It takes two blokes about 1 1/2 to 2 1/2 hours to tip a 45ft long, 9ft wide trailer that is loaded from floor to ceiling (about 9ft) solidly with parcels. Just how much care and attention do you think is lavished on each particular parcel? Notwithstanding that, the manufacturers should be designing packaging that can withstand significant shock, impact and load. I wonder if any of them actually test the packaging by sending their products out onto real world distribution networks to establish whether it's fit for purpose? One final point. My 47xx is superb, but how much of that is down to the fact that I picked the model up from the retailer in person rather than entrusting it to Parcel Farce or Herpes? Andy.

Hornby and Heljan seem to particularly badly affected by design mistakes, production line assembly errors and losses in transit. Is it my imagination, but Bachmann don't seem to be affected to anything like the same extent? They are I believe greatly assisted by the fact that their parent company, Kader Industries also own Sander Kan, who assembled Hornby's models back in the day when Hornby were in their pomp. Bachmann limit themselves to a very conservative programme of releases each year and their models seem to take at least twice as long as everyone else to reach market. None the less, their models are usually well researched (*), robust, correct in most details, straightforward and generally reach their customers in one piece! That might not sound very glamorous, but that's the kind of bread and butter business sense that prevents the company's reputation ending up in the toilet and keeps the administrators and creditors at bay. I should add that I am not particularly a cheerleader for Bachmann (I find their motors and electrics to be frankly crude), but I think the other manufacturers could learn lessons from them. Andy. *Bachmann Modified Hall excepted.

Tony, I'm a regular visitor to your YouTube channel - Alexton is a really nice layout. I hope you'll post some video of your 47xx. It should make a very interesting comparison with your 'Big Bertha' 0-10-0. My 47' is superb, though I seem to be have been particularly lucky and you have to feel for the folks who have been let down. Andy.

A wet cotton wool bud with a tiny amount of washing up liquid is my preferred method of removing greasy fingerprints and oil leaks. Rinse using the other end of the bud dipped in neat water.

Sadly Oddball's paint-filled 76mm munitions weren't used in that particular engagement.........perhaps he was feeling uptight that day? Woof! Woof! Woof! Andy.

Hi Ray, Along with George Dent you were there 'pioneer' when it came to giving concise instructions as to how to correct the warped running plate on early releases of the Hornby Eight Coupled tanks. As you will recall a significant amount of material had to be removed from various parts of those models to get everything to lie straight, including the smokebox saddle, motion bracket radius plate and outside steam pipes. Those models could not possibly be built correctly without a significant amount of fettling by hand. The most recent releases of the model don't exhibit the deformation to anything like the same degree and one has to wonder whether Hornby have altered the tooling or they are getting the production line operatives to adjust them by hand. Both sound horribly expensive! However, as well as correcting the running plate issue Hornby also improved some of the detailing (eg separately fitted smokebox dart) and upped the spec of the chassis (brass axle bearings). For all the above reasons I stand by my point: in fairness to Hornby they HAVE done something about the quality of this model to the point where it is now rather good. However, it took them several years and multiple release cycles to get there and that's not much consolations to someone who bought one of the early ones and wishes he hadn't! Regarding the Grange, it seems to be going in the opposite direction to the Eight-Coupled tanks. The early ones built by Sander Kan were invariably beautifully built and ran like Swiss watches. I really can't account for the deteriorating quality of assembly of those models but wear in the injection moulding tooling doesn't sound plausible to me. Andy.

Hi Shroomy I've collected my 47xx today from a certain well known retailer in the Widnes area. It is the same model as yours - 4706 in BR Black. I've fitted mine with a Lenz Silver 21+ also. I had to set bit 0 of CV29 to get the direction of travel correct, but apart from that it runs superbly on both DC and DCC. The decoder is set to Lenz' factory default CVs (Long Address excepted). Just a few early impressions for anyone interested. The model is far more impressive in the flesh that in the Rails of Sheffield photos. The photos on Hattons website give a more accurate impression (to my eyes). Mine had no assembly issues whatsoever - straight handrails, buffer beam struts in situ and no rattling parts in the packaging. This must be a world's first, as usually if there is one duff model in a batch that's the one I end up with! The motor and geartrain are very quiet - far more so than many of my Bachmann models. Again, to my eyes the loco captures the uncompromising bulk of the locos superbly. If the loco is let down at all it is in relatively small details. For example, the handbrake and water scoop standards are so close to the tender bulkhead that the respective crank handles wouldn't turn if it were a real loco! There are some really nice touches however. The safety valves are painted a realistic dark colour quite distinct from the polished brass bonnet that surrounds them. Also, the crosshead driven vacuum pump and 'working' spindle are represented even though they are so far set back from the running plate edge that they are almost invisible. I suspect the model will continue to divide opinion. From my point of view, this is the first GWR rtr model for years that has caused me to say "Wow!". Well done Heljan! Andy.

Nice work and thanks for sharing. Do you know if drive is onto third or fourth coupled axle?

Dear Stationmaster, The operative word in post #553 is 'innovate', meaning "make changes in something established, especially by introducing new methods, ideas, or products". That is not the same as 'invent', meaning to create or conceive something entirely original. Had the OP used the word 'invent' rather than 'innovate' my answer in Post #558 would have been different. The GWR may or may not have invented the things listed in my post but then invention wasn't being discussed: innovation was. I will stand corrected about the GWR ATC being the only system of its type in the world between 1906 and 1947. That appears to be a false claim originating from Adrian Vaughn and I am happy to retract. Paragraph 3 of the following article is very illuminating:- http://mysite.du.edu/~etuttle/rail/atcgwr.htm It is true to say that the GWR's ATC system was developed entirely 'in-house' rather than being 'bought-in' technology. It was of such originality that it was protected by two UK patents. It therefore passes the the tests of being both 'innovative' and 'inventive'. Andy

Hi Brian, I'm all for taking liberties so long as they serve the only purpose I can see to this madness called model railways - namely to bring pleasure to those who own, operate and view them. Someone who slavishly pursues prototype realism to the extent they have ceased to enjoy their pastime has lost the plot. They might as well be at work! If your tinplate stock gives you joy, it is serving its purpose. I'll be honest and say when I opened you post this morning I didn't know the answer to your question about "The Pines" but I had a pleasant half hour or so researching the best answer I could give. I recall many years ago one of the Railway Modelling Magazines had a 'prototype for everything' section. In it were examples of all manner of exceptions to rules or common assumptions, enabling modellers to be less hidebound in their thinking. The truth could often be stranger than fiction. I think that short section of track in Gloucestershire where LMS and GWR trains would occasionally race one another could well qualify! Andy.

Oh really? So the country's first Pacific locomotive wasn't 'The Great Bear'? Nor did the GWR pioneer Automatic Train Control, the world's first system that protected trains from running through signals at danger, and the only one until 1947? Nor did it produce innovations like diesel railcars, steam railmotors and autocoaches in an attempt to make unrenumerative lines viable? Nor did it build a unique network of Broad Gauge permanent way which delivered superior stability for railway vehicles? Nor did it conduct bold experiments like Brunel's trial atmospheric railway? Nor was it the only British mainline railway to convert steam locomotives to oil firing at a time of acute national shortage after the war? You can accuse the GWR of many things, but failure to innovate doesn't stand much scrutiny for the above reasons and more besides. Nice try at a 'wind up' though! Andy.

Ah! So they can reproduce among themselves? Could be a very a useful excuse should I ever have to explain away the number of the bl##dy things I own. Perhaps I need to restrict their intake of Nutty Slack?

Rob, Great to see 7233 in her new home with a new identity and a fabulous repaint by James. The transfer has had unintended consequences however. My other locos are now envious that 7233 is galloping around the glorious South Hams while they remain cooped up in boxes. I fear insurrection may not be far away....... And.

Brian, If you're looking for candidate locations to justify joint running or GW and LMS stock I can suggest several. My own favourite is the North & West Route running from Shrewsbury to Newport with LMS locos getting as far south as Hereford or even Pontypool Road. The line passes through some fabulous scenery along the 'Welsh Marches' and its metals saw Kings, Castles, Counties and Stars run alongside Royal Scots, Jubilees and Patriots (Rebuilt and Unrebuilt). If you model Shrewsbury station itself you can add 'Duchesses' to that list! As you say, the GWR and LNWR/LMS operated the Chester to Birkenhead line jointly but for the latter part of the line's period of steam operation the GWR's trains were pulled by nothing more glamorous than Large Prairie tanks. In terms of running the 'Pines Express' alongside GWR locos I may have an answer for you. I believe the GWR and LMS shared running rights over the line from Standish Junction (just south of Gloucester) as far as Cheltenham and that included the 'Pines Express'. There's a fascinating webpage describing in detail operations at Cheltenham Lansdown signal box, a location which saw GW, LMS and Southern locomotives! An excerpt of the train register clearly shows the Pines Express:- https://sites.google.com/site/gloucestershirerailwaymemories/home/signal-box-registers/lansdown-junction-signal-box-train-register-4-february-1956 I hope the above is of interest. Andy.

Darn that's obscure! Kudos for the research mswjr! Railroadbill, if the Bachmann flush riveted model is anything to go by your donor tender IS missing four snaphead rivets on the fireman's side.......just not there :-( https://goo.gl/images/u8cSPG Andy.

Hi Ray, Thanks for another of your invaluable tutorials - you're one of very few people who take the reader 'step-step' through the process of improving rtr models. Given the quality of assembly coming off the production lines in China these days that's invaluable. The wire you're referring to is at the exhaust end of the brake ejector pipe. I have a feeling that its purpose is to drain condensation away, presumably between the frames. The pipe that runs along the running plate towards the buffer beam is the conduit for the GWR's Automatic Train Control system. If you're at all interested you might want to read the article below:- http://mysite.du.edu/~etuttle/rail/atcgwr.htm Andy.

May The Lord have mercy on your soul my friend. Still, redemption is available at any time and I think you've earned some with your work in Photoshop...... Andy.

Just a thought, but maybe if Heljan's metal struts are detached from the front running plate it might actually sit correctly. Also, just a thought, they might be replaced by Hornby's spare part X6210 which contains their rather nice cosmetic struts for the 28xx. No guarantees of any of that working of course..... Andy.

Thanks for that Rob. I know what you mean about the Hatton's 14xx/48xx/58xx. I have three of them. They are among the quietest and smoothest locos I own. On DCC I have found they can run at ultra low speeds making them ideal for shunting. The down side as you say is pickup. They don't like dipped rail joints and I wouldn't fancy operating them over insulfrog points. My own preferred method of cleaning them is to flip them onto their back into a Peco cradle. I then apply the power to the trailing axle using mini crocodile clips. The driving wheels are then cleaned with cotton wool buds dipped in a little meths......borrowed from our drinks cabinet........hick!!!!!!! Andy.

Hi Rob, What are your thoughts on the performance of the Kernow 1361 chassis? I ask because it comes from the DJM stable if memory serves. Andy.

The model is undoubtedly a 'curate's egg', both good and disappointing in parts. But then that's been the case with so many of the GWR rtr models released in recent years. The Bachmann 'Modified Hall' & 64xx, Dapol Railcar, DJM 14xx, Oxford 'Dean Goods', Hornby 'King', 'Hall' and 'Eight Coupled Tanks" have all had their detractors, sometimes over body detail and sometimes over chassis performance. That hasn't stopped me acquiring and enjoying most of the them! I'd be interested to see an owner's poll of the most highly rated OO gauge GWR locos. I could be wrong but something tells me that 'old timers' like the Hornby 'Castle' & 'Grange' along with the Bachmann 'Small Prairie' and 57xx would still be 'Kings of the Hill' all these years later. Regarding the price of the 47xx, it really depends on how you look at it. For £150 you are getting one big, powerful tender engine of similar scale as a 'King' or 'Castle'. Given that an 0-6-0 Saddle Tank can now set you back £135 it looks like a (relative) bargain! Set against that is the fact the cost of these models is rising at a rate much higher than UK wages or interest and for £150 a lot of folks want a model that requires no further work or expense. My own view is that a lot of the cosmetic issues on this model could be put right at little expense. When you look at Stationmaster Mike's list there isn't much there that requires radical butchery to make it right. I wonder if CJL of this parish would be up for doing an article on upgrading the model? The $6 million dollar question however is the chassis and no amount of cosmetic improvement will redeem the model if the chassis is a pup. Andy.