atom3624

He doesn't appear to have been active for a couple of weeks, and the Hattons 'live stream' was cancelled last week as well ....

Al.

One major reason for the TPE locomotive variants being so popular is a certain other manufacturer in Ireland ... 

Al.

Don't worry too much, you know many of those '2020 announcements' won't appear until 2021 anyway .... !!

Al.

Ah OK.

Thanks.

Al.

Is production going ahead then?

Al.

One container's enough for a year's worth of UK model railways, and each row has at least 250 x 40' containers ... that's a lot!!

That's one of the biggest and newest on the seas .... nice choice - if you had one!

Just imagine how many Deltics are on that!!  

OK, too soon ... loads of capacity nevertheless.

Al.

Obviously still discussing the A2/2 and A2/3 then .....   

Al.

That's the James Bond ejector seat option!!

Al.

Unless I've missed something, the much-commented on demise of the CavAlex 91 has been announced, Hornby confirmed they're not immediately producing the Mk.4 coaches, at least not within the next 12-15 months apparently ... so, couldn't a double advantage be taken by CA?

1. Get the Mk.4's out ASAP - before a Hornby knee-jerk.

2. Prove what excellent detail and quality other manufacturers are capable of - CA cf Hornby production.

3. Use some of the (assumed) profits from (assumed) extra-sales successes of the Mk.4's to get the 'top end 91' on track.

OK, decision has been taken, and any business 'opportunity' is a risk, so apologies for joining the 'broken record'.

As in the previous post CA will have been through these and other scenarios till the cows came home several times over - just a pity.

Al.

Should see them 'buzzing around' quite soon .... 

Al.

They locate under the 'nut' which retains the power bogie.

Al.

Thanks for the update Fran.

Sounds like Christmas 2020 is going to be busy!!

Al.

These 'Speculators' consider themselves collectors ...

Perhaps some have a vague interest in railways, if not particularly model railways.

Many, as inferred will probably just put in a drawer as a 'keepsake' for 10-20 years, then bring it out 'one rainy day'.

It takes all sorts I suppose.

Al.

It may be one line, but it is quite a major line, link and is pretty historic.

30 years is also quite substantial.

I think the 91 certainly merits being modelled.

I suppose the question is does it merit several versions - including the old?

Al.

If Hornby can create something to the standard they did for the 50, 56, 60 locomotives, then I would guess most would be very satisfied.

The demise of the Cavalex project is very unfortunate, I agree - they put a lot of effort into it.

Al.

Do you know what made me realise that was a model?

The numbering on the locomotive!!

The close-up realism is that good - excellent job there!

Al.

I suppose at the end of the day, let's see what Hornby come up with.

I'm swaying to a preference for the single now!!

More for the reason mentioned - the in-line chamfered form following the external lines ... 

Al.

1 hour ago, micklner said:

Further to above comments , again below has been taken from the Brown book.

 

26.05.1935 Double Chimney fitted Test runs commence.

 

All the Blast Pipe tests are listed in the book from the 30.05.1935 to 06.06.1935. On the 05.06.1935 she produced 1702 H.P at the Drawbar !!

 

13.10.1936 Doncaster for rebuild .

 

So after a bit more reading ,the Double Chimney appears ?? to have had a Test life of about 2 weeks.

Are you implying the double chimney was fitted on/before 26MAY35 then removed on/after 05JUN35?

I don't see the point if the rebuild is planned, then made on/after 13OCT36.

Totally agree, W1 carried the single blastpipe / chimney for much longer.

Curious after the 1st rebuild with the narrower blastpipe it appears the chimney was trimmed flush with the side plates / deflectors and appears to be shamfered, sloping up in line with the delfectors.

Proof of the pudding, as they say ...

After all I've 'said' (!!) I suppose I could live with a single - this doesn't look half bad: 

Al.

Where's 'Hattons' Dave'?

Is this him in the foreground dressed in orange?

Al.

15 months with a Kylchap - July 1935 - October 1936 by this text - 'LNER Ecyclopaedia'.

Looks better IMhO, 'though, after rebuild one, or two ... the single blastpipe diameter was reduced and outlet lowered to flush - not sticking out .... looked interesting, and somehow 'streamlined' with the modified single.

Another of Chapelon's recommendations was the addition of a Kylchap (Kylala-Chapelon) exhaust arrangement. In 1934, the P2 Cock o'the North appeared. This was the first LNER locomotive with the Kylchap arrangement, and in 1935 Gresley ordered No. 10000 to have the same arrangement fitted. Due to the unconventional nature of No. 10000, a number of trials were performed with different variations in the Kylchap arrangement. No. 10000 ran through May and early-June 1935, testing final adjustments to these different variations. After these adjustments were completed, it re-entered Darlington on 14th June for a hood smoke-lifter to be fitted. This was a cowl which bridged the gap between the two wings of the casing around the chimney, and was intended to increase the smoke clearance. No. 10000 re-entered service on 10th July 1935.

The End of the Water-Tube Boiler

W1 No. 10000 ('Hush-Hush') entered Darlington Works again on 21st August 1935 for further repairs, having run about 90,000 miles since new. A number of further modifications were being considered, when Gresley ordered all further work to stop whilst he considered a scheme to rebuild it with a conventional fire-tube boiler.

On 13th October 1936, the water-tube boiler W1 made its last journey: from Darlington Works to Doncaster Works to be rebuilt with a conventional fire-tube boiler. Out of the 1,888 days since it was built, No. 10000 spent 1,105 days in Darlington Works.

Al.

Turbomotive is high up on my list of 'wants'.

If Hornby continue with this pro-active marketing and development, then why not engineer the to-be-delivered Princess Royals into 6202?

A Lizzie with a double blastpipe as well!!

Al.

Very true.

The option I avoided mentioning was that initially it would be relatively easy for Hornby to apply the Kylchap of the streamlined A4-esque body on the original - thus cutting manufacturing costs. It could leave the 'single option' open, if not to Hornby, then to after-market suppliers / modellers.

Al.

From what I've seen of 'gloss' finishes, despite being transparent or nearly, they seem to be relatively quite thick.

This seems to be the problem, losing a little of the fine detail, thus 'not looking right'.

It's unfortunate that the finish isn't reliable as well.

For a preserved engine, which is a static display, it makes sense that the finish is impeccably shiny.

Conversely, if it's a preserved but operational engine, super shiny and brilliant throughout is not realistic as once fired up, there'll be all manner of grease and soot in various places.

I would definitely like manufacturers to resolve the 'realism problem' surrounding the smokeboxes - they should definitely be matt, even mid-/dark- grey and matt, not black cf the rest in satin, once a bit of heat gets in the system. OK this isn't applicable with the P2, but is with all non-streamlined locomotives.

Al.

If there is a separate moulding, I think that it's more to assist in the manufacturing.

Historically, a single is more appropriate, but aesthetically, a double definitely looks better, and it still ran for a year or so with it before rebuild.

Al.