atom3624

Thanks for the information and reply.

I suppose if investing that much in a limited edition locomotive, returning to correct costs won't be that much.

Relatively easily renamed / renumbered to the experienced modeller.

Al.

Did the 1:1 Bittern twin-tendered version ever have valances?

Al.

As you say, digressing, and meddling to the extent of iron plates and magnets obviously works, but is a bit OTT - I suppose that is what our hobby is in the search of realism.

I just found it disappointing when I had one, finding the Bachmann 66 had no problem with a big rake of bogie hoppers, but the so-called British-based railways powerhouse 70 couldn't touch it - so I sold it!

Back to HATTONS' 66 - not long to go now, and can't wait - should be excellent by all accounts, and several 'unveiling video' could be interesting.

If any of you out there do these, how about an 'independent comparison' between the 2, or more, particularly wrt performance - smoothness, slow, fast, load hauling?

Al.

According to one well known source, it's: Technological Hierarchy for the Removal of Undesirables and the Subjugation of Humanity

Al.

I thought Bachmann just about got it spot on - unlike the 70 which is WAY too light despite the detail - but this Hattons 66 has quite simply moved the ball quite a lot further up the pitch, ready for Harry Kane to net it, shall we say.

Al.

Not mine ...

Yet?  

Al.

A few problems with tunnels and stations, 'though there again ... no, that's bad taste.

Class 40 is definitely one I would like to see within the available 'new age high definition UK hobby grade proprietary locomotives'.

Al.

I still hope for 37's big brother, the 40.

Al.

Just pre-ordered one - gone for a 37 001.

Trying to 'blend' diesel and steam ...

Could do with a modern one I suppose, I just like the old blue / yellow look.

Al.

Maybe it's an A-S Pepsi Cola wagon ......

Al.

I always had room inside my Sir Winston, Flying Scottie, but agree it was tight inside the (probably closer to HO/HO) Princess Royal - with the X-04's used at the time.

Scalextric was around, with smaller motors, with decent power, but perhaps there just wasn't that much choice 'back then'.

It's all 'consigned' now ... pity.

Al.

That's a very astute consideration, but cannot change anything now!

I suppose most are finescale-enough NOW that it's generally the cylinders protruding most, so using 'modern standards' it could work.

Explaining the 'Continental modellers' I think you are 100% correct - 60's Tri-ang valve motion - even Hornby Dublo's - was a tad 'heavy handed'.

This could probably have caught on UK-style higher platforms, generally not present on the 'Continent'.

Al.

When I first found out, as an OCD teenager 45 years ago, I wasn't best pleased!!

To this day I still ask myself if it was a 'valvegear consideration' how come 'Continental' HO modellers - let's call them HO/HO (it's nearly Christmas after all!!) - can purchase HO scale / HO gauge models, yet 'we' have to put up with imperfectly proportioned OO/HO .... broken record to all of us no doubt.

MOVIN' ON .... !!

Let's see what the Warley Surprise will be.

Al.

I was just thinking that - with the Deltic, and now the 37 .... !!

Al.

49 minutes ago, Roy Langridge said:

 

Sorry, but you have lost me. OO is a gauge whether you say OO or OO gauge.

 

Anyhow, whatever makes you happy,

 

Roy

OO is the SCALE, NOT the GAUGE.

HO is - unfortunately - our Gauge.

Were we to be OO scale / OO gauge - it would not be called OO / HO.

OO Gauge = P4 = 18.83mm gauge.

HO Gauge = 'Normal OO/HO' whereby 'we' use HO gauge, with 16.5mm between the rails - unfortunately.

An incorrect application which can never be corrected, unfortunately, unless you've the patience of a saint, and the funds of a lottery winner, and run P4.

Al.

1 hour ago, Roy Langridge said:

 

No, both are 4mm scale, that is as far as it goes. 00 is 16.5mm tracks, 009 9mm tracks. These are gauges, not scales.

 

Roy

Sorry Roy, have to disagree!

Did not say 'OO Gauge', just said 'OO'.

This means that OO9 is 100% relevant.

Judging from previous A-S comments, I really don't think it's a market they'll go for, so I DO agree it's not going to happen.

Al.

OO9 is OO - just narrow gauge.

Didn't say OO/HO as 'we' have them.

Al.

When a small boy, I always liked 'the big nosed diesels'.

When a larger small boy, I started 'getting into' model railways, and elder brother at one stage purchased a Tri-ang green 37 - which I thought was great.

When an early teenager I realised these 'big nosed diesels' on local railways weren't 37's, but my real favourite, the 40 ...

That's when I stopped liking the 37 as much!

REALLY wanted an A-S 40!!

Al.

How about narrow gauge?  OO9?

Al.

Great info there, thanks.

Just looking at 'father and son' in the photo, it's interesting to see just how much difference there is in the loading gauges.

Al.

How long to go before 'the announcement'?

This weekend?  !!

Al.

3/4 of what I wished for - I wanted the full fat 40!!

I just want to know Fran, did Bachmann upset you in a former 'life' ?  !!

Like the Deltic and 92, these look superb - as is to be expected.

Al.

Developing my last post, Dapol were supremely impressive with the Class 68.

I wonder if the Class 59 can out-haul the Hatton's Class 66 - as is apparently possible 'in real life' when comparing maximum tractive efforts and historic loads hauled - when the 2 locomotives finally appear? !!!

Wonder what the weights will be.

The Hatton's 66 is already looking impressive, and what we've seen so far of Dapol, they keep upping their game .... should be interesting!!

Al.

I hadn't realised how 'different' the 59 is from the 66!

Same generator power, more power to the traction motors, higher maximum tractive effort, etc.. ... basically by numbers alone it should list higher than the 66, shouldn't it?

Don't get me wrong, I've seen a few 'sob stories' during 59 development, and how much more 'finished' the 66 is - it's domination of the British rails proves that.

4 more cylinders than the 66 as well, so if Dapol do 80% the job Hattons have of the 66 sounds, it should be individual and special in it's own way.

If they can match the efforts of the 66's sounds will be something special.

Al.