Oxford Rail - LNER Cattle Wagon

[31A]

All people need to do it tip a tenner out of their pockets, take the model home, look at photos and alter the model to suit. How hard is that compared with the immensely difficult task many folk tell us they have of building anything.

 

 

Adding the missing brake cylinder would be easy enough, and also adding the missing 'locations'  for the partition on top of the sides I suppose, but I wouldn't fancy making the 'slot' between the planks at the correct end, and I'm not sure filling in the 'slot' at the wrong end would be very easy, either.

[bigherb]

Adding the missing brake cylinder would be easy enough, and also adding the missing 'locations'  for the partition on top of the sides I suppose, but I wouldn't fancy making the 'slot' between the planks at the correct end, and I'm not sure filling in the 'slot' at the wrong end would be very easy, either.

It would have been better for the sides to be correct but as I'm not going to run mine in front of a mirror I'll not worry about the slots I'll never see both sides at once, the brake cylinder and pipes are an easy fix.

[olivegreen]

Having read all of the above I am led to the conclusion that the Parkside (ex-Westykits) version, of which I have several, continues to offer more options for not much more work or cost than buying and correcting the Oxford one.

 

…but then, it wouldn't be RTR, would it? 

 

(spelling edit only)

Edited July 3, 2016 by olivegreen

[Hroth]

It would have been better for the sides to be correct but as I'm not going to run mine in front of a mirror I'll not worry about the slots I'll never see both sides at once, the brake cylinder and pipes are an easy fix.

That's the pragmatic approach.  But for the folk who worry about such things, they'd know it wasn't "right" and they'd fret. 

 

Ok. Now we know there's some niggles, what's it like from a 3 foot viewing distance?  I'm thinking it'll DO.

[Wheatley]

Certainly "it'll do" and I have no qualms taking a razor saw, file or whatever to a RTR anything if it saves me a bit of time compared to the alternative, either to correct it or turn it into something else. The annoying thing is that photos of LNER cattle wagons aren't exactly like hens' teeth so it shouldn't be necessary to make a best guess at what the drawing is telling you.

 

I can't make my mind up whether it's sloppy research or a deliberate policy. Certainly their pre-railway business model seems to be to sell as many different liveries of the same base model as possible - maybe "it'll do" is their version of design clever because they keep doing it. 90% of their market will neither know nor care that the sides should be mirror images, and if it saves making two tools ...

Edited July 3, 2016 by Wheatley

[davefrk]

I expect it'll be out next year in the liveries of LMS, GWR, SR, GNR, CR, LBSC, etc.etc.

 

Sorry but I can't help a rye smile at the Oxford Rail's launch blurb saying 'We intend raising the standard'....    Me thinks - when will this be exactly.

 

Dave.

 

Okay, okay, my mistook, he said with another wry smile.

 

(I was wonce tolled aye had perfic speelling.

 

Dave.

Edited July 4, 2016 by davefrk

[mikeharvey22]

I expect it'll be out next year in the liveries of LMS, GWR, SR, GNR, CR, LBSC, etc.etc.

 

Sorry but I can't help a rye smile at the Oxford Rail's launch blurb saying 'We intend raising the standard'....    Me thinks - when will this be exactly.

 

Dave.

 

Seems you are right about this, but amused that you used the word "rye" in your comment.............

[Hroth]

Seems you are right about this, but amused that you used the word "rye" in your comment.............

Thats modern "phonics" spelling for you!

 

(The spelling is correct and I think we all kno what was meant so there's no point in getting into a spelin war...)

[Hroth]

The other thing is, its reasonably priced and with mucky brown weathering, who's going to say which company it belongs to?

[Dunsignalling]

"Rye" is much more fun than "Wry" anyway - at least, the bottle I have is...........

 

John

[Wickham Green]

Apart from the missing vac cylinder, the handed vac pipes not being handed on one end, the sides being identical to each other when they should be mirror images, the missing partition locators at the top, yeah, it's appears to capture the look OK. 

Pictures of both sides ARE now on eHattons ............. I'm sure Oxford never managed to model any of their road vehicles identical both sides so why couldn't they get a wagon mirror-imaged ?

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...They have made the same layout on both sides of the wagon when they should be handed...

 The real test of the acceptability or otherwise of this exciting new concept, will be very assymetric coaches like the mk3 buffet car...

[davefrk]

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the LNER have the vac pipe on the far away side from the cylinder so the vac bag was on the right of the coupling at one end and on the left on the other end, Certainly is the case on their vent vans. Of-course not actually having the vac cylinder on a XP wagon kinda buxxers up that theory.

Not a good start for the new company.

 

And before I'm jumped on again, if we didn't point out the faults we'd all still be 'playing' with old Tri-ang trains and not the mostly great stuff we have today.

 

Dave.

[Wickham Green]

 The real test of the acceptability or otherwise of this exciting new concept, will be very assymetric coaches like the mk3 buffet car...

That's easy to get round as there are no vac cylinders or door bangers to worry about - just get the Hornby 4VEP team to do the interior an' nobody will be able to see whether the far side lines up where it should.

[Dunsignalling]

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the LNER have the vac pipe on the far away side from the cylinder so the vac bag was on the right of the coupling at one end and on the left on the other end, Certainly is the case on their vent vans. Of-course not actually having the vac cylinder on a XP wagon kinda buxxers up that theory.

Not a good start for the new company.

 

And before I'm jumped on again, if we didn't point out the faults we'd all still be 'playing' with old Tri-ang trains and not the mostly great stuff we have today.

 

Dave.

And, having a 9' wheelbase, it shouldn't be XP rated anyway, even with a vac cylinder.

 

John

[Mad McCann]

Hopefully, the responses to this model's faults will persuade Oxford to pay a bit more attention to their pre-production research.

Whilst I agree it shouldn't be necessary, the remedial work required here isn't massive and shouldn't give an experienced builder/basher major problems.

Of course there is also the Parkside kit but being an older Westykits tooling I didn't find it one of their more enjoyable kits. A little fiddly and tricky to get square.

Hopefully Parkside will re-tool it one day though I guess this model will reduce that likelihood somewhat.

[davefrk]

And, having a 9' wheelbase, it shouldn't be XP rated anyway, even with a vac cylinder.

 

John

 

Do keep up John, Oxford Rail has already been pulled up for that....

 

Dave.

[coachmann]

And before I'm jumped on again, if we didn't point out the faults we'd all still be 'playing' with old Tri-ang trains and not the mostly great stuff we have today.

Dave.

I for one am not parachuting onto anyone but in the case of this cattle wagon, we are where we are, it's on sale and the move now is to improve it ~ if folk feel so inclined. A pal of mine collects model buses and if i had a pound for every occasion he told me a bus or coach was 95% of the way with a 5% stupid letdown, I would be a wealthy man. I have always taken RTR to be mass-produced toys, inexpensive and always worth a shufty to see what can be done to them.

[The Stationmaster]

And, having a 9' wheelbase, it shouldn't be XP rated anyway, even with a vac cylinder.

 

John

 

Depends on the date - certain LNER 9ft wheelbase wagons were permitted XP status in the late 1930s and I think for a few years after that.  Although I'm reasonably sure it didn't include these and it definitely didn't extend very far into into BR years (if at all).

[Hroth]

Run with XP rating post-war, and you'd probably end up with corned beef hash or cream cheese!

 

Seriously, as fitted stock, would XP be permitted as empties or when not carrying livestock? 

[Dunsignalling]

Do keep up John, Oxford Rail has already been pulled up for that....

 

Dave.

Yes, by me, as early as Post #3 of this thread.

 

I've also pointed out that it's unlikely that any of the 9' wheelbase ones survived in traffic beyond 1948, let alone received BR livery. See Posts #36 and 38

 

 

 

John

Edited July 5, 2016 by Dunsignalling

[Dunsignalling]

Run with XP rating post-war, and you'd probably end up with corned beef hash or cream cheese!

 

Seriously, as fitted stock, would XP be permitted as empties or when not carrying livestock? 

Under BR, IIRC 9' wheelbase wagons were limited to a maximum speed of 45 mph under all circumstances (XP rating was 60).

 

The underframes of 9' wheelbase LNER cattle wagons to this design were prone to severe distortion which would have made them unstable at any speed. With 700 of the 10wb version having been built in 1937/8, and cattle traffic already declining, even the less dodgy ones would have disappeared much earlier but for the outbreak of war. Some were sufficiently retrievable to convert to container flats, though this may only have involved the iron parts in the same way that the SR "rebuilt" LSWR wagons. The rest appear to have been scrapped shortly after WW2. The 10-footers survived well into BR days, the last few until around 1962.   

 

I've not yet seen even one photograph illustrating a 9' example in BR livery or with so much as an E added to the running number; suggesting that, if any did survive nationalization, it would have been by months rather than years.

 

Given all that, plus the existence of the Parkside kit for the 9' wagon, it's a great pity that Oxford didn't go for the 10' wheelbase.

 

John

Edited July 5, 2016 by Dunsignalling

[Wickham Green]

Hopefully, the responses to this model's faults will persuade Oxford to pay a bit more attention to their pre-production research.

Whilst I agree it shouldn't be necessary, the remedial work required here isn't massive and shouldn't give an experienced builder/basher major problems.

Of course there is also the Parkside kit but being an older Westykits tooling I didn't find it one of their more enjoyable kits. A little fiddly and tricky to get square.

Hopefully Parkside will re-tool it one day though I guess this model will reduce that likelihood somewhat.

Yes, there's not a massive amount of work required to correct all known errors - though it shouldn't be necessary - BUT I object to then try to match paint colours, lettering styles etc. when a fair bit of my dosh has gone into the finish of a ready to run model .............. OK, in this case, it'll end up covered in bovine essaitchonetee but that's not always the case with other wagons.

Well, the Westykit version is still waiting in the drawer and it might join some other cattle wagons that are expected from China this month ( is that still right ? ) in due course : I wonder how they'll compare ??!?

[Adams442T]

DOH!  

 

I actually Googled essaitchonetee thinking it was a new word that I could use to impress my increasingly unimpressed kinder....................

[Quarryscapes]

Yes, there's not a massive amount of work required to correct all known errors - though it shouldn't be necessary - BUT I object to then try to match paint colours, lettering styles etc. when a fair bit of my dosh has gone into the finish of a ready to run model .............. OK, in this case, it'll end up covered in bovine essaitchonetee but that's not always the case with other wagons.

Well, the Westykit version is still waiting in the drawer and it might join some other cattle wagons that are expected from China this month ( is that still right ? ) in due course : I wonder how they'll compare ??!?

 

It's possible that the model is not painted, the NBR 4 plank's grey is unpainted plastic, which is very handy for modifying bits.