SECR 10t Covered Goods Wagon & 2 Plank Ballast Wagon

[rapidoandy]

Read the word ‘standardisation’ and your thoughts automatically turn to Great Western Railway 4-6-0s. But the GWR was not the only railway to make use of standardised components.

 

The South Eastern & Chatham Railway introduced a new, 9ft-6in steel underframe under its new seven-plank open wagon in 1915. But this underframe soon found itself used under other vehicles, including a 10t covered goods wagon and a 2 plank ballast wagon.

 

 

As Rapido Trains UK has lovingly re-created this underframe as part of our five- and seven-plank wagon range, we decided to add both of these to our range.

These vans (SR Diagram 1426) were different to previous SECR designs and featured an elliptical roof, end ventilators, standardised steel underframe, lift-link brake gear and self-contained buffers. The design was so successful that it became the basis of the standard Southern Railway van.

 

 

Nearly 250 Dia. 1426s were built, with many of them surviving into BR days in both revenue and Departmental service. One, No. 15750, survived into preservation and can now be seen on the Bluebell Railway.

During their lives, the Dia. 1426s carried a wide range of liveries including SECR grey, SR brown (with two different lettering styles), BR freight grey alongside various BR Departmental liveries. We will faithfully reproduce all of these.

 

 

The SECR introduced the first of its steel underframed ballast wagons in 1919 and 120 were built over the next four years, the last being completed by the newly formed Southern Railway (which allocated them the diagram number 1744).

These wagons were often seen in long rakes as they took ballast to wherever trackwork required attention. They were so useful that BR didn’t finally get rid of the last ones until 1971, which made them some of the last pre-Grouping vehicles in operation in the Southern Region CCE’s mainland fleet.

 

 

During their long lives, they carried a wide range of liveries including SECR grey, SR Engineer’s red (with two different lettering styles) and BR Engineer’s black. Again, we will faithfully reproduce all of these liveries.

Sadly, no Dia. 1744 ballast wagons survived into preservation. However, because they used the standard SECR underframe (as modelled on our five- and seven-plank open wagons), the Bluebell Railway has re-created one, No. 567, using the chassis from a seven-plank open and original works drawings.

 

 

These are now available to pre-order with an order deadline of the 1st April and planned delivery later in the year. See your local Official Retailer or visit www.rapidotrains.co.uk to order yours today! 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 28, 2022 by rapidoandy

[Pre Grouping fan]

Beautiful! These will go nicely alongside my cambrian kit rake and Rapido 7 Planks.

[MarkSG]

They do look very nice. A focus on SECR isn't particularly helpful for me, since I don't model that neck of the woods, but I understand the commercial value in making the best use of things such as frames that are common to multiple prototypes. Now, if only Rapido could do something which has a GER or RCH underfame  

[rapidoandy]

3 minutes ago, MarkSG said:

They do look very nice. A focus on SECR isn't particularly helpful for me, since I don't model that neck of the woods, but I understand the commercial value in making the best use of things such as frames that are common to multiple prototypes. Now, if only Rapido could do something which has a GER or RCH underfame  

 

Like most wagons the covered goods wagons got everywhere. SECR design wagons in Scotland - yep that happened!

[JSpencer]

A brilliant choice, I just ordered 4 of each from my favourite model shop.

 

I'm now less and less motivated to build my Cambrian kits !!

 

Of course these wagons appeared rather late in SECR days so technically only those on the Bluebell can ran with a full Wainwright livery loco. 

Edited January 28, 2022 by JSpencer

[Steamport Southport]

Did the bloke from Cambrian kick somebodies dog?

 

 

 

Jason

[bill_schmidt1]

5 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

Did the bloke from Cambrian kick somebodies dog?

 

 

 

Jason

 
Seems that way doesn't it. Probably dog and gran by the way Rapido are going after Cambrian SECR kits. 

[Dunsignalling]

Might it also give a hint as to which bit of the Southern might be in line for a Rapido locomotive....

 

John

[MarkSG]

57 minutes ago, rapidoandy said:

 

Like most wagons the covered goods wagons got everywhere. SECR design wagons in Scotland - yep that happened!

 

Yes, I think I can probably justify a van. There's a classic "prototype for everything" photo of the Wisbech and Upwell Tramway of a J70 hauling a set of four vans, one from each of the Big Four companies.

[County of Yorkshire]

12 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

Did the bloke from Cambrian kick somebodies dog?

 

 

 

Jason

Yes, it’s a bit disappointing when there’s rafts and rafts of big 4 era (and earlier) wagons that aren’t available as RTR or kits that would perhaps sell more due to exclusivity of supply. 
 

CoY

[mdvle]

4 minutes ago, County of Yorkshire said:

Yes, it’s a bit disappointing when there’s rafts and rafts of big 4 era (and earlier) wagons that aren’t available as RTR or kits that would perhaps sell more due to exclusivity of supply.

 

Perhaps, though as is often mentioned most people aren't interested in building kits so the availability of a kit isn't likely to impact a RTR model's sales potential.

 

But unless a kit was made simply based on the interests of the kit maker then the availability of a kit is also an indication that the prototype is popular (and key, more popular than those items that don't have kits) and there is a market for it and thus also a good choice for a RTR model.  So it shouldn't come as a surprise when more and more kits also get released in a RTR form from the various manufactures as the hobby gets beyond the usual models.

[Pre Grouping fan]

24 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

Might it also give a hint as to which bit of the Southern might be in line for a Rapido locomotive....

 

John

An O1 or even SER O would be very welcome even if its to expand my Bluebell fleet. 

[Iltman]

Why Mr Rapidoandy I do believe you’re spoiling us

[DavidH]

1 hour ago, JSpencer said:

I'm now less and less motivated to build my Cambrian kits

47 minutes ago, mdvle said:

 

Perhaps, though as is often mentioned most people aren't interested in building kits so the availability of a kit isn't likely to impact a RTR model's sales potential.

 

 

See quote from JSpencer above for a hint of the likelihood of the impact!

 

Obviously it's a minor matter, and you're right that people often won't build kits. It's just that ... well, I have sympathy for the Titfield position of Rapido ...

 

I guess, what troubles me, is if you use morality as a marketing tool, your actions (immediately after) had better not show you up to be as hardnosed as the company you're gathering support against. That's all.

Even though the wagons look really nice.

[Dunsignalling]

1 hour ago, mdvle said:

 

Perhaps, though as is often mentioned most people aren't interested in building kits so the availability of a kit isn't likely to impact a RTR model's sales potential.

 

But unless a kit was made simply based on the interests of the kit maker then the availability of a kit is also an indication that the prototype is popular (and key, more popular than those items that don't have kits) and there is a market for it and thus also a good choice for a RTR model.  So it shouldn't come as a surprise when more and more kits also get released in a RTR form from the various manufactures as the hobby gets beyond the usual models.

I imagine the commonality of the underframes was a factor in Cambrian picking the SECR group of wagons, just as it has been for Rapido.

 

I'd better get on with painting my kit-builds before my pre-ordered r-t-r ones arrive....

 

RTR encroaching on kit-makers' "territory" is nothing new. Three quarters of Bachmann wagons duplicate Parkside or Ratio kits (recently unified as "Parkside by Peco"). It's one area where Hornby seem to be markedly less aggressive, though they have done a few NPCCS vehicles previously only available as kits.

 

John

Edited January 28, 2022 by Dunsignalling

[mdvle]

50 minutes ago, DavidH said:

See quote from JSpencer above for a hint of the likelihood of the impact!

 

Um, I never commented on the impact on the kit makers, but rather the effect of the availability of kits has on RTR sales - which essentially is not much.

 

Those who are dedicated kit builders aren't going to buy RTR regardless.

 

Those who, like JSpencer, abandon kits for the RTR offering will be a very small portion of RTR sales.

 

50 minutes ago, DavidH said:

Obviously it's a minor matter, and you're right that people often won't build kits. It's just that ... well, I have sympathy for the Titfield position of Rapido ...

 

I'm not sure how the two circumstances are the same.

 

The issue isn't that Hornby are making Lion, which they certainly are entitled to do.

 

Hornby can also make a Loriot-Y, the bus, the brake van, etc.

 

What they can't do is use the Titfield IP, of which Rapido have an exclusive license from the IP rights holder.

 

50 minutes ago, DavidH said:

I guess, what troubles me, is if you use morality as a marketing tool, your actions (immediately after) had better not show you up to be as hardnosed as the company you're gathering support against. That's all.

 

Again, I think you are misreading the situation - it is/was all about IP licensing rights, something Hornby has taken advantage of in the past to make Olympics, Harry Potter, Thomas, and other things - and Hornby continues to use to their advantage for other non-Titfield items they hold current licenses for.

 

As for the issue of kit makers, consider the following.

 

In the past the most "popular" items were made in RTR, and the kit makers chose from the 2nd level of popularity for the stuff they made - because they of course wanted popular items that would sell well.

 

But that was always going to be a double-edged sword - that same popularity that ensured good sales for the kit makers was going to eventually mean a RTR version would come to market - all the more so now that there is so much RTR product being tooled for the UK market.  You simply can't have the market tool 30+ new items a year and avoid stuff currently available in kit form - because as noted above the stuff available in kit form is popular and wanted.

 

This isn't about Rapido - because if Rapido didn't offer these then eventually Accurascale, Cavalex, Revolution, Bachmann, Dapol, or someone else would.

 

If you are a kit builder, then you should look at this as a good thing.  One, it means some existing kits are going to be sold off cheaper for you to buy.  Two, it means those kit companies are going to need to develop more new kits to stay in business, offering you a better variety of kits to purchase new.

 

 

[rapidoandy]

Evening all,

 

Thanks for the kind comments, we are very excited by these too.

 

So to answer a few questions and hopefully put some minds at ease:

 

When we announced the 7 and 5 plank opens (which in Rapido style were a personal choice by me as I have always found the 7 planks a very pretty wagon) I asked a few of our retailers that also sold the kit to keep some notes for me.

 

They report that the sales for kits have hardly deviated from their usual levels of sale. Speaking to them, their opinion is that those who build kits do - and those that don't - don't! Some like building them and have the skill and patience - others want to run trains and pay for the factory finish and details. This is backed up by the preliminary data from our survey which has allowed a very interesting insight into modelling habits. (Nothing we do is done in isolation.)

 

Simply, the effect is very minimal. Price also has an effect. People who want long rakes are more likely to buy the kit. However, those like me that want one or two don't mind the price in return for the detail.

 

The kit isn't the newest and in some ways our model is an upgrade. Obviously, we knew that there were other wagons that fitted the chassis, and one of the reasons for waiting was to see if there would be an effect on others. I'm satisfied that there is not and felt comfortable we could go ahead with more designs.

 

Duplication will always happen. Sometimes it is non-intentional - someone keeps a project secret etc (lots of the manufacturers do speak to each other - this week alone I have spoken to two firms and on one occasion found a planned duplication which there will now no longer be - whilst other manufacturers don't say a word).

 

Sometimes it is intentional, where people want to upgrade something, or duplicate something that is only in kit form. Other times its intentional with motive... A little competition can be good for the market.

 

Regarding people who say there are plenty of low hanging fruit that will guarantee to sell well - I would ask - would you put your money up yourself to do it?

 

We get lots of suggestions through our website where people say "this is guaranteed to sell". Whilst you can never be certain until you have done it, the financial numbers just don't add up -  restrictions i.e. geography, operation, numbers made or liveries mean that expected sales require the unit price to be far higher than the range we would like - or what we think people will pay - again backed up by info in our surveys. Many of these "guaranteed" sellers only appear in the suggestion form once - which tells us something. Like it or not, most things that are going to be good sellers have come about in one way or another, RTR, kit, 3D print. Each of these have their merits and different people who like to use them.

 

Interestingly, and getting back on track - the 10t covered goods van was suggested a lot with many people saying it would go on the same chassis - far more votes than any "guaranteed" sellers we had suggested.

 

Andy

 

 

 

 

[DavidH]

1 hour ago, mdvle said:

Um, I never commented on the impact on the kit makers, but rather the effect of the availability of kits has on RTR sales - which essentially is not much.

 

Oh dear. Sorry, yes, I inverted your point in my head after reading JSpencer's post.

 

1 hour ago, mdvle said:

Again, I think you are misreading the situation - it is/was all about IP licensing rights

 

But there, I disagree that I did. I know exactly what the other discussion was about, but this thread is not about that discussion. There are far too many pages on it already.

[Dunsignalling]

In my experience, there are quite a few people who don't consider themselves "builders" but cheerfully make up plastic wagon kits (also buildings), though they wouldn't dream of tackling anything that involves soldering!

 

Parkside in particular, with the wheels and bearings in the bag, have long been the first point of entry for those without the confidence/know-how to source the bits and pieces separately. From there, having snapped a few off many graduate to adding metal buffers, then maybe brake gear and gradually, confidence grows.

 

Wagon kits used to work out a bit more expensive than RTR, but lately, a plastic kit-built wagon seldom costs more than half the price of new-tool RTR wagons being announced (Oxford Rail excepted, at least for now).

 

John

Edited January 28, 2022 by Dunsignalling

[phil-b259]

Can anyone clarify the situation with the varying rain strip positions on the vans.

 

Was one method more favoured than another at any time, do we know roughly which was the more numerous style, etc

[KymN]

Not so long ago I would only consider SR/LSWR locomotives for my 'Cornish' layout, all RTR.  Now this has expanded to other SR constituents.  First it was LBSC locos (the Atlantics), then SECR coaches (the Birdcages). Now, thanks to Rapido, I've begun to order SECR wagons.  So much for discipline.

But I now have my first locomotive kit on my workbench.  Ironically it is a Hardy's Hobbies offering!

[rapidoandy]

7 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

Can anyone clarify the situation with the varying rain strip positions on the vans.

 

Was one method more favoured than another at any time, do we know roughly which was the more numerous style, etc

 

Now this is a tricky one!

 

We have no definitive date or answer as such. The SECR works drawing shows curved rain strips and all the SECR photos we have of these vans (there aren't many) show curved rain strips. The preserved SECR livery van on the bluebell has straight rain strips.

 

Straight rain stirps seem to have started in SR days, both the common short type as we have produced, but also a full length straight version that seems to be less common. Some vehicles retained curved rain strips all the way through their lives.

 

Andy

[Dunsignalling]

10 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

Can anyone clarify the situation with the varying rain strip positions on the vans.

 

Was one method more favoured than another at any time, do we know roughly which was the more numerous style, etc

The rain strip position on the model appears to represent as-built condition. All the photos of vans in SECR livery I've been able to turn up since the announcement show this version. There's no indication of them being changed before SR days.

 

There is a photo of one in BR Departmental use in Southern Wagons Vol.3 showing that still in place. Others in that source show full-length cantrail battens (or possibly channels), and some with an apparent absence of rain strips; the reinforcing plate above the doors (evident on vans in both SR and BR days) presumably being considered sufficient. In one case, the edge batten/channel is present with the reinforcing plate above it!

 

So four distinct arrangements (at least) but no obvious evidence to when each was introduced. My guess is that, rather than being amendments to the Diagram they, as likely as not, reflect where the van received its previous repair/overhaul.

 

What does seem clear, though, is that some vans retained the original style throughout their working lives, so it's not inappropriate for any livery. Unless Rapido plan to produce more than one roof moulding, there'll be scope for some (fairly straightforward) personalisation to represent particular vans in photos. Numbers will (hopefully) have been picked to match condition, otherwise those of us who are fastidious about such things will have a bit of modelling to do.....

 

John

Edited January 29, 2022 by Dunsignalling

[The Stationmaster]

Andy you are a very naughty boy.  Yet again you are forcing this poor old pensioner to spend money on toy trains while my wife and children will no doubt have to starve in order to fund my 'hobby' - and these things aren't even GWR   You are leading me into an act of sacrilege by attacking my wilpower with delectable offerings and I object most strongly sorry, correction - the bank account objects most strongly.

 

PS if you are going to see the light and give some thought to any vehicles from the real railway have a word with me first because my dwindling bank account cannot stand any duplication of effort by manufacturers committed to decent quality and doing the right thing when it comes to getting the right permissions to duplicate commercial images owned by someone else (even if they are French)

[mdvle]

2 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

PS if you are going to see the light and give some thought to any vehicles from the real railway have a word with me first because my dwindling bank account cannot stand any duplication of effort by manufacturers committed to decent quality and doing the right thing when it comes to getting the right permissions to duplicate commercial images owned by someone else (even if they are French)

 

If the latest Hunslet video with Andy's choice of reading material is any guide I fear for your poor bank account, though I am sure the sacrifice would be worth it to make many people happy.