SECR 6w Goods Brake (SR Dia.1558)

[rapidoandy]

 

Rapido Trains UK is delighted to complete its line up of ‘OO’ gauge South Eastern & Chatham Railway wagons with an all-new brake van.

 

 

Rapido has chosen the design that had its origins with

ten 20t six-wheeled vans originally ordered by the South Eastern Railway in 1898. This design was heavily influenced by Midland Railway practice. The SECR built a further 35 between 1900 and 1909.

 

A veranda was added to the non-veranda end and 50 vans to this design were built in 1910. When 25 single ended van required overhauls, they were rebuilt with two verandas. BR inherited 86 dual-veranda vans and didn’t withdraw the last until 1960. One survives, at the Kent & East Sussex Railway.

 

 

We are tooling two bodies: one for the dual-veranda vans built new and another to cater for the detail differences on the single ended vans rebuilt with two verandas. As with previous Rapido SECR models, these brake vans have been designed in the UK and feature full external and interior detail, split-spoked wheels in brass bearings and NEM pockets.

 

 

These models are in tooling now with an anticipated delivery of the production models in late 2022 / early 2023 with an RRP of £39.95

 

 

However, the news does not stop there as Rails of Sheffield are delighted to announce a new exclusive ‘OO’ gauge model, the South Eastern & Chatham Railway single-veranda six-wheel brake van. Rails’ version depicts the original body design, of which ten were ordered by the South Eastern Railway in 1898, followed by further batches built by the SECR between 1900 and 1909.

 

 

Head over to the Rails of Sheffield website to find out more about their exclusive models.

 

This news was SOOOOO exciting to some that they even forgot the date of the announcement 😉

 

Happy modelling!

 

 

 

Edited April 15, 2022 by rapidoandy

[Pre Grouping fan]

Definitely 1 each of the single/double dual veranda for me! 

[Venator]

Another great announcement from Rapido! Can anyone enlighten me as to the time periods the SE&CR used all over grey or grey with black underframe?

[howardb]

Not cheap but will be ordering at least one asap. Maybe someone could answer a couple of questions:-

 

1) In the mid 1920's which livery is most likely - a very dirty SECR grey or a newly painted SR?

 

2) The rails web site indicates that the single ended versions were all modified to double ended around 1910, so is it correct to assume that there would be only double ended versions in the mid 1920's

 

[GreenGiraffe22]

Rapido keeps announcing the good stuff 😁

[jaym481]

The render shown doesn't have NEM pockets? Is it intended to have them in the production version, or will they be in the box to be fitted by the owner, replacing the tension locks with the 'T" slot as shown?

[JSpencer]

Great News. 6 ordered.  3 with the double Veranda, 3 with the single veranda. Covering all SECR/SER types plus the KESR in BR guise.

[Pre Grouping fan]

50 minutes ago, jaym481 said:

The render shown doesn't have NEM pockets? Is it intended to have them in the production version, or will they be in the box to be fitted by the owner, replacing the tension locks with the 'T" slot as shown?

 

It look like if a NEM pocket were to be fitted the coupling would stick out way further than it does on the render so probably the best design but doesn't allow theuse of Kadees or similar easily. An interesting solution and I could use a few couplings of that type if they were available as spares (Hint @rapidoandy) 

[Merchant Navy]

Got to love the more obscure versions like Engineer's Black and SR Brown with BR lettering!

 

[KymN]

2 hours ago, jaym481 said:

The render shown doesn't have NEM pockets? Is it intended to have them in the production version, or will they be in the box to be fitted by the owner, replacing the tension locks with the 'T" slot as shown?

That's a problem for me.  I use Kadees, and the NEM pockets make it so easy.  Oxford uses short pockets and seem to have devised a clip to hold the fishtails from sliding back and forth.  There seems to be room behind the axle to allow the pocket.  I can live with a slightly wider gap between vehicles, and in any case can use the short Kadee.  But not having the NEM mount is a real backward step. As much I as I like the vans it probably is a show stopper.

Edited April 15, 2022 by KymN
Added comment.

[Big James]

Absolutely amazing. I’ll take the BR grey and the SR colouring with BR letting please. I told my partner that it’s a sign for my new layout and she seemed skeptical. 
 

Big James

[choo1choo]

 

 

Brilliant.....not my area but have ordered one anyway. Any chance of some LBSCR ones when the E1's hit our shore?

 

Craig.

[Skinnylinny]

Regarding the couplings:

When most people who work in 00 or H0 say "NEM pockets" what they mean is the rectangular pocket to the standard NEM362. The standard specifies various things including the height, width, and length of the pocket, its location, and how far back from the buffer faces it should be.

Unfortunately, following the standard exactly would require the NEM pocket to occupy the same space as the outer axles (!) so we looked at the NEM363 standard (intended for use in restricted space) - which most people know as the triangular dovetail often seen on the end of the NEM362 pockets in the UK. Unfortunately, Kadee don't seem to offer an NEM363-compatible coupling yet.

As you can see, it was a bit of a case of "danged if you do, danged if you don't!", but we wanted to strictly follow one of the standards rather than have something "close but not close enough for compatibility". 

Edited to add:
Taking off my Rapido hat and speaking just as a modeller, while I'm not aware of Kadee offering an NEM363-compatible coupling yet, a French company called AMF87 appears to offer a kit which uses the coupler head off a Kadee NEM362 coupler, and provides a NEM363 attachment. I have no experience of this kit, though, so purchase is at your own risk!

https://www.amf87.fr/prestashop/attelages/917-a265-interface-d-attelages-nem363-kadee-4000000012078.html

Edited April 15, 2022 by Skinnylinny

[KymN]

4 hours ago, Skinnylinny said:

Regarding the couplings:

As you can see, it was a bit of a case of "danged if you do, danged if you don't!", but we wanted to strictly follow one of the standards rather than have something "close but not close enough for compatibility".

 

 

I know I shouldn't argue with the folk that are becoming one of the better UK manufacturers, but I think that Rapido has picked the wrong horse here.  Close enough in this case would produce a workable solution for the many Kadee users, whereas strictly following a standard won't.  Nevertheless I have ordered the AMF87 product (I hope - I don't speak French!).

[Mr chapman]

Definitely be having a couple of these! I hope the proper regional wagons are proving to be a good seller for you guys. I'll be using kadee's, but fitting a 146 with a draft box so hopefully that will fit in the available space once the coupling is cut away. Failing that, a good old barrier wagon will be fine by me

[45568]

Can anyone tell me how close these would be to renumber as former Midland examples for BR/LMR use?

Thanks in advance,

Peter C.

[Skinnylinny]

Hi Peter,

Unfortunately, while the SECR ones were decidedly in the style of the Midland brakes, there are quite a few differences:
 

• The Midland ones didn't have the heavy end stanchions on the veranda ends, where the lamp irons are mounted on the SER/SECR ones.
• There are other details such as the different number of side planks between MR and SER/SECR design, different side handrails (the horizontal MR ones were split into two sections, where the SER ones were one continuous rail; also, the MR vans had an additional, lower handrail.)
• There were other minor variations as would be expected given they were being built by different companies: Axleboxes (MR and SER using their own patterns), different suspension mountings, no rainstrips on the SER/SECR ones... It all adds up!

For me, the most obvious changes would be the ends (the lack of vertical stanchions on the planked section of the end of the Midland brakes, plus the wooden support in the middle of the veranda end "window" opening of the Midland brakes. An additional, lower, side handrail would also add much more Midland styling. 

[Jon Harbour]

13 hours ago, Skinnylinny said:

Regarding the couplings:

When most people who work in 00 or H0 say "NEM pockets" what they mean is the rectangular pocket to the standard NEM362. The standard specifies various things including the height, width, and length of the pocket, its location, and how far back from the buffer faces it should be.

Unfortunately, following the standard exactly would require the NEM pocket to occupy the same space as the outer axles (!) so we looked at the NEM363 standard (intended for use in restricted space) - which most people know as the triangular dovetail often seen on the end of the NEM362 pockets in the UK. Unfortunately, Kadee don't seem to offer an NEM363-compatible coupling yet.

As you can see, it was a bit of a case of "danged if you do, danged if you don't!", but we wanted to strictly follow one of the standards rather than have something "close but not close enough for compatibility". 

Edited to add:
Taking off my Rapido hat and speaking just as a modeller, while I'm not aware of Kadee offering an NEM363-compatible coupling yet, a French company called AMF87 appears to offer a kit which uses the coupler head off a Kadee NEM362 coupler, and provides a NEM363 attachment. I have no experience of this kit, though, so purchase is at your own risk!

https://www.amf87.fr/prestashop/attelages/917-a265-interface-d-attelages-nem363-kadee-4000000012078.html

 

Here's a link to the Google translate version of the page https://www-amf87-fr.translate.goog/prestashop/attelages/917-a265-interface-d-attelages-nem363-kadee-4000000012078.html?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp

 

Postage for a set to Australia will set me back more than the components!

Edited April 16, 2022 by Jon Harbour
Adding postage comment!

[KymN]

12 hours ago, Jon Harbour said:

 

Here's a link to the Google translate version of the page https://www-amf87-fr.translate.goog/prestashop/attelages/917-a265-interface-d-attelages-nem363-kadee-4000000012078.html?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp

 

Postage for a set to Australia will set me back more than the components!

 

So I've discovered!

[Opelsi]

Fantastic news.

Been wanting a RTR SECR brake van for so long, though I did think it would be the 'Dancehall' and did not even know of this type (please forgive my ignorance). They look great!

One question I do have about the livery of the SECR ones (931001 + 931002) though please.

What will the roof colours be for each, (grey like the 10t covered vans 927001 + 927002 or white like 9270011)?

Many thanks in advance if you are able to shed light.
Si

[KymN]

19 hours ago, col.stephens said:

What is the use of setting standards to ensure standardisation and compatibility across the hobby if individual manufacturers then go off and do their own thing?  By straying away from accepted standards to please one particular group of modellers, the manufacturer risks alienating other groups.  As a user of the more common tension-lock coupling, my question now would be 'will I be able to replace the coupling as provided with a standard Bachmann coupling?'

 

I would be first to agree that standards are standards and that they should be followed. However the problem here is that, as far as I am aware, no-one offers a tension-lock coupling to suit the NEM363 mount without the NEM 362 box.  Hence tension-lock users are alienated as much as we Kadee devotees.  The only non-compromise option that I can see is to add the NEM 362 box and put up with a ridiculous gap between wagons.  Of course I would expect Rapido to include tension-lock couplers with suitable 363 mounts with the vans and Lion.

 

I was attempting to offer a solution, or at least to promote some alternatives.  I have ordered the amf87 devices, and I have contacted Kadee to ask if they might consider a 363 mounted coupler.  There are several manufacturers that have realised that we need a solution to coupling ancient prototypes - Accurascale for example with their magnetic couplings - but for the time being there are no workable 'standard' solutions.

Edited April 18, 2022 by KymN
Clarification

[No Decorum]

3 hours ago, col.stephens said:

What is the use of setting standards to ensure standardisation and compatibility across the hobby if individual manufacturers then go off and do their own thing?  By straying away from accepted standards to please one particular group of modellers, the manufacturer risks alienating other groups.  As a user of the more common tension-lock coupling, my question now would be 'will I be able to replace the coupling as provided with a standard Bachmann coupling?'

 

Terry

The coupling is a standard, although I’ll grant you, a rarely used one. As a matter of course, I replace the clumsy Hornby tension locks with Bachmann shorties. In the case of Oxford, the non-standard mountings mean that it isn’t a simple matter of clipping in the replacements and needs glue. However, if it’s of any help, I’ve found that the couplings on the SE&CR wagons are neat enough and don’t need to be replaced.

[KymN]

14 minutes ago, No Decorum said:

 In the case of Oxford, the non-standard mountings mean that it isn’t a simple matter of clipping in the replacements and needs glue. 

 

This is true of most of the few Oxford wagons I own.  For some reason the Pilchard coupler stays put - no glue.  One of life's mysteries, but I'm grateful. 😜

[phil-b259]

On 17/04/2022 at 08:06, Opelsi said:

Fantastic news.

Been wanting a RTR SECR brake van for so long, though I did think it would be the 'Dancehall'

 

The 'Dancehall brake van was a very late SECR design - we are talking 1920s so absolutely USELESS to go with the beautifully ornately lined Wainwright livery (unless you happen to be modelling the Bluebell Railway).

 

By contrast the Brake van Rapido have selected is design which could definitely be seen to run along with the ornately lined SECR locos and as such offers far more modelling (and thus sales) potential than a Dancehall

[Wickham Green too]

Not 'far more modelling potential' but different modelling potential - as the dancehall lasted well beyond the steam era !