What locomotives and rolling stock should be produced first?

[rodshaw]

4 hours ago, rekoboy said:

I am imagining this, or have I read somewhere that firms such as Lincoln Locos produce British (3mm) TT bodyshells for Piko mechanisms?

They certainy make 3mm scale bodies but I don't know what mechanisms they fit. Whether they will start producing 1:120 scale bodies is another matter.

https://lincoln-loco.co.uk/

Edited August 7, 2022 by rodshaw

[andythenorth]

1 hour ago, rodshaw said:

They certainy make 3mm scale bodies but I don't know what mechanisms they fit. Whether they will start producing 1:120 scale bodies is another matter.

https://lincoln-loco.co.uk/

They’re offering HO special order. Rescaling to 2.5mm is probably plausible. https://lincoln-loco.co.uk/2022/02/24/ho-scale/
 

Someone could just ask them? I would, but I’m away from email/phone right now 🙃

 

They look like nice prints.

[andythenorth]

On 06/08/2022 at 20:53, F-UnitMad said:

It's Continental Ferry chemical tankers I'd be most interested in, and air-brake, 'modern' ferry vans like Cargowaggon, hbfis, etc.

Heljan have the research for the 2-door German type In O and OO (think it’s this diagram) https://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/german2doorvan so I assume they’d be the most likely candidate for those, if anyone.
 

Revolution have both the ‘holdalls’ and the 2-axle twin sets…in non-TT:120, but we can hope 🙃

 

There are plenty of other habfis-type diagrams on Paul’s site, and in the Ratcliffe book though.

 

Tankers seem to be mostly small batch, I suspect a certain amount of compromise might be needed, where a diagram is produced in inauthentic liveries.  👻
 

I don’t know for sure, but am guessing that there is an inherent challenge in producing very high fidelity models of very small batch prototypes.  My assumption is that alternative liveries shift more units. I often buy another one or two of something if there’s an alternative livery, probably not the only one.  🙃

Edited August 8, 2022 by andythenorth

[maridunian]

On 06/08/2022 at 20:53, F-UnitMad said:

It's Continental Ferry chemical tankers I'd be most interested in ....

 

Many of these were standard UK tanks on beefed up chasses with brake platforms - eg https://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/?q=ferry+tank

 

In model form, it'd be a case of taking a suitable RTR continental chassis and adding a UK tank to it. In N Gauge I used one of my 20T anchor-mount tanks with a longer chassis to produce one of these. The SMBP example is mounted on a 17'6" OH x 10' WB chassis. I've made a 1:120 print of this tank available in my shop.

 

 

Mike

[luke_stevens]

One notable thing with the steam locos from Piko, Kuehn and Roco is that none of them have splashers. This means that model wheels that are thicker than prototype or have larger than prototype flanges will not interfere with the running plates.

 

But the majority of British locos have splashers. Unless manufactures use fine scale wheels with fine scale flanges (P120 anyone?) this going to be a problem. A prototype splasher is a thin piece of metal to stop dirt and gunk being "splashed" onto a boiler / cab front. In model form a piece of moulded plastic is going to be much thicker, even a piece of etched metal is still going to be too thick for model purposes.

 

This could leave manufactures looking at steam prototypes that don't have splashers

 

GWR

2-8-0's (28XX, 38XX, 47XX), Large Prairies 61XX, Small Prairies - should be ok, maybe County 4-6-0 but none of the other 4-6-0!

 

LMS

Stanier Black 5's, 8F's, streamlined Coronation - but again none of the other 4-6-0

 

LNER

A4, A1, B1, J50, J70, J94, K3, V2

 

SR

Unrebuilt MN, unrebuilt WC/BoB, Q1, maybe King Arthur, W tank, Z tank, N/N1 2-6-0

 

BR

WD 2-8-0, WD 2-10-0, 9f, Britannia, Rebuilt WC/BoB, Rebuilt MN, Standard 4, Standard 5 (generally not those copied from existing LMS designs)

 

It's not a particularly representative list of British Locos, and is mainly off the top of my head so I apologise for "obvious" missing locos!

 

I suspect it will be something that any manufacture considering an r-t-r  UK TT:120 will need to be thinking about.

 

Luke

Edited August 12, 2022 by luke_stevens

[britishcolumbian]

27 minutes ago, luke_stevens said:

P120 anyone?

It is doable - a friend did it as an experiment, a turnout and a non-powered little truck with wheels he turned himself. Works fine, provided everything is done with precision.

[luke_stevens]

Just now, britishcolumbian said:

It is doable - a friend did it as an experiment, a turnout and a non-powered little truck with wheels he turned himself. Works fine, provided everything is done with precision.

 

I'd still stick with Diesels & Electrics :)

 

Luke

[Jeff Smith]

Including the 08 if you still want an 0-6-0!

[Hobby]

9 hours ago, luke_stevens said:

But the majority of British locos have splashers. Unless manufactures use fine scale wheels with fine scale flanges (P120 anyone?) this going to be a problem. A prototype splasher is a thin piece of metal to stop dirt and gunk being "splashed" onto a boiler / cab front. In model form a piece of moulded plastic is going to be much thicker, even a piece of etched metal is still going to be too thick for model purposes.

 

 

I suspect it will be something that any manufacture considering an r-t-r  UK TT:120 will need to be thinking about.

 

We've had this discussion already several times, it was brought up initially by finescale modellers on why TT 1:120 couldn't do British models.

 

Look at it from a different angle, RTR models are full of compromises, they are not 100% scale models like those produced by finescale modellers. For 99% of us what they make is fine, they look the part, are reasonably robust and reliable. As such I am sure that they will find ways to make models with splashers, they will probably have to compromise somewhere, I'm not an expert on the manufacturing to RTR models so couldn't say where, but I'm sure the finished results will be acceptable to most of us. We'll just have to wait and see, eh!

 

However in that list you've listed the steam locos I want so I'm quite happy!

[natterjack]

1 hour ago, Hobby said:

RTR models are full of compromises

Talking of which, I've noticed some of my Corgi Legends loco wheels are a little over 12mm between flanges. Any tips on taking these apart to tweek into  static display items on 12mm track (or even more ambitious objectives)?

[Hobby]

33 minutes ago, natterjack said:

are a little over 12mm between flanges.

 

14.2mm? 🤣

[natterjack]

3 hours ago, Hobby said:

14.2mm?

Edit to the above- should have typed over flanges. To avoid misleading anyone- I've found the range between 11.8mm (OK) and 12,8mm (not OK- even for 14.2!).

 

[crackedmember]

Something which I have not seen metioned.

 

With regards to kits, I believe George Mitcheson (3mm) has perviously sold an etched kit for the J94 Austerity (in 1/120), after several requests.  This was because they were used in Belgium, Holland,, and France.

 

 

[D9020 Nimbus]

I've noticed a number of similarities between this and Peco's introduction of RTR 009 — the coverage in Railway Modeller, and even the identity of another manufacturer involved. But there is a significant difference — a lack of joined-up thinking. In 009 the rolling stock from Peco, and the loco from Heljan, were related. This time however Heljan are producing a class 31, while Peco—in RM and in their introductions and proposals, are concentrating on steam-age GWR. Also there were several items of rolling stock — now just a seven-plank wagon is proposed.

 

Compared to 009 Peco's investment this time round is relatively minimal.

[Jeff Smith]

5 hours ago, crackedmember said:

Something which I have not seen metioned.

 

With regards to kits, I believe George Mitcheson (3mm) has perviously sold an etched kit for the J94 Austerity (in 1/120), after several requests.  This was because they were used in Belgium, Holland,, and France.

 

 

The next question is what chassis was it designed to use?

[andythenorth]

Anyone building their own chassis? 

 

I built an etched chassis once in OO.

 

Then I paid a professional kit builder to true and quarter it. 😉

[Jeff Smith]

5 hours ago, crackedmember said:

Something which I have not seen metioned.

 

With regards to kits, I believe George Mitcheson (3mm) has perviously sold an etched kit for the J94 Austerity (in 1/120), after several requests.  This was because they were used in Belgium, Holland,, and France.

 

 

 

41 minutes ago, Jeff Smith said:

The next question is what chassis was it designed to use?

The J94 is a simple 0-6-0 with no splashers and inside motion so could an ideal subject!

[Ravenser]

1 hour ago, D9020 Nimbus said:

I've noticed a number of similarities between this and Peco's introduction of RTR 009 — the coverage in Railway Modeller, and even the identity of another manufacturer involved. But there is a significant difference — a lack of joined-up thinking. In 009 the rolling stock from Peco, and the loco from Heljan, were related. This time however Heljan are producing a class 31, while Peco—in RM and in their introductions and proposals, are concentrating on steam-age GWR. Also there were several items of rolling stock — now just a seven-plank wagon is proposed.

 

Compared to 009 Peco's investment this time round is relatively minimal.

 

It's a striking point. I remain convinced that the explanation is  a large piece of the jigsaw is still missing - there is something significant still to be announced. By somebody else

[spamcan61]

4 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

 

It's a striking point. I remain convinced that the explanation is  a large piece of the jigsaw is still missing - there is something significant still to be announced. By somebody else

Agreed, assuming there is some sort of overall plan between the various potential manufacturers with regard to introducing British outline TT:120, which may or may not be the case.

I don't see 009 as much of a parallel as that had been an established scale with trade support, in the form of ' kits and bits' for decades before RtR locos came along. There has been no such equivalent for British outline TT:120.

[andythenorth]

Didn't we play the "who's waiting to announce something" guessing game already a few times?

 

Granted, it's a fun game, but really, what's left to speculate on? 😉

Edited August 14, 2022 by andythenorth

[Jeff Smith]

Just for fun, my money would be a new Arnold designed product marketed under a Hornby TT120 banner......Evening Star anyone?  Oh, and a suitable rake of coaches......

[andythenorth]

24 minutes ago, Jeff Smith said:

Just for fun, my money would be a new Arnold designed product marketed under a Hornby TT120 banner......Evening Star anyone?  Oh, and a suitable rake of coaches......

There might be a betting marketplace where you can lay odds on that?

 

Which would make the game interesting at least. 🙂

 

Disclaimer: "when the fun stops, stop", as the gambling industry would like us to carefully remember.

Edited August 14, 2022 by andythenorth

[rodshaw]

I think we can rule Bachmann out of the speculation anyway. A rep of theirs at a show I went to on Saturday said they are far too heavily into N gauge to invest in TT. (Of course, he didn't put it in writing!)

[Jeff Smith]

Arnold do both 1:160 and 1:120......

[andythenorth]

21 minutes ago, Jeff Smith said:

Arnold do both 1:160 and 1:120......

Arnold would probably have the shortest odds if money was being placed on this*.

 

In alphabetical order, Busch, Piko, Roco and Tillig all possible outsiders with existing European 1:120 ranges.  Long odds.

 

* In OO/HO Hornby seem to use a broad-brush segmentation by country of prototype origin for Hornby, Electrotren, Jouef and Rivarossi.  Not sure if that applies to Arnold N / TT though.

Edited August 15, 2022 by andythenorth