 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / General / Railroads / April 2008My ideas for needed models
Locos Units and Coaches These are model I think should be produced and why, some are single survivor GWR 4-4-0 Let start with City of Truro - no explanation required, I'd buy one, suitable for GWR, BR and preserved lines. 2-8-0T Quite a few preserved, and never an RTR model. SR 02 0-4-4 Very popular on the Isle of Wight, also there is a real one and no-one has ever done and RTR model. LNER Moguls K1 2005 North York Moors and mainline, can do in apple green K4 3442 Servern Valley and mainline, can do in apple green SDJR 7F Two preserved, I think they could be quite popular BR Class 14 Only one I can think of with no model current or shortlisted, with preserved examples Class 28 Could do with a current model - a very odd loco Electrics Could do with a early decent AC electric 81 or say 85 Multiple units GRCW 100 Quite common and never a model 123 & 124 Decent models of both of these Mark1 based DMUs could be popular, near 123 for Western Region, later on mix and match between both. Suburban DMUs From 115 to 118, 121, 122, 125, and 127 are all suburban DMUs. I think they could be done with 4 cab fronts (BR, Pressed Steel, BRCW, GRCW) three I think power car designs, and three trailers. eg 116, 117, 118 same power cars with different fronts, 117, 118 same trailers, 115 & 116, 127 same trailers I think, 115 and 127 same power car bodies, not sure how similar to 116/7/8 they are. 125 DMBS is different to 116/7/8 AFAIR. However a good proportion of BR DMUs could be made from a limited amount of tools. Southern EMUs 4TC Ran with 33s, 73s, 430s can use some standard Mk1 bodies 4VEP Very common Coaches GWR Bachmann - produce a couple more Sunshines eg a Brake Third and Composite, not just the BCK and TK as featured on SVR and at Didcot Hawksworth stock - good looking, still some around, could get away with TK, BTK, CK Hornby - when you revamp your late 20s GWR stock please include the C54 TK the rest just need to be up to date. LMS - models at last, can only think of period 1, and also the port hole stock LNER Hornby extend your Gresleys GCR Barnum stock SR lots of holes here LSWR IronClads 4 models I think will do the lot SECR non corridor stock, such as the birdcages Off the wall ideas D84xx NBLs forgotten loco Baby Deltic Worth a punt GWR 47xx A big 2-8-0 4REP Very similar to 4TC change the chassis use your RBR and 1 new coach design gives you this, also need a good motor for your 12 coach train GWR Tourist stock Looks good and preserved GWR Churchward Toplights would look good SECR Corridor boat train stock - see KWVR Sorry not up on modern units > Locos Units and Coaches > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > 4-4-0 Let start with City of Truro - no explanation required, I'd > buy one, suitable for GWR, BR and preserved lines. Very limited appeal for BR modellers, which seems to be an increasing market (I can remember when BR was never talked about and pre-grouping was common), but I do agree that a GWR 4-4-0 is needed and for that reasons I would suggest a 90xx "Dukedog" which would then appeal for all the same reasons above. > 2-8-0T Quite a few preserved, and never an RTR model. Again, limited appeal due to having a limited real life locality, OTOH there shouldn't be any reason to stop both the 2-8-0T and 2-8-2T classes could be produced from the same basic tooling, I suspect that latter would be the more popular though. > SR > > 02 0-4-4 > > Very popular on the Isle of Wight, also there is a real one and > no-one has ever done and RTR model. Would need the correct rolling stock to go with it... :~)) > LNER > Moguls > K1 2005 North York Moors and mainline, can do in apple green > K4 3442 Servern Valley and mainline, can do in apple green Both limited appeal, money would be better spent in producing either an O4 (this would also appeal to GWR modellers), J27 (NER fans must be screaming out for them), a decent model of the J50 tank or my personal wish - the L1 2-6-4T (common on the ex GCR and southern end of the ex GNR out of London). > SDJR > 7F Two preserved, I think they could be quite popular Hmm, interesting, 25 years ago perhaps, Ivo Peters anyone? > BR > Class 14 Only one I can think of with no model current or > shortlisted, with preserved examples Nice loco, totally inappropriate for most layouts unless modelling either an industrial or preserved railway - the real locos were barely run-in before being sold off by BR! > Class 28 Could do with a current model - a very odd loco Cough, cough, literally, made more smoke when totally healthy than a sick Baby Deltic, and that's saying something! > Electrics Could do with a early decent AC electric 81 or say 85 Along with some nice British spec OHEL equipment!........ > Multiple units <snipped> Lets not even go there, far to localised, it's like trying to argue between the merits of a Pannier tank and a Jinty if only the one could be produced... > Southern EMUs > 4TC Ran with 33s, 73s, 430s can use some standard Mk1 > bodies > 4VEP Very common Both will be easy conversions once Bachmann produce their Cep. > Coaches <snipped> Same problems as for DMUs, probably even more so though, some stock only ran on certain routes and at certain times, basically one can't just expect to be able to boxes for all stock - coaches and the less common wagons more so than locos IMO. > Off the wall ideas > D84xx NBLs forgotten loco ...and best forgotten, like the Metro-Vick Co-Bo's! > Baby Deltic Worth a punt :~) With half the model already being made for the class 20 it could be a relatively cheap model to produce, detailed plans might be the problem though and two distinct front end designs would need to be produced with no period of cross over - the class were either running with head code discs or head code boxes. > GWR 47xx A big 2-8-0 Competes with the existing 28xx from Hornby and has less prototypical route availability. > 4REP Very similar to 4TC change the chassis use your RBR > and > 1 new coach design gives you this, > also need a good motor for your 12 coach train See comment re the TC above no reason why the TC can't be motorised to help with traction in these days of DCC, it would just need a centrifugal clutch between motor/flywheel and gear set.... > Very limited appeal for BR modellers, which seems to be an increasing > market (I can remember when BR was never talked about and pre-grouping was > common), but I do agree that a GWR 4-4-0 is needed and for that reasons I > would suggest a 90xx "Dukedog" which would then appeal for all the same > reasons above. A 'Dukedog' might convince me to make a model based on Barmouth station on the Cambrian Coast line. Can't think of any other ex-GWR loco which might persuade me to switch to modelling an former GWR prototype. John. >> Very limited appeal for BR modellers, which seems to be an >> increasing market (I can remember when BR was never talked about [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > loco which might persuade me to switch to modelling an former GWR > prototype. I'm glade you didn't say 'Swindon prototype', the news of the forth coming Dapol Cl. 22 "Baby Warship" seriously questioned my future plans [1], but the future planes of a Cl.15 from Heljan have kept then on track - I'm still very doubtful as to Dapols ability to actually produce anything worthwhile in 4mm scale, now if they were going to adapt the tooling so that they could also produce a Cl. 21/29 I might have to swallow my doubts... [1] think north Devon and the Hornby milk tanks.... >> Locos Units and Coaches >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >reasons I would suggest a 90xx "Dukedog" which would then appeal for >all the same reasons above. After all the other large-wheeled GWR 4-4-0s were withdrawn, Truro still had to earn its keep. It was Reading station pilot for a while and also worked the Didcot, Newbury and Southampton line. But the small-wheeled 4-4-0s had a far longer life, satisfying modellers from pre-grouping (even late Victorian) to BR days. And to be honest a small engine like this, pulling four carriages looks much more sensible than a Castle and four. A Dukedog would be a nice engine, but if they do that, they could get four locos for the price of two: Dukes: introduced in the 1890s, lasted into the 1950s. Like a Dukedog but with the original curved frames. Parallel boiler with large dome. Originally round topped firebox, later Belpaire Curved frame Bulldogs: Like a Duke but with a tapered boiler and Belpaire firebox. Some like this from new, others rebuilt from Dukes. circa 1900 to the 1950s. Straight frame Bulldogs: the main Bulldog builds. Like the Dukedog but with tapered boiler. Early 1900s to the 1950s Dukedogs: 1930s rebuilds combining the straight frames from withdrawn Bulldogs and the parallel boilers from Dukes. Four engines from two sets of tooling. Recent Bachmann American engines have come with alternate wood and steel cabs in the box. They could do something similar and provide replaceable long (superheated) and short fireboxes. Make the engine itself without top feed, just the brass safety valve cover, and provide a top feed add-on with springy plastic pipes. Giving even more alternatives straight out of the box Minimal extra work to do some of the variants, possibly as special editions: Original Duke with round top firebox. Later Bulldogs with deeper frames. > Locos Units and Coaches > [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > 4TC Ran with 33s, 73s, 430s can use some standard Mk1 bodies > 4VEP Very common I think I would add a 4CIG as they did run on all of the Southern divisions and 3 car versions still operate on the Lymington branch. > Coaches > GWR [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > Sorry not up on modern units > Locos Units and Coaches > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Very popular on the Isle of Wight, also there is a real one and no-one has > ever done and RTR model. I could use one... :-) > SDJR > 7F Two preserved, I think they could be quite popular Not allowed! ;-) I just bought a DJH kit to build, so no company is allowed to make one of these for the next 10 years!!! ;-) > Southern EMUs > 4TC Ran with 33s, 73s, 430s can use some standard Mk1 bodies [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > 1 new coach design gives you this, > also need a good motor for your 12 coach train Hmmm, no use having the TC without the REP... :-$ but it would need to have 4 motor bogies to be prototypical... ;-) Ian J. > Locos Units and Coaches > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > one, > suitable for GWR, BR and preserved lines. I've heard that this MIGHT be the next model commissioned by the NRM. > 2-8-0T Quite a few preserved, and never an RTR model. > [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > AFAIR. However a good proportion of BR DMUs could be made from a limited > amount of tools. Yeah, we definitely need a suburban DMU as there are so many possibilities and some like the 117 had a very long life. Fred X >> Locos Units and Coaches >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >I've heard that this MIGHT be the next model commissioned by the NRM. Me want. >Locos Units and Coaches > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >4-4-0 Let start with City of Truro - no explanation required, I'd buy one, >suitable for GWR, BR and preserved lines. Duke or Bulldog, surely? Larger classes, longer lived. >BR >Class 14 Only one I can think of with no model current or shortlisted, >with preserved examples >Class 28 Could do with a current model - a very odd loco Already been done - Silver Fox do one (SF0041, in green or blue). They also do classes 15, 22, 23 and "41" (the six-axle NBL DH machines) as well as classes 76, 77 and 81.. >Baby Deltic Worth a punt Done by Silver Fox (SF0051, again in green or blue) - and for MUs they do the class 128 parcels units and the Derby lightweights. S'not just Hornby and Bachmann..  SignatureAndy Breen ~ Not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales, Aberystwyth Feng Shui: an ancient oriental art for extracting money from the gullible (Martin Sinclair) > >BR > >Class 14 Only one I can think of with no model current or shortlisted, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > classes 15, 22, 23 and "41" (the six-axle NBL DH machines) as well as classes > 76, 77 and 81.. Don't think Silver Fox do a 15, or if they do it's not on their website. Cheers, Martyn -- >> >BR >> >Class 14 Only one I can think of with no model current or [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >Don't think Silver Fox do a 15, or if they do it's not on their website. Advertised in this month's RM (one of the retailers has 'em - check out the adverts in the front of the magazine). SignatureAndy Breen Not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales, Aberystwyth Post-September, somebody figured out that the Internet was cheaper than babysitters (Dick Gaughan) >>Locos Units and Coaches >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Duke or Bulldog, surely? Larger classes, longer lived. Four engines for the price of two sets of tooling. Between them covering the 1890s to the 1950s. Dukes, curved and straight framed Bulldogs and Dukedogs. <snip> > S'not just Hornby and Bachmann.. Very true, like a lot of other RTR models, most of which have already been marketed by one kit manufacturer of another at some point in history, why do Hornby, Bachman & Heljan bother... In article <fu5s11$hgv$1@registered.motzarella.org>, :Jerry: <INVALID@INVALID.INVALID> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >been marketed by one kit manufacturer of another at some point in >history, why do Hornby, Bachman & Heljan bother... Except these are RTR, not kits... SignatureAndy Breen ~ Speaking for myself, not the University of Wales "your suggestion rates at four monkeys for six weeks" (Peter D. Rieden) > In article <fu5s11$hgv$1@registered.motzarella.org>, > :Jerry: <INVALID@INVALID.INVALID> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Except these are RTR, not kits... No, they are kits that the kit company have made up for the customer, available as either a "finished" body kit or also mated to the required chassis - both at a considerable price premium compared to the high street price of the none made up kit RTR models. For example the Silver Fox model of the Baby Deltic is listed at 75 GBP for a finished kit (less chassis), that price could very likely be the price point of a RTR model should Bachmann ever decide to produce them (taking on board that they have already developed 95% of the chassis) whilst Silver Fox want 135 GBP for a running model. Sorry but you are trying to compare chalk and cheese. > > In article <fu5s11$hg...@registered.motzarella.org>, > > :Jerry: <INVA...@INVALID.INVALID> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > whilst Silver Fox want 135 GBP for a running model. Sorry but you are > trying to compare chalk and cheese. If they're finished, running models then they are RTR. Even Bachmann and Hornby products are, ultimately, a kit of parts assembled by the manufacturer. The price of the Silver Fox products merely reflects the fact that they are not manufactured in volume using cheap far eastern labour. MBQ <snip> <google gorups quote> If they're finished, running models then they are RTR. Even Bachmann and Hornby products are, ultimately, a kit of parts assembled by the manufacturer. The price of the Silver Fox products merely reflects the fact that they are not manufactured in volume using cheap far eastern labour. </quote> Well that logic makes even you a kit of parts, on the chromosome level... One is mass produced, and benefits from the cost savings mass production give, the other is a kit that will have been individually hand built, which is more labour intensive and thus costs more - as the price-point amply shows! > <manatba...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > news:c9fcc534-033d-46c0-b14c-19ce07e1aa84@a22g2000hsc.googlegroups.com... > <snip> > <google gorups quote> What relevance does my method of posting have? > If they're finished, running models then they are RTR. Even Bachmann > and Hornby products are, ultimately, a kit of parts assembled by the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Well that logic makes even you a kit of parts, on the chromosome > level... That's just silly! > One is mass produced, and benefits from the cost savings mass > production give, the other is a kit that will have been individually > hand built, which is more labour intensive and thus costs more - as > the price-point amply shows! That's basically what I said. Do you think there is no hand building in mass produced RTR? Do you think that they are not made from a selection of individual parts? What's the difference, other than one is never offered to the public as a box of bits? MBQ >Do you think there is no hand building in mass produced RTR? Do you >think that they are not made from a selection of individual parts? >What's the difference, other than one is never offered to the public >as a box of bits? Errrr...... Triang CKD anybody? >MBQ > >Do you think there is no hand building in mass produced RTR? Do you > >think that they are not made from a selection of individual parts? [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > >MBQ I'm sure any M/R marketting person will tell you that the packaging of the individual parts of the kit and special box costs almost as much as assembling the model and placing it in a standard box. That presumes that the assembly line and finished model packaging already exists. OTOH, the cottage industry creating a kit doesn't produce parts ready to snap together nor do they have a production line and staff sitting waiting for productive work. Regards, Greg.P. On Apr 17, 10:30 am, ":Jerry:" <INVA...@INVALID.INVALID> wrote: > <manatba...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > news:c9fcc534-033d-46c0-b14c-19ce07e1aa84@a22g2000hsc.googlegroups.com... > <snip> > <google gorups quote> What relevance does my method of posting have? > If they're finished, running models then they are RTR. Even Bachmann > and Hornby products are, ultimately, a kit of parts assembled by the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Well that logic makes even you a kit of parts, on the chromosome > level... That's just silly! Not at all, I'm just throwing your (ill)logic back in your face, everything is basically a kit of parts, other than single cell organisms that reproduce themselves asexually! > One is mass produced, and benefits from the cost savings mass > production give, the other is a kit that will have been individually > hand built, which is more labour intensive and thus costs more - as > the price-point amply shows! That's basically what I said. Do you think there is no hand building in mass produced RTR? Do you think that they are not made from a selection of individual parts? What's the difference, other than one is never offered to the public as a box of bits? You are obviously clueless as to the savings that mass production gives and the possible quality differences between an injection moulded parts and a resin cast parts. Finally, to answer your first question, because it's breaking the standard nntp follow up formatting, as you might have noticed my comments become merged with comments that you have made which makes things very confusing - especially if the reader doesn't understand the finer points of how to distinguish between who said what. > <manatba...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > everything is basically a kit of parts, other than single cell > organisms that reproduce themselves asexually! ? > > One is mass produced, and benefits from the cost savings mass > > production give, the other is a kit that will have been individually [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > You are obviously clueless as to the savings that mass production > gives What? I'm perfectly clueued up about the savings that can be made through mass production, thank you. The only difference between Bachmann, Hornby, etc., (the mass market RTR) and a Silver Fox RTR model is the economies of scale due to differing manufacturing methods. They are *all* put together *by hand* from component pieces (i.e., taken to the extreme, a "kit of parts"). One is high volume low cost labour, the other (to the best of my knowledge) low volume high cost labour. > and the possible quality differences between an injection > moulded parts and a resin cast parts. Quality difference can occur, regardless of the materials or manufacturing methods. > Finally, to answer your first question, because it's breaking the > standard nntp follow up formatting, as you might have noticed my > comments become merged with comments that you have made which makes > things very confusing - especially if the reader doesn't understand > the finer points of how to distinguish between who said what. No one else seems to have a problem in quoting my posts correctly. MBQ > > <manatba...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > [quoted text clipped - 68 lines] > > MBQ I do think there is a fundamental difference between a product designed to be assembled in a factory, and one designed to be sold as a kit - except, as pointed out by someone else, CKD (which applies to Land Rovers as well as Hornby!). Cheers Richard Signaturewww.beamends-lrspares.co.uk sales@beamends-lrspares.co.uk I have become... comfortably numb <snip> > I do think there is a fundamental difference between a product > designed to be assembled in a factory, and one designed to be sold > as a kit - except, as pointed out by someone else, CKD (which > applies to Land Rovers as well as Hornby!). Not even then, as a look at certain car parts catalogues, there are often differences between factory assembled vehicles and those designed for CKD, and it's not just due to different markets/assembly methods. :Jerry: wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > designed for CKD, and it's not just due to different markets/assembly > methods. Several possibiliyies there: - Some markets don't want the cigarette lighter/motorway overdrive/cocktail cabinet options on their Landrovers. - Some manufacturers put different numbers/colour schemes/detail options on their kits/RTR to tempt customers to buy one of each. > <snip> > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > designed for CKD, and it's not just due to different markets/assembly > methods. Obviously I can't say about others, but Land Rover are identical, except that some additional part numbers for sub-assemblies that are applicable to CKD which make no sense for the factory Cheers Richard Signaturewww.beamends-lrspares.co.uk sales@beamends-lrspares.co.uk I have become... comfortably numb >>Locos Units and Coaches >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Duke or Bulldog, surely? Larger classes, longer lived. That's as may be, but there are likely to be bigger sales with "City of Truro". >>BR >>Class 14 Only one I can think of with no model current or shortlisted, [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >S'not just Hornby and Bachmann.. SignatureJane British OO, American and Australian HO, and DCC in the garden http://www.yddraiggoch.demon.co.uk/railway/railway.html >>>Locos Units and Coaches >>> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > That's as may be, but there are likely to be bigger sales with "City > of Truro". Doubtful, unless the hobby is know out-numbered by collectors, which I hope that it never is as it will seriously skew what prototypes will be made by RTR manufactures - we will be back to the good old, bad old days of the 1970s in terms of RTR stock availability... :~( >>>>Locos Units and Coaches >>>> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >be made by RTR manufactures - we will be back to the good old, bad old >days of the 1970s in terms of RTR stock availability... :~( In that case, don't make one of these ancient 4-4-0s at all. There are other ex-GW locos that could be made, of which more than a few were in use in the 50s and 60s. SignatureJane British OO, American and Australian HO, and DCC in the garden http://www.yddraiggoch.demon.co.uk/railway/railway.html <snip> >>>>Duke or Bulldog, surely? Larger classes, longer lived. >>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > are other ex-GW locos that could be made, of which more than a few > were in use in the 50s and 60s. Your point being what? Wouldn't that also achieve what I'm worried about above, a few well known or well used prototypes - anyone want yet another "Black Five" and another "Flying Scotsman"?... ><snip> >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >about above, a few well known or well used prototypes - anyone want >yet another "Black Five" and another "Flying Scotsman"?... My point being, let's have a 2-8-0T and, possibly, a 2-8-2T. SignatureJane British OO, American and Australian HO, and DCC in the garden http://www.yddraiggoch.demon.co.uk/railway/railway.html >>>>>Locos Units and Coaches >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >other ex-GW locos that could be made, of which more than a few were in >use in the 50s and 60s. Yes, but the other ones all looked the same ;) It's the red fleece, thank you.. SignatureAndy Breen ~ Not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales, Aberystwyth Feng Shui: an ancient oriental art for extracting money from the gullible (Martin Sinclair) >>>>>Locos Units and Coaches >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >other ex-GW locos that could be made, of which more than a few were in >use in the 50s and 60s. Why? These old 4-4-0s are right for any layout from the turn of the century to BR days, and as such have a wider market than engines built in the 1930s. They're also more suitable for the typical layout - we don't all have room for a Castle and ten carriages. One of these or a mogul plus three or four makes a prototypical train . They make a perfect companion for the Dean Goods. And as I've pointed out, two sets of body tooling and one of chassis provides at least four different engines. More with minor additional parts. > They make a perfect companion for the Dean Goods. If you mean that abortion churned out by Hornby, then I'd want a different Dean Goods to go with any proposed 4-4-0. John. > > They make a perfect companion for the Dean Goods. > > If you mean that abortion churned out by Hornby, then I'd want a different > Dean Goods to go with any proposed 4-4-0. > > John. "Dean" or "Dean's"? I always understood it to be the "Goods" designed by Dean. Greg.P. >> They make a perfect companion for the Dean Goods. > > If you mean that abortion churned out by Hornby, then I'd want a > different Dean Goods to go with any proposed 4-4-0. How old is it now, originally an Airfix model, must be more than 20 years old by now?... > How old is it now, originally an Airfix model, must be more than 20 years > old by now?... Originally released in 1982 by Mainline using tooling produced by Airfix (GMR) but never actually produced by them. John. >>> That's as may be, but there are likely to be bigger sales with "City of >>> Truro". [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >>made by RTR manufactures - we will be back to the good old, bad old days >>of the 1970s in terms of RTR stock availability... Oh yes it will sell better It is a well known loco and quite well travelled, it will appeal to a wide range of modellers. My late 70s to mid 80s it would be a main line machine, I also tend to prefer models of preserved locos >>>> That's as may be, but there are likely to be bigger sales with >>>> "City of Truro". [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > My late 70s to mid 80s it would be a main line machine, I also tend > to prefer models of preserved locos Ok so people like you would buy the one example, those who would buy a Dukedog and it's variants could well buy two or more as that is what would have been seen, how many City of Truro's have you seen passing in the station?... >>how many City of Truro's have you seen passing in the station?... 1 more than Dukedogs Seen it in Gloucester with a rake of raspberry ripple mark 1s Traveled behind it on SVR, and the GWR Videoed it double heading with Defiant on the GWR Seen it at Toddington most recently >>>how many City of Truro's have you seen passing in the station?... > > 1 more than Dukedogs Liar! There is only *one* "City of Truro" (the class), twat, and has been since at least the early 1930s, moron, in 1955 someone may well have seen a shed full of Dukedoigs... >>Liar! There is only *one* "City of Truro" (the class), twat, and has been >>since at least the early 1930s, moron, in 1955 someone may well have seen >>a shed full of Dukedoigs... You are an insultive bastard, and need to learn manners. I HAVE SEEN ONE MORE CITY OF TRURO THAN DUKEDOG BECAUSE I HAVE NEVER SEEN THE DUKEDOG NOW PISS OFF! Does this help? http://www.greatwestern.org.uk/m_in_440_city.htm >>>Liar! There is only *one* "City of Truro" (the class), twat, and has been >>>since at least the early 1930s, moron, in 1955 someone may well have seen [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >I HAVE SEEN ONE MORE CITY OF TRURO THAN DUKEDOG BECAUSE I HAVE NEVER SEEN >THE DUKEDOG NOW PISS OFF! >>Does this help? >> >>http://www.greatwestern.org.uk/m_in_440_city.htm I know a lot about the history, but a little more learnt there thanks. Seen COT all over the place, first at Swindon museum, got some very good video material of it running on the Glos/Warwick Railway, yet I have never seen any other GWR 4-4-0s >>>Does this help? >>> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >video material of it running on the Glos/Warwick Railway, yet I have never >seen any other GWR 4-4-0s Sometimes I forget we're not all old farts here. But there is also a Dukedog on the Bluebell, which has the honour of having been in one of the David Suchet Hercule Poirot TV programmes. >>But there is also a Dukedog on the Bluebell, which has the honour of >>having been in one of the David Suchet Hercule Poirot TV programmes. Had a visit while doing car delivery driving but not ridden the line - I found the coach shed anyway! Didn't see the Dukedog! >>>But there is also a Dukedog on the Bluebell, which has the honour >>>of [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Didn't see the Dukedog! That would be because you can't read a map, lets hope you found the correct address to deliver the vehicle, you were at Horsted Keynes and not the correct location - Sheffield Park!... >>>But there is also a Dukedog on the Bluebell, which has the honour of >>>having been in one of the David Suchet Hercule Poirot TV programmes. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Didn't see the Dukedog! I've never seen them together, just seperately. But not that long ago there was a gala weekend where they double headed. There are photographs out there like.... http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/Events/cot06.html >>>Liar! There is only *one* "City of Truro" (the class), twat, and >>>has been since at least the early 1930s, moron, in 1955 someone may >>>well have seen a shed full of Dukedoigs... > > You are an insultive bastard, and need to learn manners. <snip the admission of ignorance> You need to learn to read what is said and secondly find a clue and start using the brain cells that I assume you were born with. Yes, to cretins like you I can be VERY rude... >>You need to learn to read what is said and secondly find a clue and start >>using the brain cells that I assume you were born with. Yes, to cretins >>like you I can be VERY rude... So you are the Jerry I have seen in other groups abusing long standing members rather than discussing like adults. Yes I have seen you empty a news group due to your obnoxiousness. You called me a twat, a cretin, a moron and a liar. You are not capable of accepting anyone elses view but your own. Rather than accept what someone has done or not done you are rude to them and chuck your dummy out of the pram. I think you are actually rather childish, as well as ignorant and rude! >>>You need to learn to read what is said and secondly find a clue and >>>start using the brain cells that I assume you were born with. Yes, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > You called me a twat, a cretin, a moron and a liar. Indeed I did, and they are what you are. > You are not capable of accepting anyone elses view but your own. I'm very capable of accepting another POV if that POV stands up to even casual examination... I asked you how many City of Truro's have you seen passing in a station, you said "One more than a Dukedog", you are a liar as it's an impossibility to have done so, why, how many City of Truro's are there, *one* so how did you see two?! Even if you extend the question to the whole class would mean that you would have to be well into your 80s to have seen two passing and your other mutterings clearly shows that you are probably not even half that age yet. > Rather than accept what someone has done or not done you are rude to > them and chuck your dummy out of the pram. > > I think you are actually rather childish, as well as ignorant and > rude! Stop talking about yourself and your very narrow POV at that. Just accept that *you* are wrong and that you will always be wrong if all you talk about is what you personally have seen at various preservation sites. >>I asked you how many City of Truro's have you seen passing in a station, >>you said "One more than a Dukedog", you are a liar as it's an >>impossibility to have done so, why, how many City of Truro's are there, >>*one* so how did you see two?! 0+1 = 1 I have seen 1 City and 0 Dukedog so one more than 0 is 1 Basic maths not O level not A level >>Stop talking about yourself and your very narrow POV at that. Just accept >>that *you* are wrong and that you will always be wrong if all you talk >>about is what you personally have seen at various preservation sites. Go f.ck your self you complete and utter toss pot, I have had it with you, you go around isulting every one who disagrees with your viewpoint, you do not understand primary school level maths and throw insults around like nobodies business. I would guess you are a 50 something saddo living with you mum, the way you keep bandying around the isults and picking on people, I would admit if you talked to me like that in person I would deck you. If you had any real friends you wouldn't infect news groups like a cancer picking on other posters, if this was a web forum you would be banned (mind you for my language so would I). Now I admit I pop in on tea breaks but like to read about new models and get advice about detailing and construction. Now piss off and do something constructive! BTW I am kill filing you for the first time in 4 or 5 years, did it before when you trashed a group and doing it again so I do not get tempted to retaliate again. As to insults I can think of hundreds more! Now try to control yourself before there is noone else left to talk to (or are you happy to talk at people) >>>I asked you how many City of Truro's have you seen passing in a >>>station, you said "One more than a Dukedog", you are a liar as it's [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Basic maths not O level not A level "How many have you seem passing", you need at least two for them to pass each other, I take it that you passed neither GCSE English or Maths then! >>>Stop talking about yourself and your very narrow POV at that. Just >>>accept that *you* are wrong and that you will always be wrong if >>>all you talk about is what you personally have seen at various >>>preservation sites. > > Go f.ck your self <snip> I guess the truth hurts you... > ... > I asked you how many City of Truro's have you seen passing in a > station, you said "One more than a Dukedog", ... Let's see now... How many Dukedogs has he seen running? Answer: 0 How many City of Truro's has he seen running? Answer: 1 And, last time I looked, one is one more than zero. So I am not altogether sure why you have a problem with this. E >> ... >> I asked you how many City of Truro's have you seen passing in a [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > So I am not altogether sure why you have a problem with this. But you need two of each for them to pass each other. The last time CoT could have passed one of it's own class was (at the latest) back in the early 1930. Duh! >>> ... >>> I asked you how many City of Truro's have you seen passing in a [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > CoT could have passed one of it's own class was (at the latest) back > in the early 1930. Duh! Well this is the first time that you've bothered to explain what you meant, even though it was obvious that no-one else took it that way. Rudeness plus a failure to explain is not a reasonable response to being misunderstood. E >>>> ... >>>> I asked you how many City of Truro's have you seen passing in a [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Well this is the first time that you've bothered to explain what you > meant, even though it was obvious that no-one else took it that way. But I did explain what I meant, it's called the English language, I asked "how many City of Truro's have you seen passing in the station?" (note the plural), 'not how many TIMES have you seen City of Truro passing trough the station?' (note the lack of the plural and the lack of the word "times")... >>>>> ... >>>>> I asked you how many City of Truro's have you seen passing in a [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > passing trough the station?' (note the lack of the plural and the lack > of the word "times")... It would be nice if the English language was the precise instrument you seem to think, but it isn't. More than one person misunderstood. The level of rudeness in your response was more than can be justified by impatience with the lack of understanding, and I'm not sure you're entitled to that at the beginning of a newsgroup conversation. E >>>>>> ... >>>>>> I asked you how many City of Truro's have you seen passing in a [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > you > seem to think, but it isn't. In the simple question I asked it was and still is more than precise. More than one person misunderstood. The > level of rudeness in your response was more than can be justified by > impatience with the lack of understanding, and I'm not sure you're > entitled to that at the beginning of a newsgroup conversation. It wasn't at the beginning. >>>>>>> ... >>>>>>> I asked you how many City of Truro's have you seen passing in a [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > > In the simple question I asked it was and still is more than precise. Your posts have had missing words and consistent mis-spellings, why should someone look for absolute precision in one particular post? >> More than one person misunderstood. The >> level of rudeness in your response was more than can be justified by >> impatience with the lack of understanding, and I'm not sure you're >> entitled to that at the beginning of a newsgroup conversation. > > It wasn't at the beginning. Relatively. There was certainly nothing preceding it to warrant the sudden descent into abuse. E >>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>> I asked you how many City of Truro's have you seen passing in [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > Your posts have had missing words and consistent mis-spellings, why > should someone look for absolute precision in one particular post? Because it was precise, you are missing the point, the punctuation was in the plural and not the singular - regardless of any missing words or miss spellings, of which there wasn't any. >>> More than one person misunderstood. The >>> level of rudeness in your response was more than can be justified [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Relatively. There was certainly nothing preceding it to warrant the > sudden descent into abuse. That is of course your *personal* opinion, of which you are quite entitled... >> Your posts have had missing words and consistent mis-spellings, why >> should someone look for absolute precision in one particular post? > > Because it was precise, you are missing the point, the punctuation was > in the plural and not the singular - regardless of any missing words > or miss spellings, of which there wasn't any. I am not missing the point at all, I was saying that based on the totality of your posts, no-one would have expected to need to read that one so very carefully. And while we're on the difference between singular and plural, that should have been "there weren't any". >>> It wasn't at the beginning. >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > That is of course your *personal* opinion, of which you are quite > entitled... "to which" The reaction of others, while different from mine, suggests that they had the same basic opinion. E >> "Eric" <eric@deptj.demon.co.uk> wrote in message > And while we're on the difference between singular and plural, that > should have been "there weren't any". that seems a little clumsy to me, shouldnt it be 'there were none' ? Cheers, Simon >>Let's see now... >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> >>E Thanks - you understand!! I'm ignoring Jerry from now - once he goes like this groups tend to suffer, some people seem to have the attitude that abusing other posters is fair game, I tend to be polite except in one or two circumstances like a transport group tr011 (got to be carefull with that word), and I like to get the same back. The now blocked person managed four insults in one message. I still cannot work out why he did it, but to be honest - get snotty - get it back. There is a lot in the history of the double framed 4-4-0s and will always be lots to learn. > I'm ignoring Jerry from now - once he goes like this groups tend to suffer, > some people seem to have the attitude that abusing other posters is fair [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > The now blocked person managed four insults in one message. I still cannot > work out why he did it, but to be honest - get snotty - get it back. He tried the same thing relatively recently on uk.rec.cars.classic and was told the same thing, basically to go away. Unfortunately, people like him keep trolling because others reply to him. If he was totally ignored and no-one "spoke" to him at all he'd get fed up and pi55 off! Oh, and for what it's worth, I interpreted the context of "passing" to mean that they (or it) passed me, not each other. "I saw a deltic passing... passing what? Why, me, of course!" Badger. Oh look, the moron trolls offering support to each other when caught in the headlights of their ignorance! >> I'm ignoring Jerry from now - once he goes like this groups tend to > suffer, [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > Badger. :Jerry: wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > > > Badger. Ignorance doesn't illuminate, it denies illumination. <snip> > Ignorance doesn't illuminate, it denies illumination. Talking about yourself again I see. :Jerry: wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Talking about yourself again I see. Certainly - I didn't expect you to comprehend. <snip trolling> Hmm, nothing left to reply too... > :Jerry: wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > > Ignorance doesn't illuminate, it denies illumination. Only if you dont admit it. Cheers, Simon > > :Jerry: wrote: > >> [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > Only if you dont admit it. It definitely wasn't me! > >> I'm ignoring Jerry from now - once he goes like this groups tend to > > suffer, [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > > Badger. <posting order corrected> > Oh look, the moron trolls offering support to each other when caught > in the headlights of their ignorance! For one so keen to abuse Google Group users, I suggest you learn not to be a moronic twat of a top poster. The absence of any denial of your behaviour pattern on Usenet speaks volumes. MBQ <snip> The absence of any denial of your behaviour pattern on Usenet speaks volumes. </quote> When did you stop beating your wife and raping your kids?... > <manatba...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > When did you stop beating your wife and raping your kids?... When did you stop taking your medication? MBQ On Apr 22, 9:48 am, ":Jerry:" <INVA...@INVALID.INVALID> wrote: <snip> > When did you stop beating your wife and raping your kids?... When did you stop taking your medication? </quote> The absence of any denial of your marital behaviour speaks volumes... > <manatba...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > The absence of any denial of your marital behaviour speaks volumes... I don't need to deny because it's patently obvious that you made up your assertions. Your behaviour on Usenet, however, is plain for all to see, thanks to the Google archives. MBQ On Apr 22, 11:02 am, ":Jerry:" <INVA...@INVALID.INVALID> wrote: > <manatba...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > The absence of any denial of your marital behaviour speaks > volumes... I don't need to deny because it's patently obvious that you made up your assertions. Your behaviour on Usenet, however, is plain for all to see, thanks to the Google archives. </quote> As is the context, but trolls like you don't like putting things into context. BTW, just because you have not admitted to beating your wife and raping your kids doesn't mean that you don't, so I'll ask again - when are you going to stop beating your wife and raping your kids? > <manatba...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > and raping your kids doesn't mean that you don't, so I'll ask again - > when are you going to stop beating your wife and raping your kids? I don't do either. When are you going to start taking your medication again and stop being an arsehole? MBQ On Apr 22, 12:20 pm, ":Jerry:" <INVA...@INVALID.INVALID> wrote: > <manatba...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > again - > when are you going to stop beating your wife and raping your kids? I don't do either. </snip> Prove it then, if you can't it means that you must beat your wife and rape your kids - of course I can prove the context to the messages I post to Usenet - as you say - it's all recorded in Google archives... As for your other point, after you Sir. > <manatba...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > Prove it then, if you can't No, I choose not to, at least to you. > it means that you must beat your wife and > rape your kids - Why don't you prove you don't require medication to control your behaviour. If you can't then it means you must require the med and you obviously haven't been taking it recently. > of course I can prove the context to the messages I > post to Usenet - as you say - it's all recorded in Google archives... Indeed, the context of the personal abuse directed at someone who simply misunderstood what you said. MBQ >>On Apr 22, 1:24 pm, ":Jerry:" <INVA...@INVALID.INVALID> wrote: >>> <manatba...@hotmail.com> wrote in message [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] >> >>MBQ It is a good job I KFed him before because if he said it to me I'd do what someone else did to a tr011 when they found out who it was, lets put it this way, a particular newgroup is now t***l free because a victim found the home address and phone number of a t***l and when ever it starts - guess the rest - I was watching from the sidelines. Don't have much beyond screen names and t***l names. <snip personal threats> Abuse report forwarded to Demon. > > I'm ignoring Jerry from now - once he goes like this groups tend to > suffer, [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > keep trolling because others reply to him. If he was totally ignored and > no-one "spoke" to him at all he'd get fed up and pi55 off! He does it *everywhere*, eventually, and then lies low for a while, or goes elsewhere. MBQ <snip> He does it *everywhere*, eventually, and then lies low for a while, or goes elsewhere. </quote> Yes, some people do show up the morons, trolls and w.nker like you in what ever groups people like you infest... > <manatba...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Yes, some people do show up the morons, trolls and w.nker like you in > what ever groups people like you infest... Unfortunately, it's too often the same group as you. MBQ > >>>how many City of Truro's have you seen passing in the station?... > > > 1 more than Dukedogs It's now very obvious what Martin thought you meant, i.e. How many City of Truro's passing HIM in the station, not passing each other. Quite a reasonable misinterpretation. So why did you immediately launch into the insults: > Liar! There is only *one* "City of Truro" (the class), > twat, ..., moron, ... Instead of just explaining what you actually meant. Why do you think someone would intentionally lie about the number of CoTs? It's always you who starts the abuse, :Jerry:. Look to yourself before calling others names. MBQ On Apr 18, 3:07 pm, ":Jerry:" <INVA...@INVALID.INVALID> wrote: > "Martin" <nos...@spam.spam> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > > 1 more than Dukedogs It's now very obvious what Martin thought you meant, i.e. How many City of Truro's passing HIM in the station, not passing each other. Quite a reasonable misinterpretation. <snip> </quote> Not at all, unless one doesn't understand the difference between the singular and the plural... > <manatba...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Not at all, unless one doesn't understand the difference between the > singular and the plural... Still no reason to launch the kind of verbal attack you seem so fond of. MBQ >Liar! There is only *one* "City of Truro" (the class), twat, and has >been since at least the early 1930s, moron, in 1955 someone may well >have seen a shed full of Dukedoigs... Plonk. Guy SignatureMay contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting. http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk 85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound > On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 15:07:43 +0100, ":Jerry:" > <INVA...@INVALID.INVALID> said in [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Plonk. You missed the -er ;-) Andrew On Apr 21, 4:18 pm, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <u...@ftc.gov> wrote: > On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 15:07:43 +0100, ":Jerry:" > <INVA...@INVALID.INVALID> said in [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Plonk. You missed the -er ;-) As in those who post via Google groups >>>how many City of Truro's have you seen passing in the station?... > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Seen it at Toddington most recently Truro and the preserved Dukedog are mambers of the same family: Starting with Dukes in 1895. Domed parallel boiler, round topped smokebox. Belpaire added later. The Badmintons were Dukes with 6'8' drivers and Belpaire boiler. The Bulldogs were Dukes with the Churchward standard number 2 boiler, originally parallel with a raised Belpaire and later tapered. Original Bulldogs and Duke rebuilds had curved frames, later Bulldogs had straight frames. The Atbaras were Badmintons with the Bulldog boiler. The Cities were Atbaras with the larger Churchward number 4 boiler. The Aberdares were freight 2-6-0s of basically the same design as the Atbaras and Cities. Finally the Dukedogs were straiht-framed Dukes, nominally new engines built from existing parts 40 years after the original If any of these were availble I'd buy them. But for my period of interest it would be anything but the Dukedog. City of Truro is actually a later rebuild with extended smokebox, superheater, top feed and piston valves. It never carried the ornate Dean livery in that condition until preservation. But it looks beatiful and I would close my eyes to the anachronism. > Locos Units and Coaches Snipped irrelevent chatter... > LMS - models at last, can only think of period 1, and also the port hole > stock Wash your mouth out... After finished with upgrade of 4-6-0's - where is that parallel boiler Scot ? Then 4F and 2P - upgrades desperately required. Plus some variations - a Johnson tender would be nice even though am trying to kit bash one at the moment. Bring back the Compound (also upgraded), recon it would be better received now. 1F's, 2F's, 3F's. Lots of them survived for years. Will Bachmann really produce the G2 ? Could kits of A, B,C,D,E and F be done ? Ok, just an A and D. Can ignore the Claughton cos when reach suitable competence level or win lottery then will get a kit. Do we really want the masses to own such a machine ? Finally, Cauliflower, George Vth and Prince of Wales as a nice starter selection ? They made it to BR - just. > Sorry not up on modern units Dont be sorry, can be proud ! Cheers, Simon > Locos Units and Coaches > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > SDJR > 7F Two preserved, I think they could be quite popular Maybe, but more useful would be a range of 0-6-0 freight locos, e.g. LMS /LMR : ex-L&YR, ex-MR Class 3F ex-LNWR, Cauliflower or Coal Engine ex-Caledonian 0-6-0 LNER/ER/NER Class J6, J11, J15/17, J25/27, J36, J37 plus some ex-LNER/GCR/GNR 2-8-0's, Classes O1/O2/O4 and also some older passenger tank designs that survived until the BR era e.g. ex-LNWR 0-6-2T ex- L&YR 2-4-2T ex- LNER (GCR) C13 4-4-2T A5 or A8 4-6-2T Bevan Price > Maybe, but more useful would be a range of 0-6-0 freight locos, e.g. > LMS /LMR : [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Bevan Price I'll second that, and buy most of those classes. >> LNER/ER/NER >> Class J6, J11, J15/17, J25/27, J36, J37 Of the NER types, I's suggest the C ("J21") as a more generally useful and flexible type than the P-derivatives (P2 and P3, aka "J25" and "J27"). The Cs worked passenger trains regularly and for //many// years were the workhorses of the long, thin secondary routes and rural branches (with particularly associations with the /very/ modellable Lancashire & South Durham Union over Stainmore. With the Ps you're much more closely tied to the coalfield, though they did last a few years longer (not that many, though..). J36 and J37 are right on the ball. SignatureAndy Breen ~ Not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales, Aberystwyth Feng Shui: an ancient oriental art for extracting money from the gullible (Martin Sinclair) >>> LNER/ER/NER >>> Class J6, J11, J15/17, J25/27, J36, J37 [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >the coalfield, though they did last a few years longer (not that >many, though..). Sounds like the GWR's Dean Goods which was do anything, go anywhere locomotive. You even saw them with class A head codes when the South Wales expresses were diverted over the Severn bridge due to engineering work in the tunnel. >J36 and J37 are right on the ball. >>> LNER/ER/NER >>> Class J6, J11, J15/17, J25/27, J36, J37 > Of the NER types, I's suggest the C ("J21") as a more generally > useful and flexible type Agreed. Also, there's special edition potential as one's preserved. > than the P-derivatives (P2 and P3, aka "J25" and "J27"). The J25 was NER P1. P2 was the J26, which was very similar to the J27 (P3) - there was virtually no visible difference between the two if the 26 you were looking at had shaped spectacles. Dave Alexander does excellent kits of the J21, J25, J26 and J27, with the last two actually being the same kit. Highly recommended. <snip> > With the Ps you're much more closely tied to the coalfield, though > they did last a few years longer (not that many, though..). There's also a little bit of Great Eastern Section interest as twelve superheated J27s were permanently transferred down there in August 1926 as they'd been displaced by the first twelve J39s (delivered, incidentally, in red-lined black). SignatureJades' First Encounters Site - http://www.jades.org/ffe.htm The best Frontier: First Encounters site on the Web. nospam@jades.org /is/ a real email address! >>>> LNER/ER/NER >>>> Class J6, J11, J15/17, J25/27, J36, J37 [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Agreed. Also, there's special edition potential as one's preserved. I remember it sittig at Beamish - where has it got to now? On reflection, a C (J21), an M or R (D17 or D20) and maybe a A or an O (F8 or G5), plus an E1 (J72) would pretty well cover any number of very modellable NER and ex-NER lines over many years. Probably the C, R and O for the wisdest period appeal, as there seems to be more of a preference for post-nationalisation than pre-grouping.. >> than the P-derivatives (P2 and P3, aka "J25" and "J27"). > >The J25 was NER P1. P2 was the J26, which was very similar to the J27 >(P3) - there was virtually no visible difference between the two if >the 26 you were looking at had shaped spectacles. Brain fart there... sorry. >Dave Alexander does excellent kits of the J21, J25, J26 and J27, with >the last two actually being the same kit. Highly recommended. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >1926 as they'd been displaced by the first twelve J39s (delivered, >incidentally, in red-lined black). Now that I'd not known.. SignatureAndy Breen ~ Not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales, Aberystwyth Feng Shui: an ancient oriental art for extracting money from the gullible (Martin Sinclair) There is very little NER or GER stuff RTR which to me seems a bit of a pity. > There is very little NER or GER stuff RTR which to me seems a bit of a pity. Off the top of my head, the only RTR NER-designed engine is the Bachmann J72, which is sometimes available in LNER black but most common in BR black. With regard to GER classes, the only one I can think of is the Hornby B12 and I have a suspicion that's an LNER rebuild. Also, it's not particularly accurate due to having a firebox that's twice as long as it should be so they could get the motor in. I don't know much about the Great Eastern, TBH. SignatureJades' First Encounters Site - http://www.jades.org/ffe.htm The best Frontier: First Encounters site on the Web. nospam@jades.org /is/ a real email address! >> There is very little NER or GER stuff RTR which to me seems a bit of a pity. > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >it should be so they could get the motor in. I don't know much about >the Great Eastern, TBH. Rebuilt. Credited to Gresley but undertaken by Thompson at Stratford - one of his rare successes. >>There's also a little bit of Great Eastern Section interest as twelve >>superheated J27s were permanently transferred down there in August >>1926 as they'd been displaced by the first twelve J39s (delivered, >>incidentally, in red-lined black). > >Now that I'd not known.. Nor me. RCTS Part 5 says 2341/50/54/57-62/87/88/89 went south in late 1926 to Cambridge and March sheds. In Sept 1930 six went to Peterborough East; by about 1935 there were 5 at Ardsley and 3 at Langwith. These went to Granthem or March on the outbreak of war, but all returned to the NE between April 1940 and April 1942. Have to wait for the Yeadon to know more, I suppose. Tim >>>There's also a little bit of Great Eastern Section interest as twelve >>>superheated J27s were permanently transferred down there in August >>>1926 as they'd been displaced by the first twelve J39s (delivered, >>>incidentally, in red-lined black). >> >>Now that I'd not known.. > Nor me. > RCTS Part 5 says 2341/50/54/57-62/87/88/89 went south in late 1926 to > Cambridge and March sheds. In Sept 1930 six went to Peterborough East; > by about 1935 there were 5 at Ardsley and 3 at Langwith. These went to > Granthem or March on the outbreak of war, but all returned to the NE > between April 1940 and April 1942. > Have to wait for the Yeadon to know more, I suppose. According to Yeadon's Register (Volume 11, Gresley J39 Class), the register of transfers marked the engines in question as being 'in exchange for J39' - the J39s in question being new-builds assigned to the NE Area direct from coming out of Darlington Works. Yeadon speculates that "it was probably thought prudent to have the first ones [J39s] built assigned to work where they could be closely watched, and where they could easily be called into the works which had built them should any teething troubles be found." SignatureJades' First Encounters Site - http://www.jades.org/ffe.htm The best Frontier: First Encounters site on the Web. nospam@jades.org /is/ a real email address! |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.