 |
 | 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 / August 2010It's been a while ... what new RTR models would folks like to see
It's been a while since this thread was run and since the last time we've had some very good RTR offerings make their appearance, I am for instance thinking in particular of the ROD but I'm sure others will have their own favourites. So what would folks like to see next ... At the very top of my list would be the: Aspinall L&Y 2-4-2T class 5, in service in one guise or another for over 70 years, four main variants ... short bunker, long bunker, Belpaire and saturated and of course as minor additional variants we have auto tank fitted versions of all 4 preceeding major variations as well. For livery we have L&Y, L&Y/L&NWR transitional, L&NWR, LMS early and late and at least a couple of BR versions. Hundreds built. For much the same reasons I'd vote for the L&Y 0-6-0 class 27/28s Of perhaps smaller interest I’d also like to see the class 8 Dreadnoughts and their 4-6-4T sisters. Many went through to the LMS with a least a couple of variations or modifications on the way.  SignatureAll the best, Chris >It's been a while since this thread was run and since the last time we've >had some very good RTR offerings make their appearance, I am for instance [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >and their 4-6-4T sisters. Many went through to the LMS with a least a >couple of variations or modifications on the way. I'd still like to see the GWR Duke/Bulldog/Dukedog family. With a minimum of extra tooling they could do Dukes, straight and curved frame Bulldogs and Dukedogs all using the same chassis. Given that Bachmann and others in the US include alternative cabs etc in the boxes they could also supply the early short smokebox, and using springy flexible plastic for the top feed that could be removeable. These engines were remarkably long lived. The Dukes and Bulldogs lasted from the late 1890s into the 1950s. I'd also like to see a Manning Wardle Old Class I or a Class K. These engines go back to E.B.Wilson (just) and were built throught the second half of the 1800s, and many of them lasted into the 1950s so it would be legitimate to run one alongside an Austerity. >>It's been a while since this thread was run and since the last time we've >>had some very good RTR offerings make their appearance, I am for instance [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > second half of the 1800s, and many of them lasted into the 1950s so it > would be legitimate to run one alongside an Austerity. Before anything else Bachmann should update their unrebuilt Scot - its still basically the Mainline one ! All that kerfuffle when Hornby did rebuilt Scot and Patriot, then Bachmann upgraded Jubilee and stole unrebuilt Patriot. :-) Cheers, Simon > All that kerfuffle when Hornby did rebuilt Scot and Patriot, then Bachmann > upgraded Jubilee and stole unrebuilt Patriot. :-) Ah well, maybe in these times of financial austerity, the pair of them may stop playing silly buggers. There's plenty of unmodelled prototypes around for there to be no need for duplication. Now where's the B16, G5, J25, J27, K1, Q6 & 4F I would so desperately like to have on our shelves. John. >> All that kerfuffle when Hornby did rebuilt Scot and Patriot, then >> Bachmann upgraded Jubilee and stole unrebuilt Patriot. :-) [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > John. 4F - yes please, not sure about those others though. Plus how about a few more industrials - Hunslet, Pecket etc would go down a treat. Cheers, Simon <snip> > Now where's the B16, G5, J25, J27, K1, Q6 & 4F I would so desperately like > to have on our shelves. Well, it's common knowledge that one of the major manufacturers has been down to the NYMR and scanned the Q6 so that's likely for this year or next. Another one that's rumoured to be close to release is the G5. In the case of the latter, it'd be nice if they did a tie-in special edition in association with the guys building a new one (http://www.g5locomotive.co.uk/). 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! > <snip> > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > edition in association with the guys building a new one > (http://www.g5locomotive.co.uk/). Still seems like they're missing the obvious one - the C (what got called the J21 after the London branch was added to the system). Long-lived, ubiquitous - and essential for pretty well any branch line on the old NER. Add the G5 (I'll reluctantly accept that these are probably of more interest to those who model the Boring Black Period of Decline and Decay [1] than the much more interesting and handsome BTP - OK, G6 in the BBPoDaD) and an M or R (D20 or D17 in the BBBPoDaD) and there's pretty well everything needed. Though I fear if Bachmann did it then they'd insist on making them available in black - only :-( [1] Roughly 1928-1968. Not to be confused with the Boring Blue Period of Decline and Decay (roughly, 1968-1988). SignatureAndy Breen, not speaking on behalf of Aberystwyth University "The internet, that wonderful tool for bringing us into contact with things that make us wish we could scrub our brains out with dental floss.." (Charlie Stross) > So what would folks like to see next ... A 'Jenny Lind' 0-2-0. These were the first mass-produced locos at the end of the 1840s and were sold to a variety of railway companies the length and breadth of the UK. They had elegant fluted domes and safety valve covers, a range of 4- and 6- wheeled tenders, and a few were later rebuilt with cabs. One basic model could be turned out year after year in the liveries of LBSC, Midland, Birmingham & Gloucester, London & Birmingham. There would be the opportunity then for a variety of 4-wheel and 5-wheel carriages, with all the luscious lampgear on the roofs and fiddly moulding round the doors. http://www.scienceandsociety.co.uk/results.asp?image=10301012 http://www.scienceandsociety.co.uk/results.asp?image=10283806 'Columbine', .Grand Junction 0-2-0 http://www.scienceandsociety.co.uk/results.asp?image=10437064 'Liverpool', the Crampton that starred at the Great Exhibition http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/egallery/object.asp?object=2800094 Now, here is a real challenge to the dcc merchants, the builders of mechanisms, and the detailers: What about a working rail-mounted crane? complete with luffing, slewing, and winch mechanisms? even deployable outrigger legs? Oh, and just for grins, let's have all of those in Gauge 1, 0, HO, & N! >> So what would folks like to see next ... > A 'Jenny Lind' 0-2-0. These were the first mass-produced locos at the [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > http://www.scienceandsociety.co.uk/results.asp?image=10301012 > http://www.scienceandsociety.co.uk/results.asp?image=10283806 Am I missing something - that looks like a 2-2-2 to me. An 0-2-0 would be interesting, though I'm sure it has been done - I've seen a working model of a Patiala State Monorail 0-3-0. SignatureArthur Figgis Surrey, UK >>> So what would folks like to see next ... >> A 'Jenny Lind' 0-2-0. These were the first mass-produced locos at the > Am I missing something - that looks like a 2-2-2 to me. An 0-2-0 would > be interesting, though I'm sure it has been done - I've seen a working > model of a Patiala State Monorail 0-3-0. In model form, at least, it's been done. Quite famously, too: http://www.ngrail.co.uk/far_t_4l.jpg >>>> So what would folks like to see next ... >>> A 'Jenny Lind' 0-2-0. These were the first mass-produced locos at the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > http://www.ngrail.co.uk/far_t_4l.jpg Ah, the good old Far Twittering and Oysterperch Railway! SignatureMartin S. > >> On 14 Aug, 15:03, Chris Wilson<ulm@.4rubbish.britwar.co.uk> wrote: > >>> So what would folks like to see next ... [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > http://www.ngrail.co.uk/far_t_4l.jpg The principle is good - provided that it is a tender engine! The French use motorised hand rotovators to tow ride on trailers and I have seen the same thing used as a ride on when working the soil. Such an arrangement would have been perfectly functional as a rail locomotive -- in my opinion. >> >> On 14 Aug, 15:03, Chris Wilson<ulm@.4rubbish.britwar.co.uk> wrote: >> >>> So what would folks like to see next ... [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Such an arrangement would have been perfectly functional as a rail > locomotive -- in my opinion. I have a photo somewhere (not sure where offhand) of a German machine designed for moving a wagon on an industrial siding. It has/had a small motorcycle type motor with a lawn-mower type handle and a single driving wheel. One pushed it on the rail under the wagon wheel. As it drove into the "V" between the wheel and rail it used the wagon weight to obtain traction. Greg.P. >> The principle is good - provided that it is a tender engine! The >> French use motorised hand rotovators to tow ride on trailers and I have [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > the "V" between the wheel and rail it used the wagon weight to obtain > traction. Locopulser? SignatureAndy Breen, not speaking on behalf of Aberystwyth University "The internet, that wonderful tool for bringing us into contact with things that make us wish we could scrub our brains out with dental floss.." (Charlie Stross) > Am I missing something - that looks like a 2-2-2 to me. An 0-2-0 would > be interesting, though I'm sure it has been done - I've seen a working > model of a Patiala State Monorail 0-3-0. OK, it's late and I've been working hard. Emmet did an o2o and I've seen it modelled... >> So what would folks like to see next ... > A 'Jenny Lind' 0-2-0. ITYM "2-2-2". 0-2-0 is strictly Emmett. > These were the first mass-produced locos at the > end of the 1840s and were sold to a variety of railway companies the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > 4-wheel and 5-wheel carriages, with all the luscious lampgear on the > roofs and fiddly moulding round the doors. Add: a reasonably generic Stephenson Patentee and the 0-4-2 goods equivalent, plus a Sharp, Roberts 2-2-2 and/or a Hawthorn ditto, and you have the makings of the locomotive stock for pretty well any line. Carriages and wag(g)ons were fairly generic at that time (or good enough!).. Yep. Works for me. > 'Columbine', .Grand Junction 0-2-0 Again, 2-2-2. Buddicom ("Crewe") type 2-2-2s and 2-4-0s would be great, given their long life (to the 1890s) and wide spread (from the midlands to the far northern Highlands). Yep. > 'Liverpool', the Crampton that starred at the Great Exhibition > http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/egallery/object.asp?object=2800094 An oddity, and a failure. Far better to have a 2-20 and 0-4-0 Bury, which were successful and widespread (and, again, long-lived, with examples seeing extensive industrial service...). There's a lot going for the early-modern image railway (late 1830s-1850s): short trains, tight curves quite acceptable. No need for lineside signalling, interesting operational practices.. Actually - here's a challenge for the DCC mob: common 1840s-1860s practice was to uncouple the locomotive on the move on approach to the station. Locomotive would then accelerate, run into a siding and (everyone hopes) stop. Train - and I'm talking passenger trains here - would run into the terminal platform under its own momentum and (again, one hoped) be stopped by the van handbrake. So - a DCC controlled coupler and some form of braking. Should be OK... > There's a lot going for the early-modern image railway (late > 1830s-1850s): short trains, tight curves quite acceptable. No need for > lineside signalling, interesting operational practices.. Mixed traffic, hunting specials, that sort of thing. I like the idea an awful lot. And, as you say, short trains. I can imagine a 1st/ second, a 3rd, a parliamentary, and a 3rd-brake all in different styles > Actually - here's a challenge for the DCC mob: common 1840s-1860s > practice was to uncouple the locomotive on the move on approach to the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > one hoped) be stopped by the van handbrake. So - a DCC controlled coupler > and some form of braking. Should be OK... Ooh, I like that. powered coaching stock... bobharvey <robertharvey@my-deja.com> wrote in news:c68bc0f7-dd39-456e-a483- 903c28916613@x18g2000pro.googlegroups.com: > Ooh, I like that. powered coaching stock... Not necessarily, I gave this some thought some time ago when we were discussing slip coaches, place a magnet under the tracks at the place where you want the coach to stop and place a second one under your slip coach and Bob's your uncle. Ensure your train is going fast enough and have some form of mechanical uncoupler ahead of where you want the coach to stop and the magnets should ensure that it stops in the right place. SignatureAll the best, Chris >> There's a lot going for the early-modern image railway (late >> 1830s-1850s): short trains, tight curves quite acceptable. No need for >> lineside signalling, interesting operational practices.. > Mixed traffic, hunting specials, that sort of thing. I like the idea an > awful lot. And, as you say, short trains. I can imagine a 1st/ second, > a 3rd, a parliamentary, and a 3rd-brake all in different styles And probably all in different colours. Lots of the early companies painted 1st, 2nd and (if they had 'em, if they /had/ to have them...) 3rd coaches in different colours (think the NER was the last to do this, well into the 1860s). Of course, there was a tendency to put 3rds on the end of goods trains, and only run 'em at night. Passenger trains would probably have been 4-5 coaches typically, at least one a brake. At least, that's the impression I'm getting from the accounts I see of the early-modern railways. Excursions were different, of course. Then it seems to have been a case of hang as many coaches as could be rounded up on, put as many engines on as would move it, and go to it. 4+ engines not uncommon, 6 seems to have happened at least once (on a train of over 50 coaches.... yike!) >> Actually - here's a challenge for the DCC mob: common 1840s-1860s >> practice was to uncouple the locomotive on the move on approach to the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Ooh, I like that. powered coaching stock... NOt sure about actively powered - you don't really want it moving off on its own, at least not uphill.. >>> So what would folks like to see next ... >> A 'Jenny Lind' 0-2-0. > >ITYM "2-2-2". 0-2-0 is strictly Emmett. Don't forget the BRistol and Exeter's broad gauge steam railmotor Fairfield, which was an 0-2-0 permanently attaqched to a 4-wheeled carriqage. >> These were the first mass-produced locos at the >> end of the 1840s and were sold to a variety of railway companies the [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >Carriages and wag(g)ons were fairly generic at that time (or good >enough!).. I want the small Sharpie 2-4-0 tender engines bought by many of the smaller railways. The GWR acquired one when it took over the Pembroke and Tenby Railway, and used this on the Didcot, Newbury and Southampton line. But nobody's going to do that one. >Yep. Works for me. > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >one hoped) be stopped by the van handbrake. So - a DCC controlled coupler >and some form of braking. Should be OK... >>>> So what would folks like to see next ... >>> A 'Jenny Lind' 0-2-0. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Fairfield, which was an 0-2-0 permanently attaqched to a 4-wheeled > carriqage. which, surely, would make it an 0-2-4? > I want the small Sharpie 2-4-0 tender engines bought by many of the > smaller railways. The GWR acquired one when it took over the Pembroke > and Tenby Railway, and used this on the Didcot, Newbury and Southampton > line. > > But nobody's going to do that one. Also used by the Furness, in quite a big way. Some of them lasted to be taken over by the LM&S, though I don't think they ever got LM&S livery. IIRC one of the southern companies also had some, and the L&NW may have done too at one point (via something they took over). Yes, I'd like one. Or more than one. And several of the equivalent small goods 0-6-0s, which lasted almost into BR days in GW ownership (ex- Cambrian and Mid-Wales examples) and into the 1930s on the LM&S (ex- Furness engines). >>Yep. Works for me. >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >>given their long life (to the 1890s) and wide spread (from the midlands >>to the far northern Highlands). Yep. .. and I'd love to see an example of the Hackworth school of design done... >>>> So what would folks like to see next ... >>> A 'Jenny Lind' 0-2-0. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Fairfield, which was an 0-2-0 permanently attaqched to a 4-wheeled > carriqage. which, surely, would make it an 0-2-4? > I want the small Sharpie 2-4-0 tender engines bought by many of the > smaller railways. The GWR acquired one when it took over the Pembroke > and Tenby Railway, and used this on the Didcot, Newbury and Southampton > line. > > But nobody's going to do that one. Also used by the Furness, in quite a big way. Some of them lasted to be taken over by the LM&S, though I don't think they ever got LM&S livery. IIRC one of the southern companies also had some, and the L&NW may have done too at one point (via something they took over). Yes, I'd like one. Or more than one. And several of the equivalent small goods 0-6-0s, which lasted almost into BR days in GW ownership (ex- Cambrian and Mid-Wales examples) and into the 1930s on the LM&S (ex- Furness engines). >>Yep. Works for me. >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >>given their long life (to the 1890s) and wide spread (from the midlands >>to the far northern Highlands). Yep. .. and I'd love to see an example of the Hackworth school of design done... > > I want the small Sharpie 2-4-0 tender engines bought by many of the > > smaller railways. The GWR acquired one when it took over the Pembroke [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Also used by the Furness, in quite a big way..... speaking of which, has anyone built anything from http://www.kemilway.com/peter-k.html ? They look splendid on the webmail >> > I want the small Sharpie 2-4-0 tender engines bought by many of the >> > smaller railways. The GWR acquired one when it took over the Pembroke [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > http://www.kemilway.com/peter-k.html ? They look splendid on the > webmail I may well be investing in one of these[1], then hunting for someone to build it (I know my limits: the only thing I can reliably produce with a soldering iron are burned fingers...) [1] The goods Sharpie, of course. Though a pair of NLR 51s did end up on Wheatley's line, running boat expresses.... Hmm.. SignatureAndy Breen, not speaking on behalf of Aberystwyth University "The internet, that wonderful tool for bringing us into contact with things that make us wish we could scrub our brains out with dental floss.." (Charlie Stross) >>> > I want the small Sharpie 2-4-0 tender engines bought by many of the >>> > smaller railways. The GWR acquired one when it took over the Pembroke [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > [1] The goods Sharpie, of course. Though a pair of NLR 51s did end up on > Wheatley's line, running boat expresses.... Hmm.. That Kirtley Well tank does look very nice - perhaps one day, will add to ever expanding wish list :-) Cheers, Simon 2-2-2 surely? >> So what would folks like to see next ... >A 'Jenny Lind' 0-2-0. These were the first mass-produced locos at the [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >http://www.scienceandsociety.co.uk/results.asp?image=10301012 >http://www.scienceandsociety.co.uk/results.asp?image=10283806 Also the GWR. When they acquired the standard gauge West Midland Railway this included some Jenny Linds. There is a famous pictute of "Will Shakspere" which remained in its original condition until very late. If you're going back that far though, a Stevenson patentee mighty have a bigger market. >'Columbine', .Grand Junction 0-2-0 >http://www.scienceandsociety.co.uk/results.asp?image=10437064 > >'Liverpool', the Crampton that starred at the Great Exhibition >http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/egallery/object.asp?object=2800094 Both very limited market. >Now, here is a real challenge to the dcc merchants, the builders of >mechanisms, and the detailers: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Oh, and just for grins, let's have all of those in Gauge 1, 0, HO, & >N! > >'Columbine', .Grand Junction > >http://www.scienceandsociety.co.uk/results.asp?image=10437064 [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Both very limited market. the question wasn't what would sell - but what I'd like to see. But yes, there were not many Cramptons on the LNWR, and the idea of a 'crewe type' would be a better one. Some 4-4-0 s lived a long time too. > What about a working rail-mounted crane? complete with luffing, >>slewing, and winch mechanisms? even deployable outrigger legs? Warley, or was it Manchester?, last year had a demonstration rail-mounted crane. Very impressive to watch in operation! SignatureDave, Frodsham http://dave-jackson.fotopic.net >> So what would folks like to see next ... > A 'Jenny Lind' 0-2-0. These were the first mass-produced locos at the [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > 'Liverpool', the Crampton that starred at the Great Exhibition > http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/egallery/object.asp?object=2800094 That appears to be a 4-2-0! SignatureMartin S. >>> So what would folks like to see next ... >> A 'Jenny Lind' 0-2-0. These were the first mass-produced locos at the [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > >That appears to be a 4-2-0! "Liverpool" was a 6-2-0. >>> 'Liverpool', the Crampton that starred at the Great Exhibition >>> http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/egallery/object.asp?object=2800094 >> >>That appears to be a 4-2-0! > > "Liverpool" was a 6-2-0. The above photo is of a 4-2-0. If you zoom in, the nameplate reads "Folkstone 1851", so it's not "Liverpool". The large buider's plate reads: Stephenson & Co., Engineers, Newcastle South Eastern Railway London to Paris Folkstone & Boulogne & Dover & Calais Crampton Patentee Note the spelling of Folkstone; it was standardised as Folkestone around the mid 19th century. [Wiki] SignatureMartin S. >>>> 'Liverpool', the Crampton that starred at the Great Exhibition >>>> http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/egallery/object.asp?object=2800094 [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >Note the spelling of Folkstone; it was standardised as Folkestone around >the mid 19th century. [Wiki] According to Mike Sharman, Folkstone was the first of a class of ten rigid-framed jackshaft-drive 4-2-0 Cramptons for the SER. You can see on the picture that the connecting rod emerges halfway along the frames. They were according to his references both fast (75mph top speed, 60mph average) and powerful. One of them lasted, unrebuilt, until 1874, quite a record for a Crampton in the UK especially given the unconventional transmission ! Nick SignatureSerendipity: http://www.leverton.org/blosxom (last update 29th March 2010) "The Internet, a sort of ersatz counterfeit of real life" -- Janet Street-Porter, BBC2, 19th March 1996 >>>>> 'Liverpool', the Crampton that starred at the Great Exhibition >>>>> http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/egallery/object.asp?object=2800094 [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >a record for a Crampton in the UK especially given the unconventional >transmission ! That was another of Crampton's patents. He is remembered primarily for trying to get the kind of power and speed the GWR got out of its broad gauge engines, for the standard gauge, by combining as large a boiler as would fit above the frames and large driving wheels in the only place there was room a high axle. But he also tried to minimise hammer blow, and the intermediate jackshaft was intended to do this. One of his prettiest engines was a long wheelbase 0-4-0T built by E.B.Wilson which looked like a well tank version of the 0-6-0T design Manning Wardle inherited from them. >Nick >> 'Liverpool', the Crampton that starred at the Great Exhibition >> http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/egallery/object.asp?object=2800094 > > That appears to be a 4-2-0! 6-2-0 (or 4+2-2-0 - Cramptons don't really fit the White notation very well). >> So what would folks like to see next ... >A 'Jenny Lind' 0-2-0. These were the first mass-produced locos at the [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >Oh, and just for grins, let's have all of those in Gauge 1, 0, HO, & >N! Definitely in N please... SignatureFrank Erskine Sunderland > It's been a while since this thread was run and since the last time > we've had some very good RTR offerings make their appearance, I am [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > At the very top of my list would be the: Forget locomotives and rolling stock. What I would like to see is some decent "rtr" electrically-operated signals, stop, distant and stop and distant on the same post. As I've said before, if Hornby could do them in 1939, then why can't they be done now? SignatureJane I for one, would like an up to date suburban DMU such as Class 117. >I for one, would like an up to date suburban DMU such as Class 117. please keep taking the tablets :-) Water softening tablets for steam loco's I suppose ? >>I for one, would like an up to date suburban DMU such as Class 117. > please keep taking the tablets :-) > Water softening tablets for steam loco's I suppose ? >> >>>I for one, would like an up to date suburban DMU such as Class 117. >> please keep taking the tablets :-) I know am being unfair, its just like an ugly child, shouldnt be suprised that someone loves em :-) cheers, Simon > > Water softening tablets for steam loco's I suppose ? > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > cheers, > Simon I would like a D11/1 (Director). Crosti boilered 9F - after all the chassis and mechanics exist , its only a new moulding for the body.. > It's been a while since this thread was run and since the last time we've > had some very good RTR offerings make their appearance, I am for instance > thinking in particular of the ROD but I'm sure others will have their own > favourites. |
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.