Steam modelling nightmare

[TravisM]

I know that I’m going to open a hornets nest, so I’m going to throw this out there and then run away .  As I model the present era, I know that it can be a modelling nightmare with build and rebuild differences, liveries etc but I feel it’s nothing compared with steam.

 

I was reading a thread about Hornby’s rebuilt light pacific and the conclusion was that the model had the wrong tender, so I was wondering the minefield of modelling steam with it’s different tenders, riveted or welded, cut down or extended.  That was the tenders but the loco’s had detail differences from different chimneys, valve gear, feed water heater, steps etc, and that can be within a single class.  Black 5’s and 9F’s come to mind but I’m sure there must be loads of other examples.

 

Over to you guys 

Edited June 11, 2020 by jools1959
Typo

[Wickham Green too]

Yes there is a LOT of unexploded ordnance scattered around the Light Pacifics in particular ..... but there ARE people who've devoted time and effort into researching and publishing far more info than could be summarised on here ; Richard Derry's "The Book Of ...." contains an awful lot of info but I'm sure the late Albert Goodall collated other differences that aren't fully listed therein ( smoke deflectors, ashpans, water treatment ).

Yes, steam locos were, undoubtedly more 'hand built' than the types that followed and - without doubt - that's why they still have such a following.

[James Makin]

I’m also imagining obtaining the reference photographs is more of a nightmare!

 

I model the late 1990s and take for granted how silly easy it is to get 30-40 photos of any chosen loco on both sides and all ends & roof, or shots of almost any wagon one can think of just by a few mins searching on Flickr, Google and Smugmug, let alone having to leaf through old out of print books, old mags, dubious works drawings and grainy images of one side of a loco that may have had a set detail for a tiny time period and then having to guess the rest and hope no one calls you up on it! 
 

Cheers,

James

[John Isherwood]

13 minutes ago, James Makin said:

I’m also imagining obtaining the reference photographs is more of a nightmare!

 

Oh, I dont know; I've collected around 74,000 of them for reference purposes.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[DLT]

1 hour ago, jools1959 said:

 

I was reading a thread about Hornby’s rebuilt light pacific

 

There are other FAR more expert than I, but my thinking is that you would be hard pushed to find two Bulleid Pacifics that were the same!

[Wickham Green too]

2 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

Oh, I dont know; I've collected around 74,000 of them for reference purposes.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Which loco was that for ?

[Ken.W]

9 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

Yes there is a LOT of unexploded ordnance scattered around the Light Pacifics in particular .....

 

Not just those

In my loco collection I've 12 A3s and no two are the same...

and I only cover the 1957-64 period!

 

Hornby have recently announced an A2/2 model

Out of a class of just 6 locos, the 2 models as being released are only suitable for three of them, and even thats with some minor differences for one, and not suitable for any from being rebuilt from P2s in '43/'44 prior to '51 for one model, and '57 for the other.

 

Then there's my three J39s with, yes, three different tenders (and that's not all the varieties).

[Wickham Green too]

The one saving grace of the Bulleids is that all the tenders are fully welded and there's no need for - literal - rivet counting ........... mind you, they do come in several varieties : a) weeping at the first seam, b) weeping at ...............

[doilum]

And this is the fun that underpins our entire hobby!

[The Johnster]

At least I model BR (W) and as everyone knows, all GW locos are the same.  Except when they're different...

 

57xx, 842 locos built to an allegedly standard design.  First deviation, 67xx with no vacuum brakes and jointed coupling rods for dock shunting.  Second deviation, 8750 with Collett  cab design.  3rd variation 97xx, actually 2 in 1 because there was a 57xx based prototype then the production 8750 based locos, shoretended pannier tanks with sidt tank section at the cab end and condensing equipiment. 4th variation, top feed version of boller, subsequently fitted to locos previously carrying 'normal' boilers and becoming prevalent over time, but some locos withdrawn with 'normal' boilers.  5th variation larger whistle guards. 6th variation, 6750 class, Collect cab variant of 67xx. 

 

Futher variety was supplied by tripcocks for working over LT lines on the 97xx, and spark arrestor chimneys for working in fire risk locations.  We will not fry our brains by considering livery varints.

[Steamport Southport]

You want to try the 1196 class for complexity. Three locomotives of which one was dismantled not long after rebuilding, presumably for spares for the other two.

 

The other two don't even look the same locomotive in various photographs. There is always something different such as steps, bunkers, pipework, toolboxes, lamp irons, etc. Seems they did a lot of swapping and moving of parts.

 

People have tried previously to fathom them out, but it's difficult.

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/103016-gwr-1196/

 

Not that they were particularly camera shy either. I've found about fifty photos each of the pair so far. Unfortunately not many for 1192 which only lasted a short time in that form.

 

I bought one because I thought it might be a nice, easy project. The other two were very cheap and looked neglected.....

 

To be honest I wasn't going to leave them seeing as they were only about £15 each. It was only when I examined them later that I realised they were the complete kits with Mainly Trains chassis and full set of wheels, motor, etc.

 

 

 

Research? That's the fun bit. Looking through magazines and books for information. Just try and keep focused. If you are looking for a certain thing, don't start looking at other things or you'll never finish looking, or even worse give up.

 

 

 

Jason

[Zomboid]

It's not just steam. You think "standard" products like the EMD GP38 are the same bar the paint job? Not a chance. There's loads of differences between them depending on who originally ordered them, things like dynamic brakes, headlight arrangements, number boards... If that kind of accuracy is important to you then it's just as complicated as anything else.

Edited June 13, 2020 by Zomboid

[TravisM]

10 hours ago, Zomboid said:

It's not just steam. You think "standard" products like the EMD GP38 are the same bar the paint job? Not a chance. There's loads of differences between them depending on who originally ordered them, things like dynamic brakes, headlight arrangements, number boards... If that kind of accuracy is important to you then it's just as complicated as anything else.

I know what you mean about US diesel’s after modelling the Santa Fe and Southern Pacific for 30+ years.  Taking the EMD GP38 for example, you have hi or low short hood, built with or without air filters, Alco or Blomberg trucks, 1966  or 1971 dash -2 build, no dynamic brakes or standard or extended range dynamic brakes, position of cab windows and headlights, fuel tank capacity and the list goes on and on 

[The Johnster]

There were plenty varieties of Class 47s even as they were being built, and a good few more added since with the likes of MGR slow control, eth, airconiditioning stuff, long range fuel tanks, and so on.

[jim.snowdon]

3 hours ago, The Johnster said:

There were plenty varieties of Class 47s even as they were being built, and a good few more added since with the likes of MGR slow control, eth, airconiditioning stuff, long range fuel tanks, and so on.

They're machines, there to do a job, and modified as and when the need arises, using whatever locomotives were to hand, and suitable, at the time.

 

Jim

[kevinlms]

'Standard' locos like the BR 4-6-0s had different tenders on various batches, depending on their intended usage. Often it was a matter of changing the coal/water ratios. Especially for those on the Southern Region, where they needed more water, because there were no water troughs.

[rockershovel]

On 13/06/2020 at 02:30, Steamport Southport said:

You want to try the 1196 class for complexity. Three locomotives of which one was dismantled not long after rebuilding, presumably for spares for the other two.

 

The other two don't even look the same locomotive in various photographs. There is always something different such as steps, bunkers, pipework, toolboxes, lamp irons, etc. Seems they did a lot of swapping and moving of parts.

 

People have tried previously to fathom them out, but it's difficult.

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/103016-gwr-1196/

 

Not that they were particularly camera shy either. I've found about fifty photos each of the pair so far. Unfortunately not many for 1192 which only lasted a short time in that form.

 

I bought one because I thought it might be a nice, easy project. The other two were very cheap and looked neglected.....

 

To be honest I wasn't going to leave them seeing as they were only about £15 each. It was only when I examined them later that I realised they were the complete kits with Mainly Trains chassis and full set of wheels, motor, etc.

 

 

 

Research? That's the fun bit. Looking through magazines and books for information. Just try and keep focused. If you are looking for a certain thing, don't start looking at other things or you'll never finish looking, or even worse give up.

 

 

 

Jason

 

.... and you find whole classes of previously unknown types! Why aren’t these rather elegant little locos, better known?