Wright writes.....

[PMP]

6 hours ago, Richard_A said:

That looks good,  so even the large cabs could be different! 

 

Is there any difference in wheel diameters between any of the numbered series?

 

The cabs for the 57xx 'family were one of two types either low cab with port hole style windows, (RH engine in images) or high cab with 'square' widows, (LH engine in images).

 

The cab conversion shown is specifically for the 74xx and late 64xx, and doesn't apply to large panniers above.

 

In terms of wheel diameter for the 57xx family there isn't any difference in wheel diameter, profile or spokes. The 54xx which looked very similar to the 64 and 74 had a slightly larger diameter wheel, but for the type you've bought, no difference.

Edited September 8 by PMP
add pic

[PMP]

6 minutes ago, Captain Kernow said:

Tony, would you mind telling us more about the origins of these two pannier kit photos, that you posted earlier, please?

 

 

Many thanks.

 

They are JLTRT 7mm kits I'd wager!

[Tony Wright]

18 minutes ago, Captain Kernow said:

Tony, would you mind telling us more about the origins of these two pannier kit photos, that you posted earlier, please?

 

 

Many thanks.

 

They're 'Just Like The Real Thing' products in O Gauge.

 

Whether they're still available, I don't know. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[polybear]

2 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

Tony, would you mind telling us more about the origins of these two pannier kit photos, that you posted earlier, please?

 

 

Many thanks.

 

I think the top one is a Brassmasters kit (£242 with Tender & delivery)

 

edit:  or maybe not….🤣

 

Edited September 8 by polybear

[Bulwell Hall]

 

I've not been on here for a while and when I return I find this explosion of Pannier interest!  I'm all in favour of it being a great fan of them and I'm encouraged to show a couple of photos of the latest engine to be completed for my Maiden Newton project. 

 

7780 has been in gestation for longer than I care to admit but recently I decided to get her finished and this is the result. It has a Bachmann body running on a High Level chassis which used Ultrascale EMF wheels and a Mashima motor.  Some while ago in a flash of inspiration - it doesn't happen very often - I realised that I could substitute the left-over closed cab components from a Martin Finney 27xx pannier kit, which had been built as a half cab, for the clunky original Bachmann cab.  I had to make replacement cab roof from scratch as the Finney roof had the ventilator in the wrong place for a 57xx.  Some of the fittings were replaced with Finney castings - tank fillers, safety valve bonnet, injectors, etc - and I replaced the lifting rings with new ones made from wire for a better appearance.  She also has replacement footsteps made from a privately commissioned etch which also included bespoke number plates.

 

At the time I have set Maiden Newton 7780 was a Bristol St Philips Marsh engine so her presence on the Bridport branch would be unlikely but not impossible.  But this engine later transferred to Weymouth and ran the only steam worked passenger train on the Bridport branch that I actually saw .  In 1962, when I was just 10 years old, I photographed her with my juvenile Brownie camera  and also saw her working on the Weymouth Harbour Tramway and a short goods train on the Portland branch - so 7780 it really had to be!

 

I hope that all this is of interest and I am now awaiting the arrival of the forthcoming Accurascale pannier which I look forward to very much!  I'm going for an 8750 and she will be the fourth pannier in my collection.

 

Edited September 9 by Bulwell Hall

[lezz01]

4F heaven thanks Tony.

Regards Lez.

[Tony Teague]

5 minutes ago, lezz01 said:

4F heaven thanks Tony.

Regards Lez.

 

Beats 'pannier hell'..............

(for me anyway - each to his own!).

[gingerangles]

Hello @Tony Wright & morning all (it was morning when I started writing ths)

 

I hope you don't mind me hijacking this thread for the purpose of knowledge acquisition but this thread obviously has a considerable amount of knowledge running through its veins and I'm hoping I can tap into some of it at, what is probably, a fairly superficial level... I know the O4 subject to an earlier post here so hopefully I can justify it on that basis if nothing else 😁

 

My modelling basis is a layout based on the ex-LDECR line in the early 30's which would have been swarming with ex-GCR 8ks / O4's.  To get me going I have 2 of the Bachmann O4s (31-003 #6190).  

I want to renumber them, add any appropriate / missing details / modify as required before then weathering.  Not a fan of shiny locos 😂And I'm looking for guidance.

 

 

6190 was actually allocated to Mexborough during my time period which is only up the road but there are so many more local allocations it would make sense to change both numbers (I think?).  So I am thinking something Annesley, Langwith or Tuxford, or possibly Immingham which I believe was the destination of a lot of the mineral trains (and returning empties I imagine).  

 

Now I have tried to research but feel like I'm going round in circles... From what I understand the Bachmann model is supposed to be an O4/1... and being new to the hobby wouldn't know if this is an accurate representation or not... certainly what I need to start messing with in terms of any modifications, if required but I would like to personalise them. 

 

According to 'Loco's of the LNER Vol 6B':

• O4/1's were ex-GCR 8k's that had a 4000gal tender with scoop, vacuum brake and at some point lowered chimneys and domes and the scoops removed. 
• O4/3's were the same as the O4/1's but without scoops and steam brake only. [forgive me, I'm not sure of the external appearance differences between steam and vacuum brakes - are those vacuum bakes on the model?]
• 6190 was built by Kitson in 1912 and it's '1923 class' was O4/1
• O4/1's were 'introduced' in 1923.  Presumably this means the class designation.
• In the Thompson renumbering all "Kitson built" locos (which are identified in the same sentence as ex-ROD locos) were renumbered 3643-69.
• 6190 wasn't in this range when renumbered.

So - is it an O4/ 1 or 3? and - does it matter?

 

Things I have noticed on the model so that are potential key identifiers and have an affect on variant:

• The vacuum(?) brakes
• The small fitting behind the chimney
• There is no saddle fitting protruding above the boiler between the chimney and done that some seem to have
• The chimney and dome are the taller types?
• The tender is the 4000gal version, scoop removed?
• The twin safety valves.

So I am looking for likely candidates, I can find find a fair few that kind of moved round the likely contenders shed allocation wise but need to answer the O4/1 or 3 question first - are there any significant differences appearance wise?

 

Also are there likely noticeable differences between Kitson O4s and others or were they pretty much built to the same specs across the board?

 

I ask Builder question as I have done a bit of a trawl through the LNER locos book, combined with the BR Database shed allocations (which actually seem relatively complete for O4's?) and there aren't any Kitson built locos ever allocated to Annesley, Langwith, Tuxford, Immingham or Lincoln.  They all seem to be Stephenson or North British built.  All of the Kitson locos seem to have spent their lives allocated to Mexborough, Gorton, Colwick, Doncaster, etc.

 

Many thanks in advance for any help!

[richard i]

3 hours ago, gingerangles said:

Now I have tried to research but feel like I'm going round in circles... From what I understand the Bachmann model is supposed to be an O4/1... and being new to the hobby wouldn't know if this is an accurate representation or not... certainly what I need to start messing with in terms of any modifications, if required but I would like to personalise them. 

O4 rod tenders have a cylindrical water filler, the GCR ones have a box so depends how it was acquired by LNER. Look also for the pipe running down the boiler (or not) I can be behind the hand rail, below, above or not exist externally. 
my suggestion is pick a loco and get a few good pics from near the time you are modeling. Put on it what you see in the photos. 
 

in a similar GCR vein I am about to send this to the paint shops after cleaning

Worsley works etches as a scratch aid starting point and much altered and added to make it accurately/ appropriate for the period modeled. 
richard

Edited September 8 by richard i

[geoff west]

Two of my panniers, expertly weathered by Tom Foster running on my Cwm Prysor layout. 

[gingerangles]

6 minutes ago, richard i said:

O4 rod tenders have a cylindrical water filler, the GCR ones have a box so depends how it was acquired by LNER. Look also for the pipe running down the boiler (or not) I can be behind the hand rail, below, above or not exist externally. 
my suggestion is pick a loco and get a few good pics from near the time you are modeling. Put on it what you see in the photos. 
 

in a similar GCR vein I am about to send this to the paint shops after cleaning

Worsley works etches as a scratch aid starting point and much altered and added to mark it accurately/ appropriate for the period modeled. 
richard

 

Ah - that would also seem to be significant then!  The model base I have has a cylindrical water filler and the pipe runs down the RHS of the boiler above the handrail.  Thanks for the advice!  I was going to try to find pics but I've got to establish what I need pics of 1st 😂

[gingerangles]

In best Harry Hill voice...

 

I like these Panniers

 

And I like these Panniers

 

 

But which ones are better? 😂

 

[PS - Panniers aren't really for me 🤷‍♂️😂]

[lezz01]

My favourite Midland locos are the Johnson slim boilered 4-4-0s closely followed by anything that has double frames. The problem with that is the 4-4-0s were crack express engines and my requirement for those is limited as not many of them appeared at Tewksbury shed. I do intend to build part of the Nailsworth/Stroud branch as a home layout where they did appear on specials very occasionally and so can be justified. Tewkesbury saw many large loco types during the 2nd world war but the 4-4-0s had all been rebuilt by then and the Belpare rebuilds are much less attractive to me. The reason so many larger types of locos were seen at Tewksbury during the war was that the Germans didn't know it was there whilst Gloucester was easy to find and was bombed quite often. There is also a pic of Tewksbury shed packed with 8Fs due to being used on Fisherman's specials which is why I have 3 of them to build. Tewksbury was also the closest shed to Ashchurch where there was a large provender store so it is conceivable that locos from all over the Midland network could have been seen at the shed if they needed coaling or having minor issues sorted out as whilst the shed was tiny it was still a proper engine shed. The main requirement for locos on a pre-grouping or even post-grouping layout is 0-6-0 goods types and you never see them in anything like the proper quantities which is a shame because they all have a certain charm especially the double framers and particularly when they were in "full dress uniform" as opposed to black. 

Regards Lez.    

Edited September 8 by lezz01

[geoff west]

On to 4F’sAirfix on a comet chassisAlan GibsonAirfix comet chassis. 
All from the Peter Lawson collection. 

[PMP]

8 hours ago, Keith Turbutt said:

 

I remember some panniers on Paddington empty stock duties were converted to oil burning and made a right mess of the station roof.

 

There was only one oil burner conversion,  3711 which was converted in Newcastle in 58 or 59. It then went on test at Swindon, following that it was at Old Oak for around half a year before withdrawal in 62 or 63 IIRC.

 

[2750Papyrus]

9 hours ago, Keith Turbutt said:

And that's why the Irwell Press series "The Pannier Papers" ran into 7 volumes!

 

I remember some panniers on Paddington empty stock duties were converted to oil burning and made a right mess of the station roof.

 

Here's a line up of real ones at Old Oak on 24th August 1964 in its final years as a steam shed.

I couldn't say that's the cutest tank engine I've seen...

[NHY 581]

Here's my contribution to PannierFest. 

 

 

 

 

Rob. 

[Tony Wright]

7 hours ago, gingerangles said:

Hello @Tony Wright & morning all (it was morning when I started writing ths)

 

I hope you don't mind me hijacking this thread for the purpose of knowledge acquisition but this thread obviously has a considerable amount of knowledge running through its veins and I'm hoping I can tap into some of it at, what is probably, a fairly superficial level... I know the O4 subject to an earlier post here so hopefully I can justify it on that basis if nothing else 😁

 

My modelling basis is a layout based on the ex-LDECR line in the early 30's which would have been swarming with ex-GCR 8ks / O4's.  To get me going I have 2 of the Bachmann O4s (31-003 #6190).  

I want to renumber them, add any appropriate / missing details / modify as required before then weathering.  Not a fan of shiny locos 😂And I'm looking for guidance.

 

 

6190 was actually allocated to Mexborough during my time period which is only up the road but there are so many more local allocations it would make sense to change both numbers (I think?).  So I am thinking something Annesley, Langwith or Tuxford, or possibly Immingham which I believe was the destination of a lot of the mineral trains (and returning empties I imagine).  

 

Now I have tried to research but feel like I'm going round in circles... From what I understand the Bachmann model is supposed to be an O4/1... and being new to the hobby wouldn't know if this is an accurate representation or not... certainly what I need to start messing with in terms of any modifications, if required but I would like to personalise them. 

 

According to 'Loco's of the LNER Vol 6B':

• O4/1's were ex-GCR 8k's that had a 4000gal tender with scoop, vacuum brake and at some point lowered chimneys and domes and the scoops removed. 
• O4/3's were the same as the O4/1's but without scoops and steam brake only. [forgive me, I'm not sure of the external appearance differences between steam and vacuum brakes - are those vacuum bakes on the model?]
• 6190 was built by Kitson in 1912 and it's '1923 class' was O4/1
• O4/1's were 'introduced' in 1923.  Presumably this means the class designation.
• In the Thompson renumbering all "Kitson built" locos (which are identified in the same sentence as ex-ROD locos) were renumbered 3643-69.
• 6190 wasn't in this range when renumbered.

So - is it an O4/ 1 or 3? and - does it matter?

 

Things I have noticed on the model so that are potential key identifiers and have an affect on variant:

• The vacuum(?) brakes
• The small fitting behind the chimney
• There is no saddle fitting protruding above the boiler between the chimney and done that some seem to have
• The chimney and dome are the taller types?
• The tender is the 4000gal version, scoop removed?
• The twin safety valves.

So I am looking for likely candidates, I can find find a fair few that kind of moved round the likely contenders shed allocation wise but need to answer the O4/1 or 3 question first - are there any significant differences appearance wise?

 

Also are there likely noticeable differences between Kitson O4s and others or were they pretty much built to the same specs across the board?

 

I ask Builder question as I have done a bit of a trawl through the LNER locos book, combined with the BR Database shed allocations (which actually seem relatively complete for O4's?) and there aren't any Kitson built locos ever allocated to Annesley, Langwith, Tuxford, Immingham or Lincoln.  They all seem to be Stephenson or North British built.  All of the Kitson locos seem to have spent their lives allocated to Mexborough, Gorton, Colwick, Doncaster, etc.

 

Many thanks in advance for any help!

Good evening,

 

The Bachmann O4 is an O4/1, with vacuum brakes and water pick-up on the tender. 

 

I don't have prototype shots of pre-War locos, but the following images from BR days should show the difference between an O4/1 (original GC locos) and an O4/3 (ROD-built, without vacuum brakes and no water pick-up apparatus).

 

 

O4/1; note vacuum standpipe on front platform. 

 

This loco has a three-link coupling - most O4/1s had screw shackles.

 

 

O4/1; note vacuum ejector pipe behind handrail and (just visible) screw shackle.

 

 

O4/1.

 

The wiggly oil pipe is worth putting on.

 

 

O4/1; vacuum standpipe, vacuum ejector pipe behind handrail and screw shackle.

 

Note characteristic drooping front end!

 

 

O4/3; no standpipe, no vacuum ejector pipe and three-link coupling.

 

 

O4/3; for BR modellers, note the unusually small cabside numbers. 

 

 

O4/3.

 

 

O4/3; no extra 'box' on right hand rear of tender (no pick-up apparatus). 

 

I hope these help.

 

Please (all) observe copyright restrictions on the above images.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

Readers might recall recently where I showed a South Eastern Finecast K3 (builder unknown) set of frames, driven by a DS10 and Romford gears. Graeme King expressed surprised that such a combination was 'successful'. He was right to be sceptical!

 

I thought I'd got it to go 'reasonably' until some friends visited ten days ago. They tried to run it and it just jammed up. There was far too much side-play between the worm and the gear, and, under load, it just kept jamming up.

 

So...........

 

 

I've replaced the DS10 and its gear mount/gears with a combo which used to be available from SEF - a slim Mashima motor and an etched gear mount, and Romford 40:1 gears. 

 

A sweet and powerful runner, much quieter than the open-framed DS10 and no jamming up. 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

I count myself a most-fortunate man!

 

Why? Well, most of my big green locos have been painted by two masters of the craft - Ian Rathbone and Geoff Haynes.

 

I showed Geoff's work on ABERDONIAN recently, and here's Ian's on (yet) another DJH A1 I've built. 

 

 

This is superlatively-natural painting on SIR VINCENT RAVEN.

 

 

Very much like the real thing. 

 

Listing the A1s complete/painted running on Little Bytham, we find........... 60114/116/117/118/119/120/121/125/126/128/129/130/136/146/147/149/155/156/157/158. A running total of 20, with three more to build (at the moment).

 

In case folk think this is excessive, there are two reasons. 1 - I like making locos, especially A1s, and 2 - I try to recreate in miniature the sort of numbers one might expect to see, say, during a few days' 'spotting at Retford in the late-'50s.

 

I'll take some shots of her in action tomorrow. 

 

 

 

 

[lezz01]

Those long Mashima motors were very good it's a shame that they are no longer available although I've found a couple of sources from China on eBay that have lots of different options for a fraction of the price of the same motors from a British supplier. Most of them are under £5 including coreless ones. These suppliers are Motor House and Bee Studios. They arrive in under 10 days and are very well made.

Regards Lez.     

[ScRSG]

15 minutes ago, lezz01 said:

Those long Mashima motors were very good it's a shame that they are no longer available although I've found a couple of sources from China on eBay that have lots of different options for a fraction of the price of the same motors from a British supplier. Most of them are under £5 including coreless ones. These suppliers are Motor House and Bee Studios. They arrive in under 10 days and are very well made.

Regards Lez.     

Links, please.

[gingerangles]

41 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Good evening,

 

The Bachmann O4 is an O4/1, with vacuum brakes and water pick-up on the tender. 

 

I don't have prototype shots of pre-War locos, but the following images from BR days should show the difference between an O4/1 (original GC locos) and an O4/3 (ROD-built, without vacuum brakes and no water pick-up apparatus).

 

 

O4/1; note vacuum standpipe on front platform. 

 

This loco has a three-link coupling - most O4/1s had screw shackles.

 

 

O4/1; note vacuum ejector pipe behind handrail and (just visible) screw shackle.

 

 

O4/1.

 

The wiggly oil pipe is worth putting on.

 

 

O4/1; vacuum standpipe, vacuum ejector pipe behind handrail and screw shackle.

 

Note characteristic drooping front end!

 

 

O4/3; no standpipe, no vacuum ejector pipe and three-link coupling.

 

 

O4/3; for BR modellers, note the unusually small cabside numbers. 

 

 

O4/3.

 

 

O4/3; no extra 'box' on right hand rear of tender (no pick-up apparatus). 

 

I hope these help.

 

Please (all) observe copyright restrictions on the above images.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

Thanks for the reply @Tony Wright, looks like I definitely have the basis of an O4/1 then. The inclusion of the vacuum ejector pipe excluding the O4/3s. 

 

The tender doesn't seem to have any additional equipment as far as I can tell for a scoop...

[richard i]

23 minutes ago, gingerangles said:

The tender doesn't seem to have any additional equipment as far as I can tell for a scoop...

It is an ex ROD tender. The preserved O4 has one and so Bachman copied it. You will need to make the D shaped water filler.

richard 

[gingerangles]

4 minutes ago, richard i said:

It is an ex ROD tender. The preserved O4 has one and so Bachman copied it. You will need to make the D shaped water filler.

richard 

 

Ah I see, thanks @richard i Will it be the right dimensions in other regards? I understand the '3's had 3500gal tenders originally.