Atlantic 3279 wrote:Whilst Bill is of course correct about 3 Gorton-built ROD specification locos going straight into GC stock, their GC numbers were 1, 5 & 8, not 1185 as per the Bachmann sample. I have no idea if they were ever fitted in GC days with vacuum brake (and therefore ejector pipe) as per the Bachmann model either. They may have had only steam brake as built, or possibly even Westinghouse. So one way or another, the model is still either wrong or at least highly unrepresentative of the 120-odd 8K class locos to true GC specification.
There's pre-1923 photos of numbers 8 and 5 in Johnson's 'locomotives of the Great Central Railway' vol. I and II respectively. Both have had their westinghouse pumps removed, but retained the pump's twin vertical brackets on the smokebox, as well as the attendant gap in the handrails. Both these locos had a selection of GCR and ROD features: e.g. Ross 'pop' valves, boiler topfeeds, loco re-railing jacks, but GCR 8K buffers, standard draw gear instead of WD side-chains, etc etc. Hope that helps a wee bit.
a lot of bashing on a very expensive 'collectors' model!
Maybe the number allocation makes some sense as the GCR was a big freight mover, but I did think it slightly ironic that a loco to not even to quite the proper GCR 8K design, added perhaps opportunistically to stock, received the number 1. On the GNR for instance at one time that number might have been expected to be reserved for a highly prestigious loco.
Most subjects, models and techniques covered in this thread are now listed in various categories on page1
Dec. 2018: Almost all images that disappeared from my own thread following loss of free remote hosting are now restored.
If there's logic to it, I've never worked it out! I wondered whether it was just using the next available number from a scrapped loco. This works in the beginning (back in the 1850s-1870s the system worked in logical numerical sequence with numbers re-used in numerical order as soon as older locos were withdrawn) What knocks it out of 'sync' is the GCR's extensive use of the duplicate list, whereby superannuated locos hung around with a B-suffix to their number, often for decades.
So... working backwards, the 'life' of 'number one' in MSLR/GCR ownership appears to be thus;
#1, class 8K, (ROD type) built 25/1/19
#1, class 18, built 11/1870, converted to tank engine 25/2/05. On duplicate list (i.e #1B) sometime after conversion + before grouping.
# 1, class 4, built 11/1859, scrapped early 1880s (presumably on duplicate list after 1870.)
# 1, class 'Python', built 10/41, and sold 1859.
So why they decided to take #1 for the 8K built in 1919 seems quite random. In late 1918- early 1919 the GCR wasn't building much except 8Ms and the ROD type 8Ks, and 'Butler Henderson', the first post-war 11F was not built until, 12/1919. I suppose in a characteristically unsentimental railway company like the GCR someone must have thought 'well, we might as well use up #1 now...'
Even though I say so myself, I think that’s first class pedantry!
Atlantic, I look forward to seeing what you do with the Bachmann LNER 04. I'd never have guts to bash such an expensive model!
Hi Will - I'm not sure whether you have seen the butchery that has already taken place, here: bachmann-announce-o4-t2141s75.html
and on adjoining pages of that original Bachmann O4 topic:
Most subjects, models and techniques covered in this thread are now listed in various categories on page1
Dec. 2018: Almost all images that disappeared from my own thread following loss of free remote hosting are now restored.
The O4 conversions look smashing. The conversions inspired me to purchase an Isinglass drawing for the 04/7, which is the variant I really want. But the project has been back-shelved in the hope that if I wait long enough, that kind chap at Bachmann will pop on a new boiler while I concentrate on building coaches!
Simon (CVR1865), I've only just caught up with your post. Thank you for your kind words.
We haven't yet been favoured with an invitation to Ally Pally, but you can see us at Glasgow, Spalding and Manchester next year. There may be another one which slips my mind... our webmaster hasn't posted the list for 2011 yet.
While it occurs to me can I mention that Geoff Kent is bringing Blakeney to the Ely show on May 7th next year? My favourite layout and worth the entrance fee on its own. I will post another reminder nearer the time.
Getting back to the topic in hand, there are quite a few of the flaws which Graeme has already spelled out apparent in the NRM model. I'm inclined to wait for a Hattons clearance as I'd want to take the knife to mine, nice as they are. Let's keep it in perspective, though: if you'd said 10 years ago that there'd be an off-the-shelf GC liveried locomotive to this standard, you'd have been laughed at. We are very much spoilt at the moment.
