Heljan Gresley O2 2-8-0 'Tango'

[auldreekie]

How many of us can tell the difference between a tangent and a tango, come to it?....


auldreekie

[Atlantic 3279]

Especially when they are so close together in the dictionary, along with Satsuma, or is it Mandarin?

[fazy]

would'nt the tangent be pointing the other way

[auldreekie]

Perhaps you're thinking of a tangerine, or maybe she was from Marrakesh....



auldreekie

[Seagull]

Did they paint any of them green - would they be mangoes...


I'll get me coat

[notascoobie]

Graeme,

I think folks are taking the pith.


Rgds,

Vernon

[Brush53Falcon]

I hope Mr BrushVeteran does not mind me pasting this info which has been posted on RMWeb:-

" Posted Today, 09:56

I would like to point out that the initial releases of the O2 will be #3910-3913,the O2/3 with stepped LNER Group Standard tender and #3920-3923, O2/4 with flush and stepped LNER Group Standard tender. The O2/2 will be a future version for which tooling is already in hand, i.e. low running plate and GN tender.



The O2 Tango is a complex subject, with five distinct variations, and it is the intention to produce all versions, but not all at once. The project is proceding nicely and on target so far. It is at a stage whereby colour layouts are being produced. The tooling for this model is a more lengthy process because there was more of a mix and match of components within all variants meaning that everything has to be tooled initially to ensure good fitment and compatability. At least this way there is every chance of producing the complete class, but as always, each variant will be of limited production runs to ensure that sales warrant the investment.



Once we have received satisfactory EP samples I will post some images to show current progress."

I certainly don't mind the quote from my submission to RMWeb. I was actuall y replying to a query and was trying to put the record straight regarding which order the models will appear. Nothing has changed since the original announcement of the model went out regarding the plan of releases and which I submitted to this forum earlier.

Tooling is now in progress, and as mentioned, this will incorporate all the O2 variants to ensure correctness of fitment of each component. The model will undergo extensive testing before production commences

[Phil]

I have been following the thread with a mixture of admiration and appreciation but also a little frustration.
Admiration for Heljan and those, including contributors to the thread, who have assisted with this complex locomotive class containing 8 main body variances.
Appreciation for the commercial imperatives in selecting the particular sub classes for production to enable Heljan to offer the broadest variety of liveries within the available tooling options
Clearly the O2 prototype would have limited appeal in either of its 2 body variants, with original GN cab or with (from 1940) the side window version since its withdrawal in 1948 prevented it appearing in BR livery
The O2/1 only numbered 10 locomotives and the GN cab also gave way to side window before BR days. The Side window versions therefore only numbered 10 locos.
The 15 O2/2s offer the broadest range of livery and numbering options LNER 3 digit with N prefix, LNER 4 digit numbers derived from pre grouping, LNER post 1947 numbering, Br number with early crest and with late crest. So it is frustrating that this version has been postponed. However, forward orders (including mine) might have been forthcoming if we had been told which LNER numbers would have been carried. 2 LNER versions are still listed but no clue given as which of the 3 possible numbering schemes would have been carried. So no order from me!
The O2/3s offer plenty of options but why have Heljan chosen the post 1947 number (carried for only 3 years) for the LNER version? Postponement of the O2/2 now means that the O2s are now out of bounds to anyone modelling/collecting locos from the pre-war period, surely they ‘heyday’ of the LNER. Is it too late to reconsider this?
Conversely, only 3 of the 18 O2/4s reboilered from O2/3s (high running plate) carried LNER numbers, the remainder converted in BR days. There were also 12 converted from O2/2 (low running plate and R/H drive) only 2 of which appeared before nationalisation and probably not worth the trouble.
So come on Heljan, take another look at the LNER numbering option and my wallet will resist no longer!

[Atlantic 3279]

Whilst I certainly agree with the sentiments in the last post, and some of its logic is beyond dispute, I believe the reasons for Heljan's decisions stem (as stated in other posts) from the need to methodically solve the perceived design and production difficulties for the various modules of the loco. I must therefore, albeit reluctantly, trust their judgement for the time being and accept that I'll have to wait for a "correct" loco with GN cab and tender.

I do however think that we will be entitled to express a fair degree of annoyance with Heljan if they eventually find some reason, such as "disappointing sales" of their selected first versions, to cancel the version(s) that we really want, and which (as pointed out above) are actually the most widely applicable to various modelling eras. I don't think any manufacturer is entitled to expect customers to buy an item they don't want, purely to justify the follow-on manufacture of the item they do want.

[Brush53Falcon]

I have been following the thread with a mixture of admiration and appreciation but also a little frustration.
Admiration for Heljan and those, including contributors to the thread, who have assisted with this complex locomotive class containing 8 main body variances.
Appreciation for the commercial imperatives in selecting the particular sub classes for production to enable Heljan to offer the broadest variety of liveries within the available tooling options
Clearly the O2 prototype would have limited appeal in either of its 2 body variants, with original GN cab or with (from 1940) the side window version since its withdrawal in 1948 prevented it appearing in BR livery
The O2/1 only numbered 10 locomotives and the GN cab also gave way to side window before BR days. The Side window versions therefore only numbered 10 locos.
The 15 O2/2s offer the broadest range of livery and numbering options LNER 3 digit with N prefix, LNER 4 digit numbers derived from pre grouping, LNER post 1947 numbering, Br number with early crest and with late crest. So it is frustrating that this version has been postponed. However, forward orders (including mine) might have been forthcoming if we had been told which LNER numbers would have been carried. 2 LNER versions are still listed but no clue given as which of the 3 possible numbering schemes would have been carried. So no order from me!
The O2/3s offer plenty of options but why have Heljan chosen the post 1947 number (carried for only 3 years) for the LNER version? Postponement of the O2/2 now means that the O2s are now out of bounds to anyone modelling/collecting locos from the pre-war period, surely they ‘heyday’ of the LNER. Is it too late to reconsider this?
Conversely, only 3 of the 18 O2/4s reboilered from O2/3s (high running plate) carried LNER numbers, the remainder converted in BR days. There were also 12 converted from O2/2 (low running plate and R/H drive) only 2 of which appeared before nationalisation and probably not worth the trouble.
So come on Heljan, take another look at the LNER numbering option and my wallet will resist no longer!

To a degree Phil, I share your frustration and that's because I know we will never please everybody initially and it's certainly not the intention to dis-please.

This is a massive project for Heljan to undertake and fortunately they are happy to go along with most of the suggestions put forward as long as they are commercially viable. There is a certain amount of 'toe dipping in the water' with this project and the idea is to eventually release as many of the different variants and liveries as possible. At this stage it is not known what the sales potential of each variant is but the idea will be to keep these variants as 'limited editions' in order that a different version and livery can replace it once sold out. It may be that these 'limited' editions become very small runs in order to satisfy the demand of era's being modelled but we have to start somewhere!

The reason the O2/3 and O2/4 variants are being introduced initially is because these are high running plate locomotives which have never been made in model form before. The previous kits that were available, so I am reliably informed, all represented the O2/1 and O2/2 low running plate versions so it was decided to offer the later version first.

We know that Heljan will sell more BR versions than LNER but that is not to say the LNER versions have been forgotten. To start with there are less detailed photos of LNER versions available and as you quite rightly have stated there are at least three LNER numbering schemes to consider, some with differing versions of the LNER style of typeface. We tried to look at differing styles of numbering with what we had available but I do take your point and will ensure that repeat issues of the variants take the earler LNER number series well into account.

The O2/2 has not been 'postponed' as you put it, just it is the next future variant for which tooling is currently taking place. As you are aware the O2/1 and O2/2 are very similar and share the majority of the same parts. Of course out of this we will also hopefully produce the O2/4 with low running plate (O2/1 and O2/2 rebuilds) as all the parts produced for these will have aleady been tooled. The running number chosen for the LNER liveried O2/2 is 3500, which will be as a 1924 photo I have in my collection.

We would hope that the O2/2 and O2/1 models would follow on pretty swiftly after the first versions are released so I wouldn't cancel my order if I was you...........just try and be less frustrated! Hopefully you will not be disappointed. Thanks for your input, it is most appreciated.

I am trying my best to please everybody here as I think the biggest hurdle was to get Heljan to produce it in the first place and I'm now fully commited into trying to make this a first class model which all modellers, collectors and enthusiasts will purchase.

[Phil]

Thanks for the assurances re pre 1946 number versions of the O2/3. As soon as one is listed by the retailers then I will order one.

Also for the assurance that the O2/2 will soon 'follow on'. I will certainly order one of these as well, but only when we are told which of the 2 LNER number versions will carry the pre 1946 number as there is no indication thus far.

Tooling for new locos is an expensive business and I have no quibbles whatsoever with Brush 53 Falcon's account of the commercial logic being applied here. However, information is cheap and the order book for this worthwhile project will be better off as soon as the customer can order with confidence. Once ordered, I don't mind if it takes ages to arrive (I am sure we are all used to that!) just as long as it happens eventually.

Thanks again in anticipation

[Brush53Falcon]

Whilst I certainly agree with the sentiments in the last post, and some of its logic is beyond dispute, I believe the reasons for Heljan's decisions stem (as stated in other posts) from the need to methodically solve the perceived design and production difficulties for the various modules of the loco. I must therefore, albeit reluctantly, trust their judgement for the time being and accept that I'll have to wait for a "correct" loco with GN cab and tender.

I do however think that we will be entitled to express a fair degree of annoyance with Heljan if they eventually find some reason, such as "disappointing sales" of their selected first versions, to cancel the version(s) that we really want, and which (as pointed out above) are actually the most widely applicable to various modelling eras. I don't think any manufacturer is entitled to expect customers to buy an item they don't want, purely to justify the follow-on manufacture of the item they do want.

I don't think for one miniute that Heljan would cancel the second half of a project that they had already invested a great deal of money in, Atlantic. They may, however, decide to 'hang back' if stocks of the first issue don't sell quick enough, but by fine tuning the initial releases into 'limited editions' should ensure they sell out quickly. As I have pointed out in my last post the GN Cab, low running plate, GN Type B tender are being tooled together with that of the first release to ensure the parts are all compatible.

I for one very much appreciate the LNER era you model and my aim is to ensure you and your fellow supporters get what you want. The problem is everbody wants everything at once and a decision has been made on what order things will be produced. I'm sure if my late Father was still with us I would be getting some stick from him! He would have loved to see the 'old' LNER liveries and of course he is the reason I'm so interested in the Eastern!

We are currently at the stage where the vendor will produce one off 'rough copy's' to be compared with the CAD and where issues of non compliance occur corrected samples will then be produced for scrutiny and further modification if the CAD is incorrect. This is the longest of the processes but is imperative in order to get things as accurate as possible. At present the project seems to be running on schedule but await with interest the testing stage. I will keep this forum informed the best I can and I can't wait to see all those O2's on Grantham!

[Phil]

Mention of No.3500 has sent me to the book shelves to look up RCTS Vol 6B as well as Yeadon Register Volume 9. Your photo of 3500 in 1924 is indeed a rare item as in December that year, when only 7 months old, it was sent to works where it was fitted with a Dabeg feed water heater which it kept until December 1942 (Yeadon page 38). Since demand for a Dabeg fitted version is likely to be low, might I suggest that 3501 (6B fig.28) or 3495 (Yeadon Vol 9 foot of page 28) would be more typical pre war subjects for the O2/2 version? The 'Liverpool based on line retailer' lists 2 LNER versions, items number 39vv and 39ww. Doubtless when your final selection is made, you will let us know which LNER number will be carried by each. I hope you dont think I am being pedantic (amazing how obsessive we get about metal that was scrapped before many of us can remember ) but my intention is to be as helpful as possible.

[Brush53Falcon]

Mention of No.3500 has sent me to the book shelves to look up RCTS Vol 6B as well as Yeadon Register Volume 9. Your photo of 3500 in 1924 is indeed a rare item as in December that year, when only 7 months old, it was sent to works where it was fitted with a Dabeg feed water heater which it kept until December 1942 (Yeadon page 38). Since demand for a Dabeg fitted version is likely to be low, might I suggest that 3501 (6B fig.28) or 3495 (Yeadon Vol 9 foot of page 28) would be more typical pre war subjects for the O2/2 version? The 'Liverpool based on line retailer' lists 2 LNER versions, items number 39vv and 39ww. Doubtless when your final selection is made, you will let us know which LNER number will be carried by each. I hope you dont think I am being pedantic (amazing how obsessive we get about metal that was scrapped before many of us can remember ) but my intention is to be as helpful as possible.

Will bear this in mind Phil. it's all very complicated isn't it!

[Atlantic 3279]

Fingers still crossed for the versions with GN cabs and tenders then. No desperate hurry, so long as they actually materialise.

Being humorous, or at least tongue-in-cheek for a moment, this leaves me wondering whether there is some unique difficulty in translating Danish into Scouse, as there seems to be a peculiar tendency for Hattons to misunderstand or misrepresent the Heljan "position" as described here by Brush53Falcon.