Heljan Gresley O2 2-8-0 'Tango'

[Phil Brighton]

I must admit as a relative newcomer to model railways proper I am surprised by just how healthly the RTR situation seems to be. I can imagine (though I really don't know) that model such as an O2 will sell as many the smaller selection of RTR models did a few decades ago. I casually thought that we must be paying considerable more but using http://www.measuringworth.com/ppoweruk/ I put in the 1988 price of a Hornby A4 £50 taking into account inflation the prices are pretty similar to today.

Is this ability to produce more variety and more quality down to new techniques and moving production to china?

Also while I am hungover and rambling on I was also musing on why no rtr manufacturer has ever made an Atlantic of any strip or attempted a y6/j70 as I would have thought that would be an easy tooling - no need to be concerned about chassis! and very good for people building small layouts....

[S.A.C. Martin]

Together with an unnecessary (IMHO) snipe at the manufacturer

Several going around today Ian. Some totally unnecessary criticism of Hornbys O1 as a choice of modelling subject popped up on my twitter feed too.

Cannot understand the preference for Hornby making an O2. Anyone making an O2 is a positive in my view. Whoever it is, is largely irrelevant as long as the quality is high. Heljans reputation for smooth and heavy haulage models (bar the claytons) speaks for itself in any event.

Not to mention that they have managed to deliver their models in given timescales. Heljans reliability as a OO manufacturer appears to be being severely undermined.

Populist opinion against objective assessment?

Graeme, thank you for the explanation RE running plates, much appreciated and I see the difference now. I'll throw the prototype O2 into my list of kit bashes instead then. At least I'll have a base model to work from now!

[strang steel]

Well as promised I am able to add that Heljan have in development a Gresley O2 2-8-0 'Tango' with the aim of eventually producing all versions to include both boilers, both cabs, both bufferbeams, high and low running plate and four tender styles. The model is expected to be released in 2014 and further material is being sought to enable a very accurate model. There are also some experts in this field who have been approached and have confirmed their valued support which should also help to with the authenticity. It will also have the option of authentic O2 3cyl sound which will be produced from original sound recordings.
I hope to be able to keep this forum updated with the development stages at regular intervals and look forward to receiving any valid comments during the course of the project.

Wow. I can't quite believe that I have just read this.

All versions of an O2? I never thought that I would live to see this day.

That news has made my year, and even though it will not be here until 2014 I can still keep my inner celebrations ticking over until then.

And I certainly will be buying Hornby's O1s because Lincolnshire was one place that both could be seen, and that is my area.

I think that I might have to go for a lie down before I get over excited.

[ROY@34F]

High and low running plates:

The GN locos and early LNER ones had the then standard short-travel valve gear. The running plate just cleared the top of the expansion link and its top face was about 3 inches below the lowest point of the boiler cladding. Later LNER-built locos had the improved efficiency long-travel valve gear, necessitating a longer expansion link, and in turn a higher pitched running plate approximately level with the bottom of the boiler cladding.

You've hit the nail on the head there "Atlantic" , regarding the running plate height / long travel valves . I fired on O2s ,while at Grantham,probably more than any other engine,and the running plate height was very noticeable,although only about 3" at the most I guess.It's certainly noticeable on the Isinglass drawing.
I think I'm right in saying all the O2/3s were so fitted (IE.improved valves/higher footplate)....and all O2/4s were those engines fitted with a B1 (diag.100A)boiler ,which were originally built as O2/1/2 or /3...Just to add a little more info for those who may not know.
Great to see the announcement "Brush"...an O2,especially an O2/3 would be a dearly loved addition (or two etc...)
Regards,Roy.

[D2100]

Together with an unnecessary (IMHO) snipe at the manufacturer

Several going around today Ian.

...

I imagine there are Simon, but you may have misunderstood me. Individual modellers/enthusiasts are quite entitled to their views, whether positive or negative, on this development, but the particular snipe I had in mind was by someone you'd hope was above such things. Someone who in his position - and all the more so these days - should (again IMHO) be steering away from anything that could be construed as partisan treatment of particular manufacturers.

[manna]

G'Day Gents

I don't have a beef with any manufacturer of any model loco's, but I am a bit picky when it comes down to parting hard earned cash for a model loco, Bachmann are producing a couple of nice GC loco's but I won't be buying any, same with Hornby's 01, nothing against them, but, just the wrong area, but an 02, yes I'll take one of those, I can just remember them passing through Wood Green.

If any manufacturer, wants to make a J6 or a GN Atlantic, I'll put up my hand and say YES please, 'bout time, someone remembered there was 'other' engines at the bottom end of the ECML, other than 'Pacific's'

manna

[auldreekie]

"Bottom end" you said it; I wouldn't have dared. Time someone put some concerted effort into the top end an'all (say, between Portobello and Tay Bridge). The D11/2 is a very welcome start, but about 10% of the market could use 100% of the investment in further new models!!

auldreekie

[Coboman]

Ahhh the very loco Hornby should have made. Fair looking forwards to this beaut!

[S.A.C. Martin]

It's interesting to see what people can get away with saying on different forums at the minute. Somewhat ridiculous perhaps in the case of the poor maligned Hornby O1.

Ian I take your point and happily concur.

It is a shame the O2 announcement is fast turning into a "Hornby should have done it" debate instead of "well done Heljan and thanks to the experts" discussion it should be.

Truly, railway modelling can be cut throat and petty at times.

[Royal Lancer]

I'd say just be happy with the fact that we're getting both an O1 and O2 in RTR. I've wanted an O2 for the longest time, and its good to see that Heljan will be covering the different variations of the class. Can't wait to see which variations they will be doing first.

[Coronach]

Well that's the southern end covered for heavy freight haulers, surely eyes will turn further north now!

Dave.

[Steve05]

I agree with S.A.C Martin.

We LNER collectors/modellers have never had it so good. A Hornby 01 and now Heljan 02 (Heljan now seemingly firmly committing to steam) so I’m for one certainly happy. While it’s getting a bit hard on the pocket for some I cannot imagine things being better for us. And now competition between three manufacturers for our business!

You beauty I say.

Regards
Stephen

[Horsetan]

......While it’s getting a bit hard on the pocket for some.....

[strang steel]

It's interesting to see what people can get away with saying on different forums at the minute. Somewhat ridiculous perhaps in the case of the poor maligned Hornby O1.

As a person who does not frequent other forums much, I am intrigued as to what people have been getting away with.

And why is the O1 maligned?

I will be getting my first one in a few days and hopefully, if my funds permit it, I will get a couple more in the future. To me, the more varieties of heavy freight locos we have, the better.

And not just for ECML layouts either, as people seem to suggest. There was a short period (around 1959/60) when March had an allocation of both O1 and O2 locomotives, and there must be folk who model the more northern GC areas.

[D2100]

Apologies for venturing into an area where my knowledge is sketchy at best, but I'm happy to be educated - I understood that the thinking behind Hornby's O1 was perceived as part of a three-pronged strategy (O1, B1, B17) based around the 100A boiler and other common parts. That being so, it strikes me as an all too rare example of the sort of joined-up thinking that is desperately needed at Margate. There may be valid reasons why individuals wanted one or other manufacturer to do one or other loco, but we are where we are, and we still have the option of both... doesnt seem too bad a situation to me.