Hattons have announced this model today:
http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/139562-lms-beyer-garratt-2-6-0-0-6-2-in-n-gauge-from-hattons-originals/ (http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/139562-lms-beyer-garratt-2-6-0-0-6-2-in-n-gauge-from-hattons-originals/)
Interesting announcement.
Reading the blurb it'll be interesting to see how the mechanism turns out - looks like only one chassis unit will be powered.
They are certainly not starting with the easiest of prototypes!
Cheers,
Alan
:jawdropping:
Oh my life!
Anyone want a kidney?
Now that Hattons are scaling down the Bayer Garret (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=43555)to N I wonder if they could be persuaded to shrink the ICI hoppers (http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/97603-ici-hoppers-from-hattons-in-partnership-with-oxford-rail/) and the newly anounced YOB General Purpous Crane (http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/139563-yob-plasser-12t-gpc-in-oo-gauge-from-hattons-originals/) too?
@Ben A (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=94) @red_death (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=246) how about twisting their arm?
It does look interesting, though I'm slightly concerned where it says in the specification "5 pole motor with wheels at the bunker end driven" - makes it sound as though the front end would be free-rolling (not driven)? That would be disappointing if so.
That came out of the blue! Great to see Hattons take the plunge and I know many of us will be excited to see this weird beast in N. Not suited to my layout at all, but that didn't stop me with the Blue Pullman!
Quote from: Dr Al on November 19, 2018, 12:17:22 PM
Reading the blurb it'll be interesting to see how the mechanism turns out - looks like only one chassis unit will be powered.
Yes that's how I read it too. Disappointing if so.
Quote from: ntpntpntp on November 19, 2018, 12:57:44 PM
Quote from: Dr Al on November 19, 2018, 12:17:22 PM
Reading the blurb it'll be interesting to see how the mechanism turns out - looks like only one chassis unit will be powered.
Yes that's how I read it too. Disappointing if so.
Yes, but now you understand why it's £199 and not £250!
Quote from: emjaybee on November 19, 2018, 01:05:30 PM
Quote from: ntpntpntp on November 19, 2018, 12:57:44 PM
Quote from: Dr Al on November 19, 2018, 12:17:22 PM
Reading the blurb it'll be interesting to see how the mechanism turns out - looks like only one chassis unit will be powered.
Yes that's how I read it too. Disappointing if so.
Yes, but now you understand why it's £199 and not £250!
Maybe, but that will all depend on the performance - if it's haulage is low as a result then it being cheaper won't necessarily compensate. But alas this is speculation - all will be revealed in time for sure.
Cheers,
Alan
i received an email from hattons. yes its only powered from the rear driving wheels. they never said why though. that said im getting one
Quote from: 1936ace on November 19, 2018, 01:10:05 PM
they never said why though. that said im getting one
Fairly simple to surmise why - motorising with a single central boiler mounted motor is only possible at one end as it'd be hard to mask or hide a driveshaft at the smokebox end. Presumably, double motoring each end would be a lot more expensive.
Cheers,
Alan
All
Great Hattons is doing N Gauge this one is not for me but hopefully it will do well and more N locos and wagons will be released
If this goes well maybe they could do some locos that were promised by others and never delivered
(http://images.modelrailgroup.com/images/2018/11/19/hbg.jpg) (http://images.modelrailgroup.com/image/EMve)
Just read the Hatton's notification. Looks good. January 2020 availability seems a bit optimistic if they've just started the project.
:) :beers:
I've read it on facebook....
but starting with another most simple model...wasn't a good idea?(IMHO)
Marco
Never likely to make it onto my wishlist, but I applaud Hattons for this announcement. :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Quote from: marco neri on November 19, 2018, 01:51:50 PM
I've read it on facebook....
but starting with another most simple model...wasn't a good idea?(IMHO)
Marco
Having built several garrets the last two being accurate rebuilds Of The Skytrex kit using pairs of Dapol Fairburn chassis I have my doubts on performance. My garrets pull +50 wagons as they should but I doubt a single motor version will pull many more than 20 and the result will just look silly. We shall see.
They've done quite a few models, so I presume they've got their timelines comparatively well sorted, but yes, these things tend to be optimistic as we're all too aware!
I think it's great news, not something I'm remotely interested in, but I hope it's successful so it leads to other projects. More manufacturers can only be good!
Nice, I could use one of them but £199 in full up front......I realise they need a positive commitment but at this stage I would have thought a non returnable deposit would have been offered?? Better start saving up!!
You also have the option for an email notification when the locos are available. Of course you then take the risk you might not order in time.
:beers:
Oh the temptation ! but I have not got 50+ wagons :(
I suppose they must have run light back to the shed from time-to-time :)
(while I acquire more wagons ;D )
Quote from: MalcolmInN on November 19, 2018, 03:56:00 PM
Oh the temptation ! but I have not got 50+ wagons :(
I suppose they must have run light back to the shed from time-to-time :)
(while I acquire more wagons ;D )
I got a very very good deal on PECO kit wagons (about £3 a wagon) and a month later I had a very nice coal train. :thumbsup:
They were magnificent beasts and I wish I could justify ordering one, but it would just look silly trundling along my rural single-track line with 10 wagons... However, fair play to Hatton's and I hope it proves a resounding success.
Cheers,
Chris
Hope the specification of NEM tension couplers is a copy and paste error from the OO gauge model, otherwise hooking up a load might be a challenge.
Not my thing, but an RTR Garret is a nice addition to the canon.
Cheers
Dave
The crane would be fantastic in N gauge.
Paddy
...But the ICI wagons would be fantastickerer! ;)
And the RHTT, and a new 66 with sound socket and what not...
Aren't most N Gauge motors (modern ones at least) pretty overpowered. The main issue for traction simply being weight. If the model is mostly solid metal, they should be able to get fairly serious traction even with just one driven end.
Bachmann have proved many times that the shrink ray can used from OO gauge to N, so why not Hattons!?
Personally I'd love to see their awesome OO gauge Warwell wagons shrunk to 1:148. They really are some of the best rolling stock on the market (I own X6 in OO :-X)
Quote from: Snowwolflair on November 19, 2018, 02:03:32 PM
Quote from: marco neri on November 19, 2018, 01:51:50 PM
I’ve read it on facebook....
but starting with another most simple model...wasn’t a good idea?(IMHO)
Marco
Having built several garrets the last two being accurate rebuilds Of The Skytrex kit using pairs of Dapol Fairburn chassis I have my doubts on performance. My garrets pull +50 wagons as they should but I doubt a single motor version will pull many more than 20 and the result will just look silly. We shall see.
I disagree. With traction tyres on some of the driven wheels and adequate traction weight over them it should do fine as long as it picks up off the other six drivers too. It isn't really any different to (say) a tender driven Farish B1 which is powered in effect off the six rearmost wheels and will comfortably pull 40 plus wagons.
Regards
Roy
Quote from: Roy L S on November 19, 2018, 08:26:33 PM
Quote from: Snowwolflair on November 19, 2018, 02:03:32 PM
Quote from: marco neri on November 19, 2018, 01:51:50 PM
I've read it on facebook....
but starting with another most simple model...wasn't a good idea?(IMHO)
Marco
Having built several garrets the last two being accurate rebuilds Of The Skytrex kit using pairs of Dapol Fairburn chassis I have my doubts on performance. My garrets pull +50 wagons as they should but I doubt a single motor version will pull many more than 20 and the result will just look silly. We shall see.
I disagree. With traction tyres on some of the driven wheels and adequate traction weight over them it should do fine as long as it picks up off the other six drivers too. It isn't really any different to (say) a tender driven Farish B1 which is powered in effect off the six rearmost wheels and will comfortably pull 40 plus wagons.
Regards
Roy
I can see why you say that but the problem with that concept is in your view.
There is not enough space in the bunker end to put sufficient weight, traction tyres or not.
The weight in the boiler is split between the front and rear units equally and every bit of weight added there adds drag the the front. The reason tender drives work is that the loco in such an arrangement is very lite and adds little resistance something that is impossible in a Garrett configuration.
If you have not played around with Garrets or Fairlie locos I can understand why you don't see the problem. Think back to the early Farish class 101 DMU and HST models with a single powered bogie and how hopeless they were. This is a similar weight distribution problem.
I don't Model LMS or ex-LMS. I have question marks over the haulage capability. Will it stop me ordering one? Probably not!
Seems a very ambitious loco to model for their first foray into the N gauge market.
Quote from: JonHarbour on November 19, 2018, 08:46:05 PM
I don't Model LMS or ex-LMS. I have question marks over the haulage capability. Will it stop me ordering one? Probably not!
That's the view i'm taking and I will probably order two, knowing I have two others to pull the long trains.
Quote from: Snowwolflair on November 19, 2018, 08:40:58 PM
Quote from: Roy L S on November 19, 2018, 08:26:33 PM
Quote from: Snowwolflair on November 19, 2018, 02:03:32 PM
Quote from: marco neri on November 19, 2018, 01:51:50 PM
I've read it on facebook....
but starting with another most simple model...wasn't a good idea?(IMHO)
Marco
Having built several garrets the last two being accurate rebuilds Of The Skytrex kit using pairs of Dapol Fairburn chassis I have my doubts on performance. My garrets pull +50 wagons as they should but I doubt a single motor version will pull many more than 20 and the result will just look silly. We shall see.
I disagree. With traction tyres on some of the driven wheels and adequate traction weight over them it should do fine as long as it picks up off the other six drivers too. It isn't really any different to (say) a tender driven Farish B1 which is powered in effect off the six rearmost wheels and will comfortably pull 40 plus wagons.
Regards
Roy
I can see why you say that but the problem with that concept is in your view.
There is not enough space in the bunker end to put sufficient weight, traction tyres or not.
The weight in the boiler is split between the front and rear units equally and every bit of weight added there adds drag the the front. The reason tender drives work is that the loco in such an arrangement is very lite and adds little resistance something that is impossible in a Garrett configuration.
If you have not played around with Garrets or Fairlie locos I can understand why you don't see the problem. Think back to the early Farish class 101 DMU and HST models with a single powered bogie and how hopeless they were. This is a similar weight distribution problem.
I see your point as well, and acknowledge that you have also built some very nice examples so speak with some experience! I guess what we don't know at this point is whether there will be a weight in the boiler or just the front "truck" and then how much (it need only be enough to ensure stability and good pickup). I would hope that Hattons will have done at least some evaluation before arriving at that configuration knowing what the prototype would be expected to pull. Mine (yes already ordered!) will not be regularly called on to pull more than 30 max in any case so should hopefully be OK.
Regards
Roy
Quote from: Roy L S on November 19, 2018, 08:51:21 PM
Quote from: Snowwolflair on November 19, 2018, 08:40:58 PM
Quote from: Roy L S on November 19, 2018, 08:26:33 PM
Quote from: Snowwolflair on November 19, 2018, 02:03:32 PM
Quote from: marco neri on November 19, 2018, 01:51:50 PM
I've read it on facebook....
but starting with another most simple model...wasn't a good idea?(IMHO)
Marco
Having built several garrets the last two being accurate rebuilds Of The Skytrex kit using pairs of Dapol Fairburn chassis I have my doubts on performance. My garrets pull +50 wagons as they should but I doubt a single motor version will pull many more than 20 and the result will just look silly. We shall see.
I disagree. With traction tyres on some of the driven wheels and adequate traction weight over them it should do fine as long as it picks up off the other six drivers too. It isn't really any different to (say) a tender driven Farish B1 which is powered in effect off the six rearmost wheels and will comfortably pull 40 plus wagons.
Regards
Roy
I can see why you say that but the problem with that concept is in your view.
There is not enough space in the bunker end to put sufficient weight, traction tyres or not.
The weight in the boiler is split between the front and rear units equally and every bit of weight added there adds drag the the front. The reason tender drives work is that the loco in such an arrangement is very lite and adds little resistance something that is impossible in a Garrett configuration.
If you have not played around with Garrets or Fairlie locos I can understand why you don't see the problem. Think back to the early Farish class 101 DMU and HST models with a single powered bogie and how hopeless they were. This is a similar weight distribution problem.
I see your point as well, and acknowledge that you have also built some very nice examples so speak with some experience! I guess what we don't know at this point is whether there will be a weight in the boiler or just the front "truck" and then how much (it need only be enough to ensure stability and good pickup). I would hope that Hattons will have done at least some evaluation before arriving at that configuration knowing what the prototype would be expected to pull. Mine (yes already ordered!) will not be regularly called on to pull more than 30 max in any case so should hopefully be OK.
Regards
Roy
Yes and that is my "we shall see" reservation. They might get a good balance and matching mechanism but as a design task it's an order of magnitude greater than a conventional loco. We can only hope their experience with their 4mm model will contribute to this design, although by all accounts its a poor puller :doh:
Hello all,
I think it is fantastic news that a large retailer has taken the decision to launch a model in N.
It suggests that they have the confidence and ambition to develop the market, which has to be a good thing for all of us.
Personally, I'd be very happy if their next move was any of the Plasser crane, FEA-S flat or Beilhack snowplough.
cheers
Ben A.
Hi all
I assume you all got the email from Hattons about their new LMS Beyer Garratt
2-6-0 0-6-2 in N Gauge, expected price of £200 and delivery ecxpected in 2020. Anyone know who they got yo build it for them.
http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=0013vBBXcH6YdV0Kstbrcda5w1oslozVapf0situamPvgYs3p7H_qJDdsuM-dBCvPUisUtJQ2ghjOSDoDnSxLn-4wV1c_glfIcLQgsu0NJokMfpNKWIYONqgexij11kqoehmMmrTghfX_LUZAnNmjfdzlP3mD1zeoBOS4qzEv6_u-NSIS6vUJXKbJkQPYl57c_MdX-55f0SUusRQagNoXSWzZR6Ep1UEf6TaKtwzbHITv2X-YX2Nfe4ULFz4wiHalbmoq7oehpTHduIezLGPnMIKLGCc3kBUVhARVa-lzO7JJLG2E0sVaBxsEjb9uBUQoJo&c=Ja02Jx-UbYmqLEVaFfXoTqMaVhjpV6Q18cjVxn-fBJCFSPBxLePkVw==&ch=ft9GjeSgBVIobAW657isMWn_o7JRr5EVsHGVFYQqRIH4dPBk3COuLA== (http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=0013vBBXcH6YdV0Kstbrcda5w1oslozVapf0situamPvgYs3p7H_qJDdsuM-dBCvPUisUtJQ2ghjOSDoDnSxLn-4wV1c_glfIcLQgsu0NJokMfpNKWIYONqgexij11kqoehmMmrTghfX_LUZAnNmjfdzlP3mD1zeoBOS4qzEv6_u-NSIS6vUJXKbJkQPYl57c_MdX-55f0SUusRQagNoXSWzZR6Ep1UEf6TaKtwzbHITv2X-YX2Nfe4ULFz4wiHalbmoq7oehpTHduIezLGPnMIKLGCc3kBUVhARVa-lzO7JJLG2E0sVaBxsEjb9uBUQoJo&c=Ja02Jx-UbYmqLEVaFfXoTqMaVhjpV6Q18cjVxn-fBJCFSPBxLePkVw==&ch=ft9GjeSgBVIobAW657isMWn_o7JRr5EVsHGVFYQqRIH4dPBk3COuLA==)
Paul
Hate to burst your bubble, but there's already five threads on this!
This makes me happy, till I remember I've got no money and can't get one. Overall though, it makes me happy.
That's odd, none of them showed when I searched, I was a bit surprised thinking almost 12 hours after getting the email from Hattons that no one had posted about it.
I wonder why I am not seeing the other threads.
Here's one...
http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=43555.msg539693#msg539693 (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=43555.msg539693#msg539693)
:thumbsup:
Checking back at the 2016 poll, the Garratt came 35th on the steam locomotive list. I assume that Hattons have passed over the other 34 because they have already paid for the research on the Garrett. A couple of the top ten are already "promised" by DJ and Dapol, but any SR 4-6-0, or a Standard 4 4-6-0 should outsell the Garrett 2 to 1! Having said that, I'm up for it. If I "stretch" the dates and my imagination, maybe I can use it to haul a failed Blue Pullman!!!
:hmmm:
Quote from: Roy L S on November 19, 2018, 08:26:33 PM
I disagree. With traction tyres on some of the driven wheels and adequate traction weight over them it should do fine as long as it picks up off the other six drivers too.
No! Not traction tyres! I hate traction tyres! :veryangry:
Glad to see this come out in N Scale, definitely putting my name down for one. I hope they get enough interest to warrant the project.
I am going to show my ignorance, again ! (quiet in the back row !!)
"to stop the use of double-heading and save on fuel, crews and maintenance." to haul massively heavy/long trains
but 2 Black5s (for example) not only had two sets of big wheels for traction but also 2x fireboxes and 2x boilers, so how does, did, this work ? Was the boiler larger ? Was the firebox larger, than that of a single Black5 - but that would imply more work for the lonesome fireman to feed.
yours truly,
puzzled of Tonbridge
:)
EDIT later:
so maybe single Black5s were limited in haulage capability by the traction of the 6 driving wheels, not by boiler or firebox capacity ?
ie.it is the x-12-x configuration that is the main deal ?
Quote from: Snowwolflair on November 19, 2018, 04:00:26 PM
Quote from: MalcolmInN on November 19, 2018, 03:56:00 PM
Oh the temptation ! but I have not got 50+ wagons :(
I suppose they must have run light back to the shed from time-to-time :)
(while I acquire more wagons ;D )
I got a very very good deal on PECO kit wagons (about £3 a wagon) and a month later I had a very nice coal train. :thumbsup:
I think my few Peco kits were £3+bit but I didnt have the foresight to buy yards of them, , , a few years on they (various wagon kits) are just a bit over £4, sooo, £200 for a loco and £200 for loadsa kits,
all I need then is to clear out my 30ft long attic :)
How does this £199 upfront order system work, is that a fixed price for delivery in 2020 or thereabouts (by which time it will prob. be pocket money :( ) or is that a down payment and lap-of-the-gods for more ?
I've never paid any up front deposit with my pre orders at Hatton's. I assume this is the same unless I've misread something
Quote from: 1936ace on November 20, 2018, 02:22:17 AM
I've never paid any up front deposit with my pre orders at Hatton's. I assume this is the same unless I've misread something
Ah oh ok I see, we order now at £199 and they bill us at delivery ?
Having just pre-ordered one, I can confirm no money has changed hands at this stage... :claphappy:
Also, got the 20% VAT off because I live outside the EU! :beers: :claphappy: :laugh3:
I assume this will be like any other Hattons pre-order - ie payment details taken but not charged until delivery, and the option to cancel at any time before that.
However as the sale is not invoiced until delivery, those of us in Oz may end up paying 10% GST in the not unlikely event that Hattons start charging it before 2020.
Quote from: JonHarbour on November 20, 2018, 02:33:52 AM
Also, got the 20% VAT off because I live outside the EU! :beers: :claphappy: :laugh3:
With a bit of luck and a following wind so will we ! It did occur to me that in these uncertain times they were in hock to circumstance, hence my pocket money bit, but we best not go further down that debate !?
So, I am not sure I will be here in 2020 let alone have the same bank account, perhaps I best write something in my will ? :)
Quote from: longbow on November 20, 2018, 02:34:12 AM
I assume this will be like any other Hattons pre-order - ie payment details taken but not charged until delivery, and the option to cancel at any time before that.
Thanks. That is why I asked, I have only bought big items up-front from my local ye oldie model shoppes so am unfamiliar. They are taking on quite a risk then !
Quote from: JonHarbour on November 20, 2018, 02:33:52 AM
Having just pre-ordered one, I can confirm no money has changed hands at this stage... :claphappy:
Also, got the 20% VAT off because I live outside the EU! :beers: :claphappy: :laugh3:
Nice one and it easily slides under the GST threshold.
Lucky
bug chap! :)
Dave G
We do live upside down, though ;)
Quote from: NinOz on November 19, 2018, 11:00:10 PM
Quote from: Roy L S on November 19, 2018, 08:26:33 PM
I disagree. With traction tyres on some of the driven wheels and adequate traction weight over them it should do fine as long as it picks up off the other six drivers too.
No! Not traction tyres! I hate traction tyres! :veryangry:
I can't see any problem with traction tyres except sometimes they need replacing if they are mistreated. They are essential to enable plastic bodied steam locos haul a reasonable length train. My least used steam locos are Dapol 9F and Farish Castle because they can't haul anywhere near proper loads over reasonable gradients. My most used steamies are my Dapol Grange and Dapol 28xx because they can.
MalcolmInN;
Yes, it was he number of driving wheels on one loco that made the difference; only one loco crew, but twice the power available. I'm not sure how the thermodynamics work out, but the boiler and firebox was bigger than a Black 5, or more realistically, 8Fs. ( I think-I haven't checked)-but not twice as big. Hence some economies of scale. Don't forget that when these were designed, the Midland Railway, and that part of the LMS, relied manly on 0-6-0s; think 3F and 4F. So the Garrets were a major upgrade in power available. The 8Fs and Black 5s did not come out until much later than the Garrets.
You need to check the history of the class, but off the top of my head, I think they had problems, at least at the beginning, with overheating bearings-could be wrong on that.
The LNER answer was the P1 2-8-2s which could haul 100 wagon trains-but this in itself caused operating problems on the ECML, and the locos (P1s) were later used well below their optimal loads. The LNER Garret was used on banking duties over Woodhead only-one loco and crew replaced at least two 2-8-0s on that duty.
Google the class and read more...
HTH
martyn
Quote from: martyn on November 20, 2018, 09:53:09 AM
Yes, it was he number of driving wheels on one loco that made the difference;
with overheating bearings-could be wrong on that.
Thanks Martyn,
Yes, will do some more googling, I did a bit but it was late last night (well early morning!) when I was pondering :)
I did read a bit about the bearings and you are right, they did, the company that ordered them from Bayer specified a change from those normally supplied/fitted to something that they already used on their existing fleet (or something that they were familiar with ? ) I didnt register the details cos it wasnt the info I was after at that time !
EDIT later :
" However the LMS Derby design office insisted on the fitting of their standard axleboxes to the design. These axleboxes were barely adequate for the LMS Class 4F 0-6-0 locomotives, on which they frequently overheated, and were a major weakness on the LMS Garratts. They were also always heavy on coal and maintenance. "
from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LMS_Garratt
OFF TOPIC
Hi Malcolm;
I'm not deeply into the LMS loco history, but as you have implied, I think that they used Midland Railway bearings, which just weren't up to the job. There was apparently some surprise after Grouping that Midland loco designs were adapted against LNWR or even L+Y-the Midland policy was to use relatively small engines and double head as necessary.
Don't forget pathing problems-in theory, one Garrett hauled train could replace two hauled by smaller locos (and possibly one loco and crew instead of up to four?-don't know), hence releasing another train path; but remember my comments on the P1!
A nice loco model, but not for me-though one may appear in due course on James St...
Martyn
I hope this one will be a success for them, and perhaps their next one could be the Garrat's replacement, the 9F, we so need a more up to date modern manufactured 9F ;)
I think the buzz about Hattons' Garrett has spurred Rails of Sheffield into action.
Got an e-mail this afternoon informing me about progress with their home-brewed locos/wagons.
Nothing in N gauge unfortunately.
Best regards,
Joe
Hattons say none survived but is this not one here?
https://www.scienceandindustrymuseum.org.uk/objects-and-stories/beyer-peacock (https://www.scienceandindustrymuseum.org.uk/objects-and-stories/beyer-peacock)
I remember seeing this hugely impressive loco many many years ago and seem to recall it was used in South Africa.
Or is this a similar but different loco ?
Beyer-Garrett locos survive around the world (especially in Africa), but not the LMS version, nor the LNER solo loco.
There is a non-working 0-4-0+0-4-0 at Bressingham museum, and working narrow gauge ones on the Welsh Highland railway, to name some others.
martyn
Quote from: daversmth on November 20, 2018, 08:03:22 PM
Hattons say none survived but is this not one here?
https://www.scienceandindustrymuseum.org.uk/objects-and-stories/beyer-peacock (https://www.scienceandindustrymuseum.org.uk/objects-and-stories/beyer-peacock)
I remember seeing this hugely impressive loco many many years ago and seem to recall it was used in South Africa.
Or is this a similar but different loco ?
The answer is in your question... Yes there are numerous Beyer-Garratts survive including many of those built for service in Africa but none of the 33 built for the LMS (which the Hattons model specifically represents) survive.
We have one in running order in Australia - number 6029 (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/6029)
Quote from: Paul-H on November 20, 2018, 05:09:06 PM
perhaps their next one could be the Garrat's replacement, the 9F, we so need a more up to date modern manufactured 9F ;)
What makes you say that? I thought the Dapol 9F was state of the art, but not always the best runner (like other Dapol tender drive locos) due to the tender drive. Perhaps I am mistaken. My Hall, Grange and 38xx are OK.
Quote from: tunneroner61 on November 20, 2018, 10:09:24 PM
Quote from: Paul-H on November 20, 2018, 05:09:06 PM
perhaps their next one could be the Garrat's replacement, the 9F, we so need a more up to date modern manufactured 9F ;)
What makes you say that? I thought the Dapol 9F was state of the art, but not always the best runner (like other Dapol tender drive locos) due to the tender drive. Perhaps I am mistaken. My Hall, Grange and 38xx are OK.
I suspect the question is more abut the haulage than the look of the model. The Dapol model looks superb, but its haulage capability isn't prototypical. I have two, but they can only pull about 25 16T mineral wagons each. 9Fs ran on at least one block working of the type B tankers a la RevolutioN trains - I'd like to see a Dapol 9F pull such a train!
Personally I don't like the Dapol drive setup, the drive shaft linking the motor in the tender to the loco is just horrible and prone to throwing the shaft if not super careful, it has a poorly designed front pony that is prone to derailment, even with the modified one fitted, and it can't pull the skin of a rice pudding, mine used to spin it's wheels with 10, 7 plank wagons.
By today's standards it's positively ancient, just like all of Dapols tender drive locos, perhaps they will 're work it when they work the bugs of of their new loco drive they are struggling to develop for the promised BOB class they are working on.
Paul
Quote from: Paul-H on November 21, 2018, 09:34:23 AM
Personally I don't like the Dapol drive setup, the drive shaft linking the motor in the tender to the loco is just horrible and prone to throwing the shaft if not super careful,
As one of the 9F's (when originally released) harshest critics, I think some of this is bordering on unfair.
The driveshafts only come out if poorly handled or lifted from the track - they don't spontaneously throw.
The bogie design (originally) was indeed poor - but this was more down to the steamroller wheels and large flanges that caught on point blades, frogs, and the slightest bump. Dapol addressed this on the second run 9Fs and thereafter both with completely redesigned wheels and a springing mechanism to ensure the bogie tracks properly. As someone who had a first batch 9F that couldn't do a lap at all without derailment, the revised design was a complete transformation - never a problem.
Quote from: Paul-H on November 21, 2018, 09:34:23 AM
mine used to spin it's wheels with 10, 7 plank wagons.
That implies a problem in QC. I had a later batch one that didn't haul as many wagons as others, and oddly, after resetting the loco pickups, it was far better - I suspect they were pushing the rear two driver wheels to one side.
I have noticed some most recent production models where the chassis is clearly slightly bowed and they see-saw on their central drivers. These can be turned down to fix, though it does imply the chassis mouldings were slightly out.
Having said all that, none of these couldn't haul a minimum of 25 wagons, so 10 indicates a clear problem.
Not sure a 10 year old design is ancient in this context - Farish were producing the same design motor chassis for 25 years!
Cheers,
Alan
Thank you Dr Al for a very objective view of the 9Fs mechanical issues.
I'm afraid that I get a bit miffed when someone rubbishes a product without objectively justifying their point of view.
Ok so I am obviously not allowed to have an opinion based on my personal experience. I will keep them to myself from now on, just remember without criticism they will never improve their products.
Bye
You can hold whatever opinion you want and make it public. Just take note of what I said about justifying that view. My remark yesterday was referring to your post -
Quote from: Paul-H on November 20, 2018, 05:09:06 PM
I hope this one will be a success for them, and perhaps their next one could be the Garrat's replacement, the 9F, we so need a more up to date modern manufactured 9F ;)
- not the subsequent one of today where you described your experience with the 9F.
I think the news is absolutely incredible. It's not something I'd ever see as RTR. Some peoples' posts imply the model might not go ahead unless there are enough pre-orders. I can't see anything that implies this on the website so I'm guessing that this is going ahead regardless? It would be great to see someone put sound in theirs.
Quote from: Paul-H on November 21, 2018, 12:29:15 PM
just remember without criticism they will never improve their products.
Dapol have had criticism on their 9F - a lot. They listened to much of it. How do I know? I was one of those levelling that criticism after my £90 first batch 9F bought new was found to be such a poor performer, and emotion very much overtook restraint.
Sadly, the problems you cite are either those that are plainly not Dapol's fault (handling of locos with driveshafts), have been addressed (front bogie), or are likely to be QC, not design related (haulage).
I understand the frustration - I went way overboard with that on my complaints with the first 9F. But (as I learned) one has to be properly objective in understanding if a problem is widespread, design, handling, QC or other cause, before immediately decreeing the design as "ancient" or lacking.
Voicing problems is highly encouraged, but I think we should just state facts rather then emote it with emotion - it may be a simple fault that's easy to correct, and not indicative of every other model.
Cheers,
Alan
Wrong in so many ways for my South Devon/Cornish layout but just have to own one. I could come up with a reason why it would be working along the sea wall at Teignmouth, going over the Albert Bridge into Cornwall and on to Redruth, but at the end of the day............Rule One rules! :D
I pre-ordered mine this morning.
@Dizz (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=4918)
It could bring the housebridge down!!!
I dont think hattons have had such publicity on the forum have they?
Most definitely not for me but there's certainly a few locos that I'd love someone to take on and build.
Keep dreaming............or at least get the layout powered to enable something to run!!
Hattons are to be congratulated on such an ambitious loco as their first N Gauge project. If should get a lot of "Rule One" sales on the basis of being such a spectaular prototype.
I have dropped Hattons a mail asking if the RHTT can get the shrink-ray treatment. That should be a real seller...
Quote from: Paul-H on November 21, 2018, 12:29:15 PM
Ok so I am obviously not allowed to have an opinion based on my personal experience. I will keep them to myself from now on, just remember without criticism they will never improve their products.
Bye
Would you be the same Paul80 that has been bagging Dapol on the RM Web Garratt thread?
Just wonderin' ?
Quote from: Newportnobby on November 21, 2018, 08:35:03 PM
@Dizz (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=4918)
It could bring the housebridge down!!!
Already strengthened in anticipation of DJM Kings running into Cornwall sometime next year ;) ;)
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/60/4918-160118221202.jpeg)
Latest update
https://www.hattons.co.uk/newsdetail.aspx?id=396&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=post&utm_campaign=hattonsnbeyergarrattcads&fbclid=IwAR2WgX8wbh3of7tOlonLiWEkhwFu4lkRImehrAueB39Nunw1dmp7tNwEqUw (https://www.hattons.co.uk/newsdetail.aspx?id=396&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=post&utm_campaign=hattonsnbeyergarrattcads&fbclid=IwAR2WgX8wbh3of7tOlonLiWEkhwFu4lkRImehrAueB39Nunw1dmp7tNwEqUw)
:bounce: :claphappy: :laugh3: :heart2:
Ah, so they've seen sense and gone for two motors now. That's got to be better.
Wasn't at all interested in this. But the CAD work is really selling it to me. :hmmm:
Quote from: RailGooner on July 16, 2019, 04:30:15 PM
Wasn't at all interested in this. But the CAD work is really selling it to me. :hmmm:
The Beyer-Garrett is just awesome, I'm down for one already. One motor would do me, but then I'm never going to have room to drag 40+ mineral wagons, or even HAVE 40+ mineral wagons. There's no way I'm missing out on this one.
Some of the connoisseurs amongst us like @Newportnobby (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=264) will probably have a couple, y'know, one parked strategically behind the breakdown crane as another slowly hauls a large rake in front of it.
;)
Several decades too early for me. Normally. But. Rule #1! :D
Wonder if I could invoke these being used on the Fawley oil trains instead of the 9Fs that were at Eastleigh? The Dapol 9F doesn't cope with 20 class B tanks.
Bob
Bob. July two years ago mr devereaux wrote the fawley finale article in railway magazine. Google fawley oil steam trains its there. Click the link . It gives history plus suitable locos and barrier wagons.
Quote from: emjaybee on July 16, 2019, 04:37:49 PM
Some of the connoisseurs amongst us like @Newportnobby (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=264) will probably have a couple, y'know, one parked strategically behind the breakdown crane as another slowly hauls a large rake in front of it.
;)
You've got your work cut out selling this model to me. I've no intention of buying one :no:
Quote from: Newportnobby on July 16, 2019, 09:19:38 PM
Quote from: emjaybee on July 16, 2019, 04:37:49 PM
Some of the connoisseurs amongst us like @Newportnobby (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=264) will probably have a couple, y'know, one parked strategically behind the breakdown crane as another slowly hauls a large rake in front of it.
;)
You've got your work cut out selling this model to me. I've no intention of buying one :no:
Nobody has suggested you'll be buying
one! :D
Quote from: RailGooner on July 16, 2019, 09:46:45 PM
Quote from: Newportnobby on July 16, 2019, 09:19:38 PM
Quote from: emjaybee on July 16, 2019, 04:37:49 PM
Some of the connoisseurs amongst us like @Newportnobby (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=264) will probably have a couple, y'know, one parked strategically behind the breakdown crane as another slowly hauls a large rake in front of it.
;)
You've got your work cut out selling this model to me. I've no intention of buying one :no:
Nobody has suggested you'll be buying one! :D
:laughabovepost:
I've got a couple of months to work on him yet.
;D
Evil persons :unimpressed: ;D
Quote from: emjaybee on July 16, 2019, 04:37:49 PM
Some of the connoisseurs amongst us like @Newportnobby (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=264) will probably have a couple, y'know, one parked strategically behind the breakdown crane as another slowly hauls a large rake in front of it.
;)
I have not been classified as a connoisseur before, more likely an obsessive collector :D
Having said this I have ordered two in the LMS black to go with my two hand made models and I feel a steam shed module on my layout coming on. :thumbsup:
What I am even happier about is that Hattons have listened and are fitting two motors. :beers: they will need them.
Do we know who is Hatton's model designer? Revolution usually let us know if it is Rapido/Sonic/Colin Allbright.
Bob
Hi All,
Well been perfectly honest the Garrett isn't for me at all not even as a rule 1 purchase, but fair play to Hattons for going all out with this one!
If they are serious about moving into N gauge then some of the track maintenance wagons they are offering in OO I think would go down well (YOB Plasser 12t GPC crane, Beilhack snow plough, FEA-S intermodal wagon with Track Panel, RHTT). But as anything time will tell and I guess that the Garrett is a bit of an experiment for them!
:doh: I feel loads of wish lists coming forth