LNER Steam Locomotives

[red_death]

Hi Roy

I don't disagree with you, except to say that the ease of accounting for variations depend entirely on what those variations are, so the fact that variations have been tooled on one model is no guarantee that you could do the same on another model where the variations are much more substantial.

I'll PM you for what should be obvious reasons when you see my PM!

Cheers Mike

[zwilnik]

One LNER loco that might suit Revolution and has so far only been around in kit form, are the Y1 and Y3 Sentinel shunters. They're not as exciting maybe as the mainline engines, but they're perfect for shunting yards and appear to have been around a bit (even the GWR had one for a while as a trial).

Nice and simple visual design, although somewhat compact, so may be a challenge there. Also no visible running gear

https://www.lner.info/locos/Y/y1y3.php

[Roy L S]

One LNER loco that might suit Revolution and has so far only been around in kit form, are the Y1 and Y3 Sentinel shunters. They're not as exciting maybe as the mainline engines, but they're perfect for shunting yards and appear to have been around a bit (even the GWR had one for a while as a trial).

Nice and simple visual design, although somewhat compact, so may be a challenge there. Also no visible running gear

https://www.lner.info/locos/Y/y1y3.php

I totally agree, I have mentioned this loco a few times previously and with the advent of the possibility of a pre-installed DCC chip and stay alive capacitor(s) it would seem to be even more viable now.

Dapol have also done a RTR model in 00 with one soon to come in O too....just saying...

Roy

[martyn]

Hi Roy;

I agree with virtually all you say in your post #13, and I have already put forward for and against for many of the models mentioned. Hopefully, Sonic may be more interested at some stage.

But it IS a fact that due to the financial state of the LNER, many loco classes, especially pre-grouping ones, did not stray far, if at all, from their original homes.

Whilst I would love a J67/69, or an N7, there were so many variations, and often a loco would undergo a number of rebuilds. N7-round or Belpaire boiler? N2-condensing/non condensing, left or right hand drive? Overall height? L1-technically, apart from the first loco, they were BR built, though obviously a pure LNER design-but air or vacuum brake? Darlington or Contractor style running plate? V1/V3-bunker styles? K3?-don't even go there.......Peppercorn K1-at last, all locos just about all the same, but BR built and tended to concentrate in discrete areas. Even the J72 tended to stay within the NER area until the BR build were given allocations in new areas-but sometimes, not for long......

I'm sure that you are more than aware of these differences. I fully appreciate Mike/Red Death's posts, though, that eventually, as a manufacturer you have to decide which what to produce; and I think that, much as I would love some more, the LNER loco stud is difficult to chose which variation to make.

And here I applaud again Stevie dc for the ex LNER designs he has produced.

Don't get me wrong; I would love to see most of the classes you have mentioned, and for the reasons you gave, but I'm not totally surprised that there are few LNER models, Pacifics aside.

BRG

Martyn

[Dr Al]

I would echo many of the comments if new manufacturers are reading (and sounds like they are!).

However, I'd urge not to go for prototypes where good current kits/prints are available- namely V1/V3, K3, L1 and N2. This will hurt the smaller designers, and there are plenty other targets to aim at.

Personally, I'd say the J72, J52, or J50 in terms of tank locos. All of these had long lifespans, J72 in particular, meaning many liveries could be produced (inc 69023 'Joem' as preserved). All said tank locos have interesting designs, from the diminutive J72 to the interesting tank shaped J50. A J72 would also be an impressive model to achieve, and would gain the manufacturer some kudos given Bachmann gave it up (not due to lack of demand).

Looking to OO, locos that have been done include J50, J52, J72, J83, and J94. These actually cover most of the LNER tank types that survived into the later period of steam, so tackling any of them would actually fill more of a gap than it may seem.

In terms of detail variations, I'm guessing intelligently designed tooling could accommodate some of these, otherwise plumping for the most common variant would make sense, and is hardly uncommon in this scale. Buyers demand too much in some ways here - variation gives us modellers something to change to make it unique!

K1 is a smart handsome loco, but there are two reasons it may be difficult to justify - namely that they were BR machines only, so limited timespan, and two (entirely personal) I've already built one!

Other wild cards - B12 (one preserved) is an interesting loco, particularly with its small tender. Done previously by Union Mills, though the tender is somewhat overscale. I still think the P2 is an obvious choice with a new build on the way....it's positively modern image.... 

Cheers,
Alan