!!

Not Registered?

Welcome!  Please register to view all of the new posts and forum boards - some of which are hidden to guests.  After registering and gaining 10 posts you will be able to sell and buy items on our N'porium.

If you have any problems registering, then please check your spam filter before emailing us.  Hotmail users seem to find their emails in the Junk folder.


Thanks for reading,
The NGF Staff.

Author Topic: Class 21 & 29 proposed by Revolution Trains  (Read 19662 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ScottyStitch

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Class 21 & 29 proposed by Revolution Trains
« Reply #15 on: September 10, 2015, 01:20:49 PM »
D6125 for me, would be an ideal machine to produce. By all accounts it stayed in single-tone green without yellow panels all its life, so would suit layouts throughout the 21s lifespan.

D6123, is a nice oddity because, despite converting to a class 29, it never got the headcode box.

My understanding is that, should the model get the go-ahead, it will be for the non-tablet apparatus fitted machines, which rules out a number of options.

I'd be in for four, I think. These things are pretty iconic for the Scottish region around the transition period.

One of my favourite Class 21 images I have is of a 21 piloting an A4 on an express fish working through Perth.

ScottyStitch

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Class 21 & 29 proposed by Revolution Trains
« Reply #16 on: September 10, 2015, 01:22:17 PM »
See thread here of the original pitch, for more info and more photos:

http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=26131.0

Offline ohlavache

  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 25956
  • Posts: 293
  • Country: fr
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: Class 21 & 29 proposed by Revolution Trains
« Reply #17 on: September 10, 2015, 01:39:19 PM »
Youpi !!!  :bounce:

That's really good news!
But I didn't understand which liveries will be proposed.
Will the choice be limited to the three locomotives in the first post ?
- D6103 class 21, green
- D6123 class 29, blue with full yellow ends
- D6129 class 29, blue with full yellow ends and headcode boxes

My understanding is that we could also have:
- green with small yellow panels
- green with small yellow panels and headcode boxes
- green with headcode boxes (as this one: http://s847.photobucket.com/user/gdaysydney/media/class29.jpg.html)

Thanks by advance for the clarification.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2015, 01:43:12 PM by ohlavache »


These locos and wagons are looking for a new home! (updated on 10 March 2019)

Wanted items (only in their original box):
- Union Mills, 3F 0-6-0 steam locomotive in LMS crimson (N gauge)
- Fleischmann 8056, 2nd class coach 'Edelweiss' in red & white (N scale)

ScottyStitch

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Class 21 & 29 proposed by Revolution Trains
« Reply #18 on: September 10, 2015, 01:50:35 PM »
Hello all,

We are proposing the Class 21 and 29 locomotives in N.

These models would be manufactured by Dapol, and after negotiations we feel we have got a good deal for anyone who backs this model.

The price will be £110 for the standard DCC ready model, and £205 for DCC sound fitted.  Because none of these locos exist anymore, the sound will be produced for us by Legomanbiffo using sounds from a genuine MAN engine (for the 21) and electrical equipment that was common to other locomotives that are still in existence.

From 1958-1960 North British in Glasgow built 58 type 2 locomotives, later given the TOPS code Class 21. The first 38 were deployed to the Eastern Region, the remainder to Scotland, though within months all
were sent north of the border.

D6103 at Cambridge in 1960.



When introduced all were in plain green, with disc indicators and nose connector doors, though later yellow warning panels were applied.

Poor reliability led to a limited scheme to re-engine some members of the class, designated Class 29.

D6123 was the first to receive the new Paxman engine, but the front end was not modified and it retained its disc headcode indicators.



The other 19 converted locomotives received headcode boxes and some also were repainted into BR Blue livery.  There is some variations, with old or new style numbers and differing positions of the BR totem.



(Thanks to Graham Wareham for the above two photos)

The re-engined locomotives were far more reliable and worked fairly successfully from Glasgow to Fort William and Oban, and across central Scotland via Perth and Aberdeen to Inverness.

However, in the early 1970s they were declared non-standard and all were withdrawn by the end of 1971.  None are preserved.

To reach the production threshold we need to get to 1200 orders for model 1, then a further 900 for model 2 - obviously whether the 21 or 29 comes first depends on which gets the most interest!

At the moment, as ever, we require no money just a serious expression of interest; we are hoping to have reached at least 1200 orders by Xmas so that work can begin in the New Year.

Since all the tooling will be paid for and funding is guaranteed, we are assured that our models would progress rapidly through the production cycle.

This model has been selected because we know Dapol can tool the characteristic face very well (it's the same, virtually, as their excellent Class 22) and they are producing this model in OO anyway.  If this drive is successful we are hoping the N gauge model for our supporters would come out at about the same time as the OO model. 

If it is produced, the model would be available in the standard Dapol range eventually but not for at least two years.

We also feel this model will go very well with the existing Farish Classes 24 and 25, and upcoming DJM Class 17; making small Scottish layouts very achievable.

cheers

Ben A.


Hi Ben,

See my post on the RMWeb thread, I don't think this class hauled any scheduled services over the Highland Main Line. You can however include Glasgow to Carlisle via GSWR (i.e. via Dumfries) as well as the WCML

ScottyStitch

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Class 21 & 29 proposed by Revolution Trains
« Reply #19 on: September 10, 2015, 01:53:23 PM »
Youpi !!!  :bounce:

That's really good news!
But I didn't understand which liveries will be proposed.
Will the choice be limited to the three locomotives in the first post ?
- D6103 class 21, green
- D6123 class 29, blue with full yellow ends
- D6129 class 29, blue with full yellow ends and headcode boxes

My understanding is that we could also have:
- green with small yellow panels
- green with small yellow panels and headcode boxes
- green with headcode boxes (as this one: http://s847.photobucket.com/user/gdaysydney/media/class29.jpg.html)

Thanks by advance for the clarification.


The identities and liveries im pretty sure will be ironed out if and when the project gets the go ahead, but I'd be pretty sure the likely candidates would be all over green (21), All over green with SYWP (21), Two Tone Green with SYWP (29) as pretty much guaranteed.

I don't think any 21s made it to BR Blue? Although obviously the 29s did.

Offline Ben A

  • Revolution Trains
  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • N Gauge Society Number: 9835
  • Posts: 1958
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
  • NGS VP, Model Rail contributor, Revolution founder
    • Revolution Trains
    • Awards
Re: Class 21 & 29 proposed by Revolution Trains
« Reply #20 on: September 10, 2015, 01:56:15 PM »

Hello all,

We haven't decided liveries yet - though there are not that many:  peliminary research suggests the 21s received plain green or green with yellow panel, the 29s two tone green with panel, two tone green with full yellow ends and blue.  There are some oddities with positioning of BR totem and number styles on the blue versions.

The oddity is D6123 which although converted from 21 to 29 did not receive the headcode box, but did receive he roof and grille modifications. Modular tooling would allow us to mix and match bodies and ends to produce this.

Scotty - I believe the last 20 were built for the Scottish region directly and had tablet catchers in recesses.    If there is significantly higher interest than the 1200 minimum then it may be viable to produce this variant; however TPM produces an excellent etched version which includes a template for the cut out and this is not too hard a job.

Thanks also for the map notes.  I will amend asap.

Railsquid - The 321 in NSE is surely a sectorisation era model, unless you are specifying before 1989... there are certainly plenty of shots of them alongside blue stock.

PLD - When I spoke to Dapol about this they said they had no plans to do this model in N as the numbers didn't stack up.  On that basis I felt we could try to make it happen - especially as we can take advantage of the OO research and also ensure that N isn't being left behind with this model and there was a long and persuasive thread on this forum...

Stu - totally sympathise.  Very few of us have unlimited funds and with that in mind Mike and I have deliberately avoided talking about too many new items, and we also tried to pick two items that would not compete with each other, at least not directly.

Naturally neither this nor the 320/321 will be for everyone but please, as with the Pendolino and the tanks, spread the word to those who are not online and let's see if we can maintain the inertia generated so far with the Pendolino and TEA.

cheers

Ben A.



Offline Newportnobby

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+63)
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • N Gauge Society Number: 21962
  • Posts: 30765
  • Country: england
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: Class 21 & 29 proposed by Revolution Trains
« Reply #21 on: September 10, 2015, 02:43:02 PM »
I'd be in for a green SYP class 21 :claphappy:
(Must be an Eastern region numbered one)

Offline NeMo

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 23720
  • Posts: 2489
  • Country: gb
    • Awards
Re: Class 21 & 29 proposed by Revolution Trains
« Reply #22 on: September 10, 2015, 03:27:42 PM »
let's see if we can maintain the inertia generated so far with the Pendolino and TEA.

I hope you mean momentum! Inertia is resistance to movement; momentum is (sort of) the opposite, the tendency of a moving heavy object to resist being slowed down.

More constructively perhaps, two interesting announcements over the last couple days. Well done to all involved, and good luck in the future.

Cheers, NeMo

ScottyStitch

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Class 21 & 29 proposed by Revolution Trains
« Reply #23 on: September 10, 2015, 03:49:43 PM »
let's see if we can maintain the inertia generated so far with the Pendolino and TEA.


I hope you mean momentum! Inertia is resistance to movement; momentum is (sort of) the opposite, the tendency of a moving heavy object to resist being slowed down.

More constructively perhaps, two interesting announcements over the last couple days. Well done to all involved, and good luck in the future.

Cheers, NeMo


I think he got it right, NeMo, the definition of Inertia is actually:

".......the resistance of any physical object to any change in its state of motion including changes to its speed and direction or the state of rest. It is the tendency of objects to keep moving in a straight line at constant velocity."

(from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertia)

and:

Newton's first law of motion states that "An object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force." Objects tend to "keep on doing what they're doing." In fact, it is the natural tendency of objects to resist changes in their state of motion. This tendency to resist changes in their state of motion is described as inertia.

(from http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/newtlaws/Lesson-1/Inertia-and-Mass)



 :thumbsup:

Happy modelling.
 
« Last Edit: September 10, 2015, 03:53:02 PM by ScottyStitch »

Offline railsquid

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 25547
  • Posts: 4721
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
    • My model railway website
    • Awards
Re: Class 21 & 29 proposed by Revolution Trains
« Reply #24 on: September 10, 2015, 04:04:28 PM »
Railsquid - The 321 in NSE is surely a sectorisation era model, unless you are specifying before 1989... there are certainly plenty of shots of them alongside blue stock.
Yup, it is indeed, just saying that purely personally it's a class which evidently appeared not long after I stopped hanging around with a notebook at Birmingham New Street, and in the intervening decades spent largely outside the UK I don't recall travelling on the WCML or anywhere else these might run, and unfortunately it fails to ignite any more passion than "hmm, looks like one of them new-fangled Turbostar thingies but with a pantograph" ;). So if I were to go for one, it would would have to be in NSE as I don't hold with these post-privatisation liveries especially if they involve dotted patterns, but will have to Think About It™. Definitely up for a 21/29 though.
Takahachikawa - Japanese and other trains

Birmingham Knotmore Street - (ex) GWR mainline through the Midlands

Offline 60156 Great Central

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 152
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
    • YouTube
    • Awards
Re: Class 21 & 29 proposed by Revolution Trains
« Reply #25 on: September 10, 2015, 04:25:40 PM »
Will be keeping a beady eye on your website for these to pop up :D

Offline Portpatrick

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 3434
  • Posts: 729
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: Class 21 & 29 proposed by Revolution Trains
« Reply #26 on: September 10, 2015, 05:17:22 PM »
let's see if we can maintain the inertia generated so far with the Pendolino and TEA.


I hope you mean momentum! Inertia is resistance to movement; momentum is (sort of) the opposite, the tendency of a moving heavy object to resist being slowed down.

More constructively perhaps, two interesting announcements over the last couple days. Well done to all involved, and good luck in the future.

Cheers, NeMo

Goodness, my O and A level physics is a very long time ago.


I think he got it right, NeMo, the definition of Inertia is actually:

".......the resistance of any physical object to any change in its state of motion including changes to its speed and direction or the state of rest. It is the tendency of objects to keep moving in a straight line at constant velocity."

(from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertia)

and:

Newton's first law of motion states that "An object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force." Objects tend to "keep on doing what they're doing." In fact, it is the natural tendency of objects to resist changes in their state of motion. This tendency to resist changes in their state of motion is described as inertia.

(from http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/newtlaws/Lesson-1/Inertia-and-Mass)



 :thumbsup:

Happy modelling.

Offline NeMo

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 23720
  • Posts: 2489
  • Country: gb
    • Awards
Re: Class 21 & 29 proposed by Revolution Trains
« Reply #27 on: September 10, 2015, 06:27:40 PM »
I think he got it right, NeMo, the definition of Inertia is actually:

Inertia as a noun, according to my dictionary (and common usage in business) means "the tendency to do nothing or remain unchanged", hence my comment above. Inertia is something project managers want to avoid. Momentum is used when something keeps moving, and things speed up as more and more people get involved or more resources are acquired.

FYI, I'm a physics teacher. So we can discuss their technical usage via personal messages if you want. But in short, inertia is describes happens when something doesn't have a force acting on it, in other words, the forces are all balanced. No acceleration and no deceleration, and of course no changes in shape or direction. Such an object may be moving (with constant velocity) or not moving, it makes no odds. Momentum is a specific property calculated by multiplying mass by velocity. It doesn't really tell you about whether the object is speeding up or slowing down because you can calculate it only for a particular instant in time.

My apologies if making a quip about the use of the word "inertia" annoyed anyone, that wasn't the purpose, and as I said, well done to those directly involved.

Cheers, NeMo

Offline Izzy

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 358
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: Class 21 & 29 proposed by Revolution Trains
« Reply #28 on: September 10, 2015, 07:50:06 PM »

I believe I am correct in saying that the first conversion/re-engine 21 to 29, D6123, was carried out a Paxman's Britannia works in Colchester, located behind the platform at St Boltophs/Colchester town station (it was rail served), all subsequent conversions being carried out elsewhere (the makers I think) after proving to be a success. This may account for the lack of headcode boxes since it was a one off trial at the time with the roof and grille amendments being part of the re-engine work.

Izzy

Offline Ben A

  • Revolution Trains
  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • N Gauge Society Number: 9835
  • Posts: 1958
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
  • NGS VP, Model Rail contributor, Revolution founder
    • Revolution Trains
    • Awards
Re: Class 21 & 29 proposed by Revolution Trains
« Reply #29 on: September 10, 2015, 08:00:28 PM »

Hi Izzy,

I think you're right.  While researching these models I found this page, which appears to have a photo of D6123 loco being fitted with a Paxman Ventura engine in 1963 (about 2/3 way down):

http://www.paxmanhistory.org.uk/paxrailt.htm

cheers

Ben A.



 

Please Support Us!
March Goal: £55.00
Due Date: Mar 31
Total Receipts: £65.00
Above Goal: £10.00
Site Currency: GBP
118% 
March Donations


Advertise Here
anything