First announced in October 2019 and following amendments to the first livery samples, examples of all seven versions of the South Eastern & Chatham Railway D Class 4-4-0 from the Dapol production line have been received by Locomotion Models and Rails of Sheffield. These have now completed extensive running trials and final checking. Following approval, shipping from the factory can now commence.
On the whole these look very good and I am looking to receiving my SR Sunshine version (although I will be renumbering as the numbers size shown above do appear to be slightly too large). Definite improvements have been made since the initial livery samples were shown, especially with the colour rendition of SR Olive and the toning down of the bright handrails on some versions (although strangely not the BR lined black version). The only other issue that has been noted is also with respect to the BR lined black version in that the cycling lion early emblem is facing backwards on the right hand side, at the time these emblems usually faced forwards on both sides as it does on at least one photo I have seen for 31574. As these are production samples it is likely to be too late to amend this.
Retailer Rails Of Sheffield have today announced that in partnership with Dapol and Locomotion Models that they are to produce the South Eastern and Chatham Railway Wainwright D Class 4-4-0 locomotive.
The first Engineering Prototype sample already here and is currently under review.
Models will have NEM coupling pockets, Next-18 Decoder socket, ‘pullout’ PCB and solderless speaker (plus provision for customer to fit Bass reflex speaker in tender).
Locomotives will feature a firebox flicker effect. Another feature is the drawbar between the locomotive and tender which is of a new ‘pinless’ type carrying the electrical connection. Dapol are the first manufacturer to use this type of drawbar on a British outline 00 scale locomotive. To couple the locomotive to the tender it is necessary to connect on it on a straight piece of track to enable them to be pushed together.
Last year I posted about Armchair Ready-To-Run designers being an extension of the term “armchair modeller” that has been used in the hobby referring to those who are vocal in criticism and comment but are sat in their comfy chairs tapping away on their keyboards without actually the processes involved in various aspects of the hobby. That particular post focused on the design side of things and why just because one model has been produced it should mean that a further slightly different model can or should also be produced.
It is true that the Marsh H2 Class and its predecessor the H1 class can be directly traced back to the Ivatt C1 Atlantic owing to the fact Marsh had previously worked with Ivatt on the C1 class whilst he worked for the GNR and that the boiler and a proportion of the chassis design is the same.
In model terms though such lineage does not necessary mean savings in design, tooling, or production costs. As I mentioned in my previsious armchair post a common boiler does not help with tooling costs as often it is combined with different cabs, fitting, running plates or other differing details. In the case of the two Atlantic models, and I discussed this with Bachmann staff a couple of weeks ago, in reality only approximately 70% of only the chassis components are actually common. The loco body, tender and trailing truck are all different and therefor unique tooling. Therefore it is only a small proportion of time that can be potentially saved at the design stage, as such as design work carried over for those small number of common components (remember its approx 70% of the chassis only that is common) that can be simply copied.
Even with these limited number of common parts the two models are likely to be completely separately tooled. This is due to other reasons which a lot of people do not consider such as: the fact that if part of the tooling is used for more than model it creates double the wear on certain tools compared to the rest, the logistical issues of either stock holding between production runs or trying to manage production slots of both models at the same time.
This logistical challenge is hard enough for Bachmann whom unlike Hornby only have production at one factory. Hornby have different models being made at a number of factories which is another reason why they would not usually share any aspect of tolling or components between models / factories as other wise it would be a logistical, transport and stock holding nightmare, in addition to the issue of uneven tooling wear.
I hope this post gives further food for thought into the issues that have to be considered in the design, tooling and production of models for the Ready-To-Run market.
The model railway world and mainly Southern Railway meanderings of Graham 'Muz' Muspratt