CR 812 Class from Rails

[WCML55.68]

Good evening all,

The first CAD shots are now available to view on Rails website. Looking good.

https://mailchi.mp/railsofsheffield/rai ... 0238fe4327

[WCML55.68]

Evening all,

I spoke to Rails Saturday about another order and also enquired if there was any news about the Bachmann 812 class. Unofficially, they are expecting them to arrive 2nd quarter of 2021 so not long off.

Hope they live up to expectations.

[tony brenchley]

I have just had a look at the CAD pictures posted in September. I am not sure how accurate these are as a portrayal of the model as it will eventually appear but one thing does worry me.

The outside faces of the splashers and the cab side do not appear to line up. Is this evidence that the splashers have been moved inwards to suit OO gauge? If that is the case what happens at the front end with the front splashers, smokebox front and wings?

If the splashers have been moved inwards that will make it difficult to use scale wheels at scale spacing, i.e. to P4 standards or better. I hope prototypical accuracy has not been sacrificed to appease the toy market.

I did ask Rails of Sheffield about this issue when the model was first proposed following my disappointment that the Hornby NBR J36 can only be converted to scale with some significant rebuilding. They promised to get back to me but despite several prompts they never responded to my concerns.

I am waiting to be pleasantly surprised but suspect I am going to be disappointed.

Tony B

[Dave Lochrie]

Tony,
I am sure you will be proved right re difficulty in conversion. The tendency being to cast the footplate and some lower body parts in metal for the weight.
I was puzzled as to how it could help OO workings to only change one after scanning the prototype.

So one thing that will surprise you (because it certainly surprised me) is that the cab side and the wheel splashers do not line up on the 812 Class. They do on the Jumbos, but not on the 812, 652, 30 and 300 classes. It's certainly hard to spot from most angles but this close-up of the well known shot of No 833 shows it reasonably clearly. I have a similar view of No828 at Kidderminster (not in CR days, obviously) which I can't locate, which is also from just the correct angle. Willie Stewart worked from GAs whenever possible, and it can be seen on his front elevation (sorry if that's architectural rather than the correct engineering terminology.

Rather begs the question why, could it just be as simple as to maximise the cab width? It's clearly not as wide as the tender side sheets.

Dave L

[Mike 1]

Could it be that the crew had to walk along that footplate beside the cab a lot more often than along the tender, so extra width was safer?

Mike

[tony brenchley]

That is a very useful photo Dave.

Clearly the cab is wider than the splashers but for what reason? Could this be defined by the boiler size and construction rather than any aesthetic considerations? I don't think there is anything related to the underfarme, wheels and motion that would require the cab splashers to be wider.

What can the experts tell us?

[WCML55.68]

I have just had a look at the CAD pictures posted in September. I am not sure how accurate these are as a portrayal of the model as it will eventually appear but one thing does worry me.

The outside faces of the splashers and the cab side do not appear to line up. Is this evidence that the splashers have been moved inwards to suit OO gauge? If that is the case what happens at the front end with the front splashers, smokebox front and wings?

If the splashers have been moved inwards that will make it difficult to use scale wheels at scale spacing, i.e. to P4 standards or better. I hope prototypical accuracy has not been sacrificed to appease the toy market.

I did ask Rails of Sheffield about this issue when the model was first proposed following my disappointment that the Hornby NBR J36 can only be converted to scale with some significant rebuilding. They promised to get back to me but despite several prompts they never responded to my concerns.

I am waiting to be pleasantly surprised but suspect I am going to be disappointed.

Tony B

I also contacted Rails regarding the tender patches applied in later life and the hugely overscale smokebox wheel. I dont remember getting a response but pleased to note that the tenders carry the patches in BR versions, but apparently still the "carbuncle" on the smokebox. Hopefully that will be an easy fix. Although expensive, still the first and best RTR CR MODEL as opposed to TOY,123, and eagerly awaited. Hopefully a Jumbo, Standard passenger and Pickersgill will follow ........

[WCML55.68]

Rails have sent out emails last week advising availability of limited numbers of the forthcoming Bachmann 812 Class locos with sound.
On phone this morning, they tell me that the files used are believed to be genuine CR locos files and that an upgrade of order is possible.
Does anyone know the source of these files and confirm genuine CR and do you feel that already pricey locos are worth the extra £100 for sound?

Thoughts would be appreciated.
P.

[Jim Summers]

I don't know the origin of these sound files, but Carina Maccall of our Association was instrumental in getting the Caledonian decoder from SW Digital to market. That used recordings, specially made, of 828. I would imagine that RAILS also used that prototype and that a lot depends on whether is was a casual recording or specially arranged. Maybe others have more information.

Properly done, sound is a real bonus, but it's a personal decision.

JimS