Royal Scot by Airfix -- was it reissued by anyone else?
Wolf Kirchmeir
Are there any Royal Scots available?
Friendw w/o 'net wants to know. (He doesn't have a phone, either.)
Thanks.
Keith Norgrove
Maybe he should buy the odd Railway Modeller, meanwhile try
<http://www.bachmann.co.uk/prod1.php4?prod_selected=branchline&prod=2>
You have chooice of rebuilt or parallel boiler versions.
Keith
Make friends in the hobby.
Visit <http://www.grovenor.dsl.pipex.com/>
Garratt photos for the big steam lovers.
kim
>Are there any Royal Scots available?
There are two in the curent Bachmann catalogue (which doesn't guarantee they
are actually available). They are:-
31-282 Parallel Boiler Scott 46151 'The Royal Horse Guardman' and
31-228 Rebuilt Scott 46141 'The North Staffordshire Regiment'
both in BR Green with early emblem. I assume these are ex-Airfix/ex-mainline
models.
(kim)
Mike Parkes
They are the Mainline models with a newer Bachmann chassis. The Airfix
one was a rebuilt version with a tender drive. Unsold stocks were
repackaged by Dapol after Airfix was acquired by Palitoy (Mainline).
It probably is a contender for the shortest production run of any OO
loco
Mike Parkes
mi...@mphgate.removetoreply demon.co.uk
Craig Douglas
(500 pieces, wooden presentation box - I think) by Bachmann a few years
back. These ocasionally appear on ebay and go around the £100 mark.
Craig
"Keith Norgrove" <k...@fiction.piplex.com> wrote in message
news:mbrln010iq1d4t1ae...@4ax.com...
John Willumsen
were 47 models in OO gauge;
02 Airfix
15 Bachmann
07 Dapol
08 Mainline
15 Wrenn
Mike Parkes
The 7 Dapol ones were reboxed 5 Mainline versions and the 2 Airfix
versions.
Mike Parkes
mi...@mphgate.removetoreply demon.co.uk
Andy Sollis- Churnet Valley model Railway Dept.
"Mike Parkes" <mi...@mphgate.demon.removethistoreply.co.uk> wrote
They are the Mainline models with a newer Bachmann chassis. The Airfix
one was a rebuilt version with a tender drive. Unsold stocks were
repackaged by Dapol after Airfix was acquired by Palitoy (Mainline).
It probably is a contender for the shortest production run of any OO
loco
Ah, This could well be the excellent time to ask what I have been meaning to
for ages....
From the old Airfix range, we know some when to Dapol-then-Hornby, and some
went to Bachmann. (was there anyone inbetween? and where does replica fit
in?)
Which models went where?
What is still around and which (if any) have vanished....?
Were the DMUS (150's etc), Cls 56 and J94 Dapol designed?
--
Andy Sollis
CVMRD
http://www.cvmrd.freeserve.co.uk - Home of the Churnet Valley Model Railway
Department
Remove the Standard Tank from E-mail to reply
Mike Parkes
>went to Bachmann. (was there anyone inbetween? and where does replica fit
>in?)
>Which models went where?
>What is still around and which (if any) have vanished....?
>
>Were the DMUS (150's etc), Cls 56 and J94 Dapol designed?
Gulp - here goes:-
In the beginning (1976) we had Mainline (Palitoy) and Airfix.
Mainlines own models were made by Kader who retained the rights to the
tooling. Airfix owned their toolings.
Airfix then went bust and was acquired by Palitoy, but the finished or
part finished railway products in the Airfix warehouse were acquired
by the firm that later became known as Dapol.
Palitoy released some of the Airfix items in the Mainline range
including some which had not reached release under Airfix.
Palitoys owners General Mills then pull out of the European toy and
model market. Dapol again acquire what is in the Mainline warehouse
plus the owned tools (ex Airfix plus a couple of Mainline additions in
the Airfix style - the 2P 4-4-0 and 56).
Dapol think they have the rights to the Kader owned tools but discover
they don't, hence the use of those tools for Replica and then by Kader
owned Bachmann.
Dapol then sell the tools plus their own additions to Hornby.
Mainline originated models were the Standard 4 4-6-0, 45, J72, Collett
Goods, Jubliee, Royal Scot, Rebuilt Patriot, Rebuilt Royal Scot,
Warship, 57xx, 56xx which have been produced in improved forms by
Bachmann, plus the 56 and 2P 4-4-0 which went to Dapol and now Hornby.
Airfix originated models were the 31, 61xx, 14xx, Castle, 4F, Rebuilt
Scot, N2, Dean Goods. The 31 and Rebuilt Scot seem to have vanished,
and the Castle and 14xx were improved on by Dapol. Now with Hornby.
Dapol originated models were the Sprinters, Terrier, Pug, J94, County
plus the loco driven Castle and revamped 14xx. Now with Hornby
Replica released the B1 and Modified Hall. Now with Bachmann
Mike Parkes
mi...@mphgate.removetoreply demon.co.uk
Andy Sollis- Churnet Valley model Railway Dept.
"Mike Parkes" <mi...@mphgate.demon.removethistoreply.co.uk> wrote
Gulp - here goes:-
Dapol originated models were the Sprinters, Terrier, Pug, J94, County
plus the loco driven Castle and revamped 14xx. Now with Hornby
Replica released the B1 and Modified Hall. Now with Bachmann
Mike,
Wow! Many thanks. Thats one history lesson I never had before! I'm glad I
asked.
David E. Belcher
> Airfix originated models were the 31, 61xx, 14xx, Castle, 4F, Rebuilt
> Scot, N2, Dean Goods. The 31 and Rebuilt Scot seem to have vanished
Having run both Airfix and Palitoy versions at differing times, I
actually preferred the Airfix Scot in terms of its running qualities
(though the paint job was better on the Mainline model); the Mainline
front bogie seemed too light and 'twitchy', tending to derail itself
on complex pointwork or going on/off turntables (same with their
Jubilee). Or maybe that's just down to my tracklaying ability....
David E. Belcher
Pat Hammond
<mi...@mphgate.demon.removethistoreply.co.uk> writes
I would just add to mike's excellent account that the B1 and Modified
Hall were 'finished' by Kader at Replica's expense but the tooling
remained in Kader's ownership. Furthermore, Bachmann is owned by Kader
which is why Kader tooling was used to make the original Branch Line
range of Bachmann models.
Pat Hammond
--
Hammond Publishing, PO Box 199, Scarborough, YO11 3GT, Tel: 01723 506326,
E-mail: P...@mremag.demon.co.uk
Read 'Model Railway Express' Britain's leading and FREE online magazine for
railway modellers. Updated DAILY. News, Model Reviews, Book Reviews, Articles,
Classified Ads. You will find us at www.mremag.demon.co.uk
David E. Belcher
> Mainline originated models were the Standard 4 4-6-0, 45, J72, Collett
> Goods, Jubliee, Royal Scot, Rebuilt Patriot, Rebuilt Royal Scot,
> Warship, 57xx, 56xx which have been produced in improved forms by
> Bachmann, plus the 56 and 2P 4-4-0 which went to Dapol and now Hornby.
>
I'm not sure if, in part, the 2P was based on work already done
towards the never-released Airfix Midland Compound. Certainly, the 2P
used an Airfix motorised tender, being identical to the one that
powered the 4F rather than based on any existing Mainline Fowler
tender.
David E. Belcher
Mike Parkes
appearance in the Replica and Bachmann ranges. A simple way of working
out whose model it was originally is the form of coupling. If its the
non-NEM clip fit type now used by Hornby then its a Airfix / Mainline
(non Kader tooling) or Dapol originated model . Kader models have the
tension locks (pre NEM mount) normally screw fixed although some had
the tension lock loop moulded as part of the model.
Mike Parkes
mi...@mphgate.removetoreply demon.co.uk
Wolf Kirchmeir
I doubt it was your tracklaying. Many steam locos have iffy pilot trucks
- engineering proper springing and centering action in such a tight
space is costly. One can usually improve tracking by the following,
arranged in increasing order of difficulty.
a) ensure that wheel profile, gauge, and back-to-back are spot on (but
beware -- different makes of track have different frog (crossing)
dimensions - that's a whole 'nother rant.) Replace or modify wheels if
necessary. This step is essential, no matter what else you do.
b) add a _light_ centering spring (the usual arrangement of a bar for a
2-wheel truck, or a slotted plate for a 4-wheel truck, tends to skew the
truck against the outside of a curve, etc.)
OR
c) weight the truck: wrap some solder round the axle(s), or stick a lead
weight to the truck. Even the few grams added this way will help. Metal
wheels also help, so replace plastic ones. (I prefer this method)
d) Reduce slop in the mounting holes/slots as much as possible. The
truck should be able to move sideways easily, but should have as little
skewing action as possible. This may entail fabricating new parts,
mounting screws/pins, etc.
HTH&GL
Mark Newton
> I doubt it was your tracklaying. Many steam locos have iffy pilot
> trucks - engineering proper springing and centering action in such a
> tight space is costly. One can usually improve tracking by the
> following, arranged in increasing order of difficulty.
>
> a) ensure that wheel profile, gauge, and back-to-back are spot on
> (but beware -- different makes of track have different frog
> (crossing) dimensions - that's a whole 'nother rant.) Replace or
> modify wheels if necessary. This step is essential, no matter what
> else you do.
>
> b) add a _light_ centering spring (the usual arrangement of a bar for
> a 2-wheel truck, or a slotted plate for a 4-wheel truck, tends to
> skew the truck against the outside of a curve, etc.) OR c) weight the
> truck: wrap some solder round the axle(s), or stick a lead weight to
> the truck. Even the few grams added this way will help. Metal wheels
> also help, so replace plastic ones. (I prefer this method)
>
> d) Reduce slop in the mounting holes/slots as much as possible. The
> truck should be able to move sideways easily, but should have as
> little skewing action as possible. This may entail fabricating new
> parts, mounting screws/pins, etc.
All good advice Wolf, but in advocating options B and C, you're certain
to incur the wrath of our resident psychoceramic*.
All the best.
(*Crackpot.)
Roger T.
"Wolf Kirchmeir"
>
> I doubt it was your tracklaying. Many steam locos have iffy pilot trucks -
> engineering proper springing and centering action in such a tight space is
> costly. One can usually improve tracking by the following, arranged in
> increasing order of difficulty.
Remove ALL springing and centring devices and let the weight of the truck
and wheels do all the tracking. The only thing you may want to do, is to
add weight to the truck, if it's possible.
I have some 20 kettles with leading and trailing trucks and all track under
their own weight or, where possible, with a bit of extra weight added to the
truck or wheel axle(s). My track is all hand-laid and varies from around 20
inch radius but is mainly between 28 and 30 plus inches.
My locos, with trucks, range from small 2-10-0s, 2-8-0s and 4-6-2s through
mid sized 2-8-2s up to largish 4-8-2s. The 20 inch radius curve is on the
wye (triangle) in "Berger Yard" used for turning power and handles the
2-10-0s, 2-8-0s, 4-6-2s and 2-8-2s with no problem. Both classes of 4-8-2
are restricted to the "main line" part of the layout and don't operate into
Berger Yard as the 28 inch branch line curves are bit too sharp for them.
They tend to derail in a tunnel that's rather awkward to access.
--
Cheers
Roger T.
Home of the Great Eastern Railway
http://www.highspeedplus.com/~rogertra/
Laurie
> If its the non-NEM clip fit type now used by Hornby then its a Airfix /
> Mainline
> (non Kader tooling) or Dapol originated model.
Or even "Rosebud Kitmaster" originated :-)
--
Laurie
Mike Parkes
>> If its the non-NEM clip fit type now used by Hornby then its a Airfix /
>> Mainline
>> (non Kader tooling) or Dapol originated model.
>
>Or even "Rosebud Kitmaster" originated :-)
Eh?
Mike Parkes
mi...@mphgate.removetoreply demon.co.uk
Laurie
> "Laurie" <laur...@despammed.com> wrote:
>
>
>>> If its the non-NEM clip fit type now used by Hornby then its a
>>> Airfix / Mainline
>>> (non Kader tooling) or Dapol originated model.
>>
>> Or even "Rosebud Kitmaster" originated :-)
> Eh?
>
Just the fact that some of the Airfix models used tooling that was taken
over from Kitmaster, when they went broke in the 1960's. So the originators
of some Airfix models, were in fact, Kitmaster.
--
Laurie
John Turner
"Laurie" wrote
> Just the fact that some of the Airfix models used tooling that was taken
> over from Kitmaster, when they went broke in the 1960's. So the
originators
> of some Airfix models, were in fact, Kitmaster.
Not for the ready-to-run stuff I'm afraid.
John.
Laurie
> "Laurie" wrote
>> some Airfix models, were in fact, Kitmaster.
> Not for the ready-to-run stuff I'm afraid.
>
I had been under the impression that the early releases were just detailed
reworkings of their kit mouldings. However some more googleing shows that
you are correct, they produced new tooling.
I stand corrected.
I wonder what happened to all the Kitmaster tooling that Airfix (and Dapol)
never re-released ?
--
Laurie
kim
>I had been under the impression that the early releases were just detailed
>reworkings of their kit mouldings.
If you think about it that's impossible. The Kitmaster/Airfix kits were full of
separate components whereas the RTR bodies were produced virtually in one
piece. That requires a completely different mould.
(kim)
Laurie
Yes, it's obvious when you think about it properly.
Doh :-)
--
Laurie
David Costigan
rebuilt "Royal Scot"; the Kitmaster kit was for TT Gauge (3mm to the foot)
whereas the Airfix model was for OO Gauge, 4mm to the foot. I have also
seen somewhere that when Rosebud Kitmaster went out of business, Airfix
bought most of what was usable; unfortunately many of the Kitmaster moulds
were either life-expired or too badly damaged to re-use - hence the demise
of the kits for the Midland Pullman, the Italian tank, "Duchess of
Gloucester" etc. Hope this helps to answer the various questions. David
Costigan
"Laurie" <laur...@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:418000d4$0$10974$cc9e...@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
Andy Sollis- Churnet Valley model Railway Dept.
"David Costigan" <dcos...@ic24.net> wrote
Airfix
bought most of what was usable; unfortunately many of the Kitmaster moulds
were either life-expired or too badly damaged to re-use - hence the demise
of the kits
Were the rest (that are not in production today under Dapol) not lost in a
fire pre Llangollen days of Dapol? Chester way?
Gregory Procter
"Andy Sollis- Churnet Valley model Railway Dept." wrote:
> "David Costigan" <dcos...@ic24.net> wrote
> Airfix
> bought most of what was usable; unfortunately many of the Kitmaster moulds
> were either life-expired or too badly damaged to re-use - hence the demise
> of the kits
>
> Were the rest (that are not in production today under Dapol) not lost in a
> fire pre Llangollen days of Dapol? Chester way?
>
How did the moulds get damaged or worn so badly? Surely Kitmaster didn't stay
in production long enough for the moulds to get so worn and surely the most
popular models would have been those like the Pug and other British locos, not
the Italian Tank, BR23 and SNCF 4-8-2?
Were some perhaps milled from aluminium to save costs, or were they roughly
handled by the receivers agents???
Regards,
Greg.P.
Roger T.
"Gregory Procter" <pro...@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
news:418160B4...@ihug.co.nz...
Were not the Kitmaster moulds not damaged in a fire? I have this vague
recollection of reading about it somewhere, or was that another companies
moulds?
Gregory Procter
"Roger T." wrote:
I have a similar recollection regarding the moulds, under Dapol control, but
that was a long time later.
If only ... those European models had been to HO scale!!!
Regards,
Greg.P.
John Turner
"Roger T." wrote
> Were not the Kitmaster moulds not damaged in a fire? I have this vague
> recollection of reading about it somewhere, or was that another companies
> moulds?
Can't remember the actual circumstances, but I think loss &/or damage
occurred at they time they went into liquidation. It's all explained in the
book on the history of the company - but don't ask me its name.
John.
Alan P Dawes
John Turner <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> "Roger T." wrote
> John.
Would that be "Let's Stick Together An appreciation of Kitmaster and
Airfix Railway Kits" by Stephen Knight Irwell Press ISBN 1-871608-90-2 or
is there another book about Airfix?
Quoting one interesting section:
"However, during a period around the transition from Kitmaster to Airfix,
the tools were put into storage in a warehouse near Peterborough with a
leaking roof. Water coming through holes was channelled into tarpaulins
covering only some of the tools and thus found its way into others,
causing the case hardened steel to oxidise and therby producing tiny pits
in the surface of the tools. ......
The rust damage to the worst affected tools was thought to be irreversible
and a decision was taken to scrap these tools straight away."
Hope this clarifies things a little.
Alan
--
--. --. --. --. : : --- --- ----------------------------
|_| |_| | _ | | | | |_ | alan....@argonet.co.uk
| | |\ | | | | |\| | |
| | | \ |_| |_| | | |__ | Using an Acorn RiscPC
John Turner
"Alan P Dawes" wrote
> Would that be "Let's Stick Together An appreciation of Kitmaster and
> Airfix Railway Kits" by Stephen Knight Irwell Press ISBN 1-871608-90-2 or
> is there another book about Airfix?
Yup, that's the one I had in mind.
> Quoting one interesting section:
> "However, during a period around the transition from Kitmaster to Airfix,
> the tools were put into storage in a warehouse near Peterborough with a
> leaking roof. Water coming through holes was channelled into tarpaulins
> covering only some of the tools and thus found its way into others,
> causing the case hardened steel to oxidise and therby producing tiny pits
> in the surface of the tools. ......
> The rust damage to the worst affected tools was thought to be irreversible
> and a decision was taken to scrap these tools straight away."
>
> Hope this clarifies things a little.
Certainly did, thanks Alan. Can't blame Dapol for once.
John.
David Costigan
but the message about the leaky roof would explain how some of the moulds
might have got damaged. Gregory Procter queried the popularity of the
Italian Tank; my reaction also when I first saw this in the "Railway
Modeller" way back when I was much younger and the earth's surface was still
cooling down (about 1958/9). In many people's opinion the worst losses were
the excellent BR Mark 1 coaches, scale length, flush windows - they looked
better than the (then) Triang, had the length advantage over Hornby-Dublo
and scale advantage over Trix. Those were the days! David Costigan
Dick Ganderton
Bogies and pony trucks are intended to carry some of the weight of the
loco and act as an aid to 'steering' the loco. Give them some weight -
either with springing or compensation - and certainly give them some
form of centring.
Roger T. wrote:
>
snip
Roger T.
> That advice doesn't work with 4-4-0, 0-4-4, 2-4-0, 0-4-2, 2-2-2, 4-2-2.
That's true. You probably need the bogies and trucks to carry some weight
on these wheel arrangements.
> Bogies and pony trucks are intended to carry some of the weight of the
> loco and act as an aid to 'steering' the loco. Give them some weight -
> either with springing or compensation - and certainly give them some
> form of centring.
In the above, probably, but in other models, I don't think so.
They may serve that function in the real thing, but in models, they're there
the for the looks.