Bee - What do you think about Rockets Tender being used for Tigers Wagons?

[JJ73]

I've just watched Sam's Trains Review on the Tiger Train Pack & he has pointed out that the Wagons are actually Rocket's Tender - See @ 7:35

All Hornby has done is painted it Brown, removed the Barrel & added a side to fill in the gap! 🤔🚂

[LTSR_NSE]

@jj - Bee has already posted an extremely detailed thread on this exact train pack!

https://uk.hornby.com/community/forum/review-of-r30233-lmr58-tiger-train-pack-344657

[JJ73]

Oh ok - Thanks 🙂🚂

[What About The Bee]

Hi JJ 👋

Rather than have you read that lengthy post, I will answer your question directly

A summary of what you asked is "What do I think of Hornby using some older tooling for new (and different) models?"

I think it is perfectly OKAY!

Here are some questions you didn't ask

Are the Hornby Coal Wagons authentic?

We have several period images of these wagons, in use, on the LMR. What they are not are "coal wagons". They were utility wagons, used in maintenance of way, spoilage hauling, & etc. These are the wagons used at the Rainhill Trials.

What about the other Coal Wagons Sam shows?

Those are Intermodal Coal Wagons, championed by the LMR. We have excellent mechanical drawings of them in Nicholas Wood 1834. They held the same volume of coal in the two boxes as in one chaldron, a standard unit of measure. The boxes could easily lift off the undercarriage and be placed elsewhere. What Sam didn't state is that the collieries flatly rejected these wagons and refused to purchase them. The LMR was forced to accept chaldrons as the collieries had an enormous imvestment in them and weren't about to change. So, while authentic, the LMR Intermodal Coal Wagons had an extremely brief period of use.

Get chaldrons instead. Wood, 1834 also documents chaldrons with mechanical drawings. 

What of Sam's Intermodal Wagons?

The reason Sam had such difficulty keeping his wagons coupled to Tiger is that his finescale peg was too low. I had similar issues when I modified the old Hornby carriages. 

I am also very concerned about the stability of the print material Sam uses. Old Triang acetate models warped and, per Pete Waterman, the material Sam uses will as well.

Is it fair to knock Hornby's coal wagons?

Not if you understand their actual, documented use. Sam does not, and so he constantly refers to them as Rocket Tenders. They were utility wagons and as such, were used at the trials in a utility sense. San Pareil also is depicted with this same utility wagon / tender. 

Further, is it fair to knock Hornby's wagons while pushing your own?

Not if you expect to be perceived as an honest and fair reviewer.

Is Sam knowledgeable about the LMR?

No. Flatly no.

Sam is unaware of the "as found" Lion photos. That is what Hornby based Tiger on and that is just cracking!

Sam is unaware of the actual use of the Hornby coal wagons.

Sam also shows us a 1st Glass carriage and says it is true to the prototype "as far as he knows", a phrase he uses repeatedly. Sadly, no. It is true to the 1930s reproductions, but clearly, in some areas, it does not match the mechanical drawings we do have

What do I think of Sam?

He is very knowledgeable about how models work and can provide us with valuable information comparing one model to another.

I do not care about his opinion about the cost. It tells me more about his station in life than anything else. I can decide for myself if the model is worth it (hint: Tiger is!!)

At 9:07 of the video, Sam states that Hornby is "contemptible".  This forum will not permit negativity, so may I state that I am positive that Sam does not possess a mirror.

Bee

[What About The Bee]

Hi LT&SR_NSE 👋

Thank you for pointing out that topic for JJ. I didn't mind answering his question and more.

I also provide proof that Hornby's Coal Wagons were used at the Rainhill Trials here

https://uk.hornby.com/community/forum/200th-anniversary-rainhill-trials-1829-2029-328559?ccm_paging_p=1#end-of-replies

I haven't bothered with the evidence that they were used in a utility wagon way, but will if interest is expressed.

Bee

[LTSR_NSE]

@bee it certainly wasn’t my intention to prevent any questions from being asked or answered.

I simply wanted to ensure that JJ (and anyone else who looks at this thread) has instant access to your excellent & highly relevant thread too.

Personally I’m glad you did answer (and weren’t unintentionally discouraged) since your reply included additional highly relevant information.

[Fazy]

Sam is a Vlogger, not a historian, he has very limited knowledge on the subject of railway history.

his knowledge of model trains is also sketchy at times.

but people seem to like him, if your after seeing a model on a layout… well track on a carpet in his case to help you decide wither you buy a certain model then, he’s as good or as bad as the next vlogger

[ColinB]

Actually Fazy Sam in one of his videos did explain about the carpet and I doubt for the little time he runs the trains it doesn't make that much difference. If it was a long (I am not allowed to put its name, this editer can't distinguish) pile one then perhaps it might effect it, but his isn't. We also don't have those open frame Triang motors anymore plus most final drive gears are covered. A lot of people have layouts in lofts and sheds where they can pick up all sorts of things, cobwebs etc. Many of the locos he tests I have and generally he is spot on with his review, the only one he really got wrong was the 9F, but then he was unlucky or Hornby were at fault for supplying one with a duff motor.

As to the coal wagons, I got the opinion that was something he had researched because he actually produced a realistic set of wagons and as he pointed out he wasn't the only one to point out the fault, I suspect there is already a thread on RMWeb. Seeing as Simon whines on about detail all the time I am surprised they made that compromise especially when they made all that fuss in the TV program about moving the 9F wheels equidistant to each other, which most people wouldn't have noticed anyway. I definitely didn't when I compared my new one with the original Railroad version I have.

Now I am not a great social media fan, but YouTube is the equivalent of reading a journal there are good reviews and bad ones. Sam relies on people watching his channel to make money and generally with most data, if you spend long enough on the web you can find out enough which I suspect is how he knows. So just because he is a Vlogger that does not mean he is brain dead. So he doesn't have to be a historian just read what said person has posted, that is how we learn.

[JJ73]

Thank you Bee 🙂 for answering my question - very knowledgeable

Here is a Clickable link - 200th Anniversary: Rainhill Trials 1829-2029 :: Hornby Hobbies

I do like reading / enjoy about this info that you & other provide, but to be honest it kinda goes in 1 ear & come out the other & there is nothing in-between to stop it!!! 😀 But in saying that - some times I do pick up some of it & try my best to remember as much as possible!!! I do like those 4 images in your other post thou 🙂🚂

[What About The Bee]

Hi JJ 👋

It is perfectly okay to ask me anything you like. I will answer your questions, within reason.

I'm not about to play tricks or games on you, I will treat you fairly and kindly. I'm certainly not going to make fun of you.

I'm glad you like the answers and images. Its part of me sharing my enthusiasm for the Liverpool and Manchester Railway.

Just so you know, I really do like your posts and your layout.

Hang in there JJ.

your friend

Bee

[threelink]

Is it not possible or even probable that the Rocket and Lion tenders were created by adapting a pre-existing design of wagon - adding a barrel/keg and modifying the front section to take coal? If that is so, the wagon design by Hornby will be corrrect.

[ColinB]

@threelink you may well be right but if that was the case then Hornby should have taken the design for the Rocket tender and then added the 4th side to the CAD. They then should have made the trucks from that design. Their current implementation just says bodge by adding that extra side with a separate piece. As Simon says it is all about the detail.

[Bulleidboy]

That seems a very plausible explanation threelink.

[threelink]

@CO I agree that the end product may be a bit sparse on detail such as a representation of internal plank lines but the end door is, I think, prototypical. Speaking puely personally I think Hornby have done well to produce a very acceptable (if rather basic) wagon from existing tooling and thereby, I presume, kept down costs and therefore prices. Early railways are a fascination but, again personally, I could not afford any of these new releases - I am happy with the old Triang Rocket and non-powered locos, kit bashed or scratch built, pushed about by powered carriages (it is easy enough to power them). I am an inveterate bodger and mean old man so leave judgement of Hornby's efforts to those better qualified than I and to those who are paying for them. I wonder what Hornby will come up with next.

[JJ73]

Arrrr thanks Bee - What a Lovely / kind thing to say 🙂🤗🚂

[What About The Bee]

Hi ThreeLink 👋.

You are indeed correct. A wagon was adapted for the Trials. This was an impromptu tender. Generation 1 tenders

The first important change was efficiency. Barrels could hold water, but were entirely wasteful of space. A square metal box fit the space so much better!

Generation 2 tenders

An example of a generation 2 tender.

The lads realized that the entire thing could be made of metal.

Generation 3 tenders.

Bee

[threelink]

Hi, Bee. The illustrations are most interesting. Some years ago I made up an old kit of Trevithic's Pen y Darren loco. In the absence of any reliable illustration and disbelieving that the loco could have run without some means of replenishing the water in the boiler, I concocted a tender with a water box. It resembles the LMR second generation tender very closely. I also took the liberty of adding a representation of a force pump driven from the crosshead. I have no idea whether the prototype was so fitted, but it felt right.

[What About The Bee]

Hi ThreeLink 👋

The transitional Generation 2 tender is on my list of things to do. Fairly easy to take a 1980s Rocket tender and cut the barrel out and replacing it with a simple box. A little more effort yields rivets and a funnel. With the new Hornby utility ("coal") wagons, I can skip the cutting the barrel out step!

A detail which has eluded me is how the water was moved from the tender into the boiler.

A main axle water pump seems likely, with a diversion of water back to the tender when not required. In other words, the pump functioned to draw water from the tender, no matter what. Yet where it pumped the water to could be selected. Either into the boiler or the tender.

Steam injection was off in the future, so we can discount that method.

Always something new to discover!

Bee