Stirling Single

This forum is for the discussion of railway modelling of the LNER and its constituent companies.

Moderators: 52D, Tom F, Rlangham, Atlantic 3279, Blink Bonny, Saint Johnstoun, richard

Rapidobill
NER Y7 0-4-0T
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 7:07 pm

Re: Stirling Single

Post by Rapidobill »

Hi All,

I have spent the past week immersed in the Stirling Single and realize that I cannot hope to but scratch the surface of the knowledge here! :oops:

It is very early in the game, and no final decisions have been made as to powering, "wheel arrangement" (4-2-2, 0-6-2, etc) and the like. Jason and I will certainly be as open as possible during the development process, and are open to informed and reasonable input. (In fact, I may soon be begging for it!)

I am currently at the lovely (?!) Manchester Airport Bewley's hotel and will be flying back tomorrow morning. As a result, I will be on line only sporadically for a couple of days, but I will check in as I can.

Thanks in advance for your help!

Bill Schneider
Rapido Trains
S.A.C. Martin

Re: Stirling Single

Post by S.A.C. Martin »

Jason, I am gratified you are here and that you have taken the time to post. I've been impressed with your production of the APT and can assure you that any misgivings I have are purely based on the fact you've not (to my knowledge) done a steam locomotive before. I've every confidence in your ability to deliver a product, however, and the samples of APT are testament to your work.
rapidotrains
NER Y7 0-4-0T
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 3:30 pm

Re: Stirling Single

Post by rapidotrains »

S.A.C. Martin wrote:Jason, I am gratified you are here and that you have taken the time to post. I've been impressed with your production of the APT and can assure you that any misgivings I have are purely based on the fact you've not (to my knowledge) done a steam locomotive before. I've every confidence in your ability to deliver a product, however, and the samples of APT are testament to your work.
Thanks!

It's true Rapido hasn't done a steamer before but Bill has extensive experience modelling in steam and two of our engineers in China designed steam engines when they worked at Kader.

I'm confident it will work well. Simply put, it won't be released until it does!

The APT-E presented huge challenges to us as we had never designed a model that could tilt while going around #2 curves. Now we have.... :D

Best regards,

Jason
john coffin
LNER V2 2-6-2 'Green Arrow'
Posts: 1087
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 12:24 am

Re: Stirling Single

Post by john coffin »

I to am happy that Jason has got here, if he is anything like Rob at Lee Valley/ Veritas Tools in Canada, then it will be useful.

One final final point about my interest in the early tender behind No 1. I was worried when, having been part of the group that re-found
1002 and promoted its restoration in the early part of this century, I was worried that the other tender would be scrapped with no
understanding of its historical importance.
Although I think it was built in about 1867-9, in its later revenue career, it was towed by a loco which could trace its roots
back to the beginning of the GNR. 112A was a loco originally ordered in 1848 by Benjamin Cubitt, the first Loco Engineer of the GNR,
so there is through the tender a direct link back to the beginning. To me well worth preserving even now.

Paul
User avatar
teaky
NBR D34 4-4-0 'Glen'
Posts: 278
Joined: Sun May 04, 2008 8:56 pm

Re: Stirling Single

Post by teaky »

MREmag today has an article on the Stirling Single that includes a couple of side-by-side photographs which allow an easy comparison of how the locomotive looks with each of the tenders.

There is also formal confirmation of Simon Kohler's appointment as Locomotion Models Manager. A good thing, I feel.
M Gair
NER J27 0-6-0
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:14 am
Location: Bendigo Australia
Contact:

Re: Stirling Single

Post by M Gair »

The plan release of a high spec Stirling Single will be much awaited. Many sold to collectors.
I will order mine next week with an initial deposit. Credit card cycle ends.

I saw it in 2011 at Shildon. They were working on it in the yard and the chimney was sitting in the tender.
Took a few photos and some video footage.
I will run some Hornby LNER Clerestory Teaks behind it. These are light and look the part, though not really authentic. I have added some internal details.

I see that Locomotion models has signed up Simon K as there manager. I think he will bring some good experience and sales know how to the NRM/Locomotion models, not to say what he has heard from punters what they want.
I think we may see some exciting new NRM/Locomotion Models in the future.

Mark in OZ
majormagna
H&BR Q10 0-8-0
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 9:41 pm
Location: North Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Stirling Single

Post by majormagna »

john coffin wrote: Although I think it was built in about 1867-9, in its later revenue career, it was towed by a loco which could trace its roots
back to the beginning of the GNR. 112A was a loco originally ordered in 1848 by Benjamin Cubitt, the first Loco Engineer of the GNR,
so there is through the tender a direct link back to the beginning. To me well worth preserving even now.
I was wondering if there'd be any support given towards the construction of a "dummy" locomotive to match the Sturrock tender; it'd certainly be interesting.
Moors Bound
john coffin
LNER V2 2-6-2 'Green Arrow'
Posts: 1087
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 12:24 am

Re: Stirling Single

Post by john coffin »

ALL my work, and people still call it a Sturrock tender.

However, the idea of a full size static engine, whilst appealing does create problems in terms of what drawings would be available.
So far we have found very few Sturrock Loco drawings let alone the tenders, and certainly few detail drawings, cylinders etc.

Paul
majormagna
H&BR Q10 0-8-0
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 9:41 pm
Location: North Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Stirling Single

Post by majormagna »

john coffin wrote:ALL my work, and people still call it a Sturrock tender.
My apologies, I'm not particularly active on the forums. What is the tender then?
Moors Bound
Hatfield Shed
LNER A4 4-6-2 'Streak'
Posts: 1664
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 3:34 pm

Re: Stirling Single

Post by Hatfield Shed »

Majormagna wrote:...I was wondering if there'd be any support given towards the construction of a "dummy" locomotive to match the ... old tender; it'd certainly be interesting.
There are enough photos of the 'Large Hawthorns' which had a tender somewhat like, that a conjectural wood built reconstruction would be possible. For my money, only worth doing if the NRM would then commit to always showing the Doncaster development at a single location: Early GN loco (conjectural replica) Stirling single, small atlantic, large atlantic, pacific or two That the artefacts uniquely still exist to show such a development line at a locomotive works should be celebrated properly.
User avatar
teaky
NBR D34 4-4-0 'Glen'
Posts: 278
Joined: Sun May 04, 2008 8:56 pm

Re: Stirling Single

Post by teaky »

Majormagna wrote:
john coffin wrote:ALL my work, and people still call it a Sturrock tender.
My apologies, I'm not particularly active on the forums. What is the tender then?

For some reason the information relating to the Stirling Single tenders has been posted on the "NRM Bachmann C1 Atlantic" thread.
john coffin
LNER V2 2-6-2 'Green Arrow'
Posts: 1087
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 12:24 am

Re: Stirling Single

Post by john coffin »

I have actually put stuff in both threads, but I agree that majority is in the part about the Bachmann C1, it started because of the comments about
tender 1002, and I got carried away.

What many may not realise is the real dichotomy of the Stirling and Sturrock tender saga is the number of tenders listed in the Doncaster tender list.The tender list was actually originally created in around 1896, and only shows 7 tenders from before Stirling took over, but only a couple can be identified
as Sturrock items, and they mostly are basically related to the Steam tender. Yet, outside, the list we found 3 other items which were plainly Sharp Stewart designs, and that is part of why I believe that the other smaller tender is a Stirling one.

Having re measured the body of the early tender behind No 1, at Shildon a couple of weeks ago, I am just sorting out the details as a drawing overlay
to confirm various other parts of data I have to re affirm my idea about it being a Stirling.

Paul
john coffin
LNER V2 2-6-2 'Green Arrow'
Posts: 1087
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 12:24 am

Re: Stirling Single

Post by john coffin »

In addition, a really interesting idea is that in a total of 30 years, of Stirling's time at Doncaster as Loco Engineer, there are only a total
of 15 tender drawings in the R list. Of these, one is for the 4 wheeler used behind some of the Stirling 0-4-2 class 18 locos, and another
two are not complete drawings. One being a tank, the other a set of frames..

It is to me at least, that there are so few GA's over this period, and it suggests that the Tender Drawing office had a lot of work done without
providing full drawings. This is why some of the photos of, particularly inside spring tenders show different things, like cut outs that are different
from those in the drawings. Experience of Doncaster practice suggests that contractors who built stuff after building started there in 1867
often put their own expression on certain things. Indeed, if you look at photos of Steam Tenders there are differences there too, so it is not unusual.

What we do not know is how many tender designs were not registered in the R list, because they no longer existed, and of course we know for
sure that Doncaster Tender drawing office re used certain drawing masters. That on R16 shows this for sure. It is also possible that some Stirling
tenders did not make it into Ivatt's time. Certainly though, many Sturrock tenders retained outside springs until 1905, we have a picture of some
awaiting conversion to goods brake vans and they have frames above the soleplate.

Oh the joys of looking at early history that no one else thought was too interesting.
Paul
rapidotrains
NER Y7 0-4-0T
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 3:30 pm

Re: Stirling Single

Post by rapidotrains »

john coffin wrote:ALL my work, and people still call it a Sturrock tender.

However, the idea of a full size static engine, whilst appealing does create problems in terms of what drawings would be available.
So far we have found very few Sturrock Loco drawings let alone the tenders, and certainly few detail drawings, cylinders etc.

Paul
I had to deal with the same issue here in Canada with our recent locomotive, a 1950s-built "road switcher" called the GMD-1. A road switcher is geared for 65 MPH to pull trains on the mainline but it has visibility at both ends for shunting in the yard. The GMD-1 is unique to Canada.

The Canadian Trackside Guide and other documents referred to the locomotive as a GMD1. But our GAs, our builder manuals, our CN documents, and our painting and lettering blueprints all unanimously included the hyphen in GMD-1. I sent an email to the editor of the major Canadian rail news magazine and the Trackside Guide explaining my sources and he replied that it should be GMD1 as various magazines used the term as well as Wikipedia and Google.

We often run into this issue of sources with enthusiastic laypeople doing research. I patiently explained that all of his sources were secondary and tertiary sources, whereas my sources were primary sources. I also explained that, according to Google, half a million people think "parallel" is spelled "paralell" but that doesn't make it correct.

It took almost three years, but with a concerted effort the locomotive is now more often referred to in the hobby press as the GMD-1, including in the Canadian Trackside Guide.

Nobody cares about this on the planet except for me, but it's a small victory nevertheless!

-Jason
User avatar
Atlantic 3279
LNER A4 4-6-2 'Streak'
Posts: 6527
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 9:51 am
Location: 2850, 245

Re: Stirling Single

Post by Atlantic 3279 »

A couple of thoughts regarding the nature of the Stirling single model:

1. Drive layout: I see no reason for the manufacturers to be wary of the possibility of driving additional sets of wheels (most obviously those under the cab) in search of better traction, even though the wheel diameters are different. Despite a few percent error in the gear ratio as compared to the relative wheel diameters, the additional drive to the carrying axle under the cab of my GN Atlantic produces very good results. The loco on test at the weekend strolled up a decent gradient towards the new flyover connection on the developing "Grantham" layout at walking pace, with a goods train in tow, without wheel slip. at the other end of the scale of performance the loco is quite happy to gallop along with a passenger train without excessive consumption of power or heating of the motor, so the friction due to the extra gears used to transmit the drive is evidently not a killer problem.

2. Bogie and cylinder clearances: If the model MUST be made to suit those who want to run it on a toy trainset rather than a model railway, I would NOT want to see clearances in this area opened up in the standard model by distorting dimensions to an obvious degree, eliminating bogie wheel "mudguards" or hacking chunks out the cylinder shapes. Far better to keep the standard model looking "right" and to offer those who only want a toy an alternative "wrong" bogie with smaller wheels plus either smaller mudguards to match, or no mudguards at all. That way, those who want a model with correct appearance for use on more realistically modelled track can have just that. Those who don't use anything approaching realistic "toy" track cannot complain if they have to use smaller bogie wheels under their toy locos.
Most subjects, models and techniques covered in this thread are now listed in various categories on page1

Dec. 2018: Almost all images that disappeared from my own thread following loss of free remote hosting are now restored.
Post Reply