Garden Railway Forum

I would quite like a model of the Earl as built

I think the chequer plate and slab sides were quite fetching, if only they had put wasp stripes on the ends as well.......

TonyW wrote: Mon Nov 05, 2018 3:14 pm There are several of those Bachmann electric Fairlies around painted as Merddin, and that too is a model of DLG!

Here is one of said beasties which I am perfectly happy with, despite the list of imperfections from the original. The main concern (for me) is to create the image of the loco, which I personally think is a thing of beauty, as well as being a mechanical marvel.....

Found an url with more info:http://www.livingsteam.no/arkiv/2261

Very nice but not for me.

Nice but like it's single Fairlie counterpart the riveting is a little bit clunky.

John

What a lovely looking loco

Released today and avaible to order once R/H open on 2nd Jan.
£ 4100

I think the current wife would be removing various underused parts of my anatomy if I even thought about it.

Not one for me. Apart from being unaffordable it's not one on my wanted list.

It's right up my street! It'll have a good turn of speed like the single.

You can buy a 5" gauge loco for that price.

tom_tom_go wrote: Mon Dec 31, 2018 8:58 pm You can buy a 5" gauge loco for that price.

Ahem, I have four large scale engines that cost me less than that in total. (Cough, cough don't tell the wife.)

Hydrostatic Dazza wrote: Tue Jan 01, 2019 8:54 pm The cost is what it is, it what it has to be. Roundhouse is not a charity, they pay their workers, holidays, sick leave, etc. They have to send their kids to school. They have to devote time and a profit % to new product development or perish, they store stock, they give customer service, it is a profession, not a hobby. They still exist unlike many other pretenders that came and are gone. If one has been in business then there is an appreciation of the costs that keep rolling in and the list is getting longer. Just think of the computer costs and back up of their data, adverts, attending shows, the workshop and depreciation of tools and machines.
Please do not compare what a professional concerns does to some one who made a loco over 2-maybe 10 years who sells it for a price that works out as $1.65 per hour labour after costs are deducted.

I fully agree, I think RH engines are very good value. I think in relative terms 16mm locos are cheaper than they ever have been. I don't think there is any profiteering being done by any of the major manufactures at the moment.

I should also add that all the large scale PMR locos have been purchased in a very, very second hand condition.

There are some receptive comments on here about it's price. It's really down to who wants one and if they can afford it. I do think it's a really nice loco, but at the price, it's well out of my league.

Still don't understand why a push you, pull me loco is needed. But it's nice all the same.

FWLR wrote: Wed Jan 02, 2019 9:02 amStill don't understand why a push you, pull me loco is needed. But it's nice all the same.

In full-size form the answer is simple. Instead of using two small locos (needed to cope with the curves) with two crews use two small-but-coupled-back-to-back locos with only one crew. A 50% labour saving right there.

Not every railway who tried them got on with the Double Fairlie concept though. For example, storage for fuel is always at a premium, so restricting their range.

Thanks Tony...

Irrespective of the price, my preference is for tank engines and tender engines. As the owner of a Roundhouse (and Accucraft) loco I think they are excellent value for money and I have nothing but praise for Roundhouse quality and service. For me it comes down to personal preference. As nice as it is it just doesn't feature on my 'wants' list. If I was spending £4100 on steam loco(s) there are other's I'd prefer. For those that want a double Fairlie now's your chance to make a purchase.

Does the model have two separate boilers, or are the halves conjoined in some way? Is it controlled with one regulator, or two?

For that matter, I suppose I have the same questions about the full-sized article!

TonyW wrote: Wed Jan 02, 2019 9:37 am Not every railway who tried them got on with the Double Fairlie concept though. For example, storage for fuel is always at a premium, so restricting their range.

An issue with the Double Fairlie concept, compared to other articulated steam loco designs, is that the more powerful you make it, the more fuel and water you want on board... but the less space there is for them.

Another potential inherent drawback is that water and fuel consumption reduces adhesion (as with Garratts, although the SAR GMAM partially avoided this by having its principal water store in a separate tender-wagon).

CSL wrote: Wed Jan 02, 2019 5:37 pmAnother potential inherent drawback is that water and fuel consumption reduces adhesion ...

Ah yes, the "fun" of the second trip on an NGG16 on a wet day from Caernarfon up the hill to Dinas on the Welsh Highland is something I won't forget. The front water tank would be filled to the brim, but the oil tank in the back bunker would by this time be half empty (and not re-filled until the end of the day). So, the front end would plod away quite happily but the back end would be slipping hopelessly due to lack of adhesive weight. Using the sanders didn't make much difference as they are on the front engine, and once its ten wheels had passed over the sand there wasn't much left on the railhead.

And then the steel oil tanks were replaced by much smaller and lighter plastic tanks, so it happened on the first trip as well...

Booked for, I think, 15 minutes, my record was 54 minutes to do the journey. Happy days!