Redcraft Barry B1

[BrianH]

I have just started to study the B1 kit prior to building and these are my initial impressions. First of all we must realise that this kit probably dates back to the 1980s and was no doubt designed with the best information available at the time and to the standards of the time.
The kit consists of a 15th brass etch for the body with additional sides for the modified GW bunker. The chassis is a very basic 18th nickel silver etch, coupling rods are supplied but no spacers. My first impression was that there are a lot of rivets to tap out, I must have spent a good hour doing them. Now to the dimensions; most are reasonably accurate and would give a good impression of a B1 if built as supplied but there are a few fairly major inaccuracies. Most noticeable is the length over the footplate which scales out to be 32' 9" at least a foot over length depending on which batch you are looking at. The boiler also is too long but only by a couple of mm and finally the height of the cab is about 1mm too high. I think it may be possible to modify some of the etches to minimise these errors but I will make sure before reaching for the file. Since the kit comes flat, the boiler will need to be rolled.
It was made clear in previous posts that only etching are supplied so this kit will probably be built as in basically Barry condition but with GW modifications since I can rustle up enough fittings from my spares box. I will keep you all informed with my progress.

One final point of interest has come to light when checking the dimensions. All source that I have come across state that the front overhang of the 1900 batches have a front overhang of 6'9" but when looked closely at the Sharp Stewart drawing E1138 dated February 1900 the measurement is given as 6'4" the same as the 1894 locos, no doubt to save making a new drawing with only this alteration.

[Newport_rod]

Thanks for the report Brian. I'll follow progress eagerly.

[signal demon]

Hi Brian,
I was just previewing my previous post regarding the above and noticed that 'Hello' came out as 'Hell Brian'. In trying to edit it, it 'flew'. My apologies ! D

[signal demon]

Hi Brian,
I have a feeling that my post regarding the B and B1 classes has gone astray during my efforts at editing, so I will repeat it hopefully.
In short, the B classes had two boilers, the original being a version of the A class boiler and the later Bs having a larger type known as a B1 boiler, which only served to classify the boiler.
These later boilers were used on the B1 locos and this led to extension of the footplating by 6 inches.
The B1s are similar to the Bs but had higher tanks to provide additional water capacity for longer runs between fills. Good weight diagrams appear in the Oakwood Press book by Mountford, 'The Barry Railway', and show excellent photos and measurements for comparisons. As built, both classes had coal rail bunkers, but a lot were rebuilt with curved top bunkers and sheeting extensions.
If you have access to the Gauge 0 Guild Gazette, you may wish to turn up an article which I wrote on the conversion of a David Andrews kit for the A class into a B. See November 2013 issue.
The heading photo was a compilation error and shows a TVR loco. This was rectified in the following issue.
I appreciate that you are building a B1, but it may provide food for thought.

[BrianH]

Thanks for the reply Signal Demon, I should have made it clear in the original post that I am working in 4mm. I have used the Mountford drawing and the ones in Russell's book plus the SS general arrangement to help identify any problems and accept that there will have to be compromises.

Brian

[Newport_rod]

Chris
Thanks for posting those.
Not being a Barry man myself I wonder if anyone can identify whether the T L Jones drawing depicts a Vulcan Foundry, Société Franco-Belge, or Sharp, Stewart & Co loco? That is if the differences would be apparent anyway. And if the last whether it is from the 1890, 1894 or 1900 batch?

[Rhobat Bryn]

I am unable to see Dragonman's attachments. Can anybody help?

[BrianH]

Chris,
Thanks for the drawings, they are beautifully clear and ideal for modelling, with the proviso that I have not compared them to the GA drawings.

Rod.

As far as I can tell different batches of B1s are basically the same, the main difference that I have noticed are as follows.

Sharp Stewart 1890 (Nos. 38 - 46) 6'1" front overhang and a square bunker. Footplate valance is straight by the buffer beams.
Vulcan 1892 (54 - 63) 6'1" front overhang and a curved bunker. Straight valance.
Sharp Stewart 1894 (73 - 78) 6'4" front overhang and a curved bunker. Valances rounded at the ends. Vacuum fitted from new.
Sharp Stewart 1900 (105 - 116) 6'9" front overhang and curved bunker. Valences rounded and vacuum fitted.
Franco Belge 1900 (122 - 126) As Sharp Stewart 1900 locos. According to the RCTS Sharp Stewart supplied Franco Belge with drawings and some patterns.

All versions had continuous handrails except the 1900 Sharp Stewart locos which had a curved rail over the smokebox door which was not joined to the rail along the boiler. The curved bunker versions were built with open coal rails which over time were filled in.

From this information I would deduce that the Barry drawing BRL.7 is base on the Vulcan locos and the GW drawing is based on the 1900 locos. In both drawings the different front overhangs are noted. The rebuilt locos had GW S/9 boilers which are virtually the same as a Dean goods which has given me ideas, if only I could find a cheap non working Airfix model!

I hope this helps.

Brian