Hornby R30301TXS

BR, Class 08, 0-6-0, D3069 - Era 5 (Sound Fitted)

Manufacturer catalogue image - please note that pre-release images may be CAD renders or CGI images rather than photographs

Prototype Era
Era 5 (1957 to 1966) British Railways Late Crest

Manufacturer description

The Class 08 will go down in history as one of the most dependable shunters ever built. While all Class 08 shunters were built by British Railways they are actually based on an earlier LMS design. With 996 of these shunters built between 1953 and 1962, they are still a common sight at mainline yards and sidings, and a common sight on heritage railways, with the number preserved almost outnumbering those currently in service.

With no thought given to aesthetics, the Class 08 was a utilitarian workhorse of the railways, with its longevity speaking volumes to its performance. The locomotive would have a cab at the number one end and equipment housed in the long nose extending towards the number two end. 

While not intended for mainline duties, some of the class in the south could be seen trundling up the mainline if there was a short distance between yards that stock needed to be moved between, assuming no express services needed to occupy the track at the time.
D3069 was built in November 1953 as part of the first batch of Darlington built shunters. 

Initially, the locomotive was numbered 13069, with this number it was allocated to shed 38E in Woodford Halse in Northamptonshire. In 1957 it would see its first renumbering to D3069. The locomotive is one of a very small number of shunters to never receive a TOPS number, being absorbed by BR as departmental stock in July 1974. 

In departmental use it was renumbered to 966509 and it would wear this number until Jun 1979 when it left the departmental pool. The locomotive would be cut up in 1980 by BR at Thornaby, all traces of the locomotive were gone by the end of May.

Catalogue listing

Model details

Prototype information

^* Class names often change over the lifespan of a locomotive, so this is not necessarily the class name used by the operator in the period modelled.