Jump to content
 

Rapido LB&SCR Class E1 0-6-0T


sem34090
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Premium

Interesting . Haven’t we got a lot of Southernish tanks appearing at moment ? I’m thinking Hattons little 0-6-0 , is it a P, aren’t Dapol doing a Terrier? I admit I don’t know what an E1 is , but they all look pretty similar to me . Is there really a demand for all these 0-6-0 tanks ?

There are lots of GWR 0-6-0 tanks and they all look the same to me. As do the different versions of BR 08 shunters. The E1 is a grownup Terrier. Very useful for Brighton and the Isle of Wight.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting . Haven’t we got a lot of Southernish tanks appearing at moment ? I’m thinking Hattons little 0-6-0 , is it a P, aren’t Dapol doing a Terrier? I admit I don’t know what an E1 is , but they all look pretty similar to me . Is there really a demand for all these 0-6-0 tanks ?

 

The question is good. Terriers and P's and even B4s are really small tank locos, they are all seriously dwarfed by Bachmann's Midland 1F and not much bigger than Modelrails Sentinal tank. Only the USA tank is an 0-6-0 of some substantial size.

 

Out of the 10 choices in MR questionnaire earlier this year, I am surprised that this ended up being chosen. I was expecting the VoR narrow gauge loco to come out on top (Terrier aside -but that was announced elsewhere since), maybe it did but they could be waiting to see how the next batch of Heljan Lyn's shape up (a related design) before further work.

 

The questionnaire was well written, asking first if you were interested in such-n-such loco (my answer to the E1 was no) and then asking if one was announced, would I buy, if so, how many would I buy and what colours (my answer for the E1 was just one and most likely in BR). It also asked if I would buy the E1R derivative (my answer yes because it is in effect another class). I know others are like "well, I'm pretty well done for SR tanks thank you" and even I hesitated somewhat.

 

The other 9 choices were quite good, I seriously did not expect the E1 to beat most of them but there we go. It is odd that the smallest of the 4 grouping regions is as popular or more popular than its much bigger cousins. Maybe it could be because it handled mostly people than freight.

 

Finally 2020 is a way off and all the Southern items will have arrived by then. I'll only go for 1 though as my southern shunting engines (will) have had a big boost by then (3 USA tanks, 5 P class, 3 new terriers, 2 B4s).

Edited by JSpencer
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

There are lots of GWR 0-6-0 tanks and they all look the same to me.

 

Don't worry, they do to everyone, which was rather the point!

 

Family resemblance, but with fascinating variations, is the result of a policy of standardisation, and we certainly see this with Stroudley's designs.

 

And there is something satisfying about the Stroudley family resemblance.  While each individually is an attractive design, am I alone in thinking that, say, an A1, D1 and E1 together - the same but different - would in itself be an attractive proposition?

 

I like the looks of the E1.  Yes, it is a stretched Terrier, or seems so if you have looked at more models or pictures of Terriers than you have of E1s, but in many ways the less compact proportions of the E1 confer a more elegant appearance, and the elements certainly appear well-balanced to the eye. 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The E1 doesn't have the "pretty" factor of the P, it looks like a Terrier on steroids.  However, you can't have too many Panniers!!!  :jester:

 

Nahhh. Those panniers all look the same!  :jester: 

 

Hat, coat, trousers ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I must say it is funny someone commenting that this:

2012-isle-of-wight-steam-railway-havenst

Is too similar to this:

secr_178_and_bluebell_323_by_mrathehedge

 

Yet isn't commenting that this:

4482106446_98277f9733_b.jpg

Looks much like this:

f800f1cfc20ffe92853694dbb1d55ee6.jpg

 

Yes I see your point now .  I didn't quite get the scale of it before . Not knowing anything about Southern Tanks I thought it looked pretty much like a Terrier and couldn't figure out why someone would produce something similar . I wasn't aware of the 16xx at the time , and again although I have 57XX, 64XX and 87XX panniers , I'm not too aware of the differences between classes.  From my point of view  I think they are pretty much "me too" products  unlike the J70 Tram engine or USA tank that are quite distinctive .  Not for me, but I congratulate Model Rail on commissioning models that will appeal to Southern and Western enthusiasts , who do know the differences!

 

Looks like Rapido are entering the UK market through commissions or manufacturing deals , NRM, Real-track and Model Rail. Yet another sign the market is changing and I suspect more bad news for established suppliers(saturation of new models) and local model shops.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Until very recently I was under the impression there were only two panniers, the 'Duck' one 57xx and the 'blocky' one 94xx, that is how much I thought they looked the same :P , when I was even younger, I assumed 'pannier' was the class name and the ones like 'Duck' were the only ones  :P .

 

I admit, as a Brightonian modeller, the E3 & E4 look almost identical, to me anyway...

Edited by GreenGiraffe22
Link to post
Share on other sites

Panniers!  Although there were Panniers on the GW before the Great War, there are largely a more modern phenomenon, so comparing their standardised appearance with that of a Stroudley design of the 1870s is a little chalk and cheese, though, one could say that Stroudley's tanks all look the same to an extent.  I will spare blushes, but I have come across a member, far from ignorant, mistaking a picture of a D1 with a Terrier. I assume there was insufficient to indicate relative scale and that a brief glance failed to spot that the rear wheel was a large trailing wheel, looking only a little smaller than the 2 coupled wheels. 

 

The focus of the proprietary industry upon late Grouping and Nationalised railways means that we are apt to overlook the fact that contemporary GW designs exhibited all the Victorian character and charisma of Stroudley-era locomotive design.

 

So, to continue the digression, some Panniers started as saddle tanks while later classes were built as Panniers. Wheel sizes differed, allowing classes to be grouped, but there were many, many classes!

 

Some were Swindon and others Wolverhampton; each doing the same things differently. The swopping of different boiler types every few years, which cut across the classes, added almost infinite variety to the saddle tanks, with different tanks to fit different boilers.   

 

Of course, by WR days the various surviving and new classes had a more standardised look, but taken as a whole, the superficial similarities between different Pannier classes disguise what is, in fact, a ...... 

post-25673-0-95111100-1528276011.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Interesting . Haven’t we got a lot of Southernish tanks appearing at moment ? I’m thinking Hattons little 0-6-0 , is it a P, aren’t Dapol doing a Terrier? I admit I don’t know what an E1 is , but they all look pretty similar to me . Is there really a demand for all these 0-6-0 tanks ?

I am confident the commissioner has done his homework, and concluded that there are niches in the Southern Small Tank market yet to be filled, and his choice is a sound one IMHO. The Terrier and E4 are each a size different, there were 80 of these, they lasted well into BR days, and multiple examples were sold off by the Brighton across the country. Rugeley Colliery comes to mind. (Sherry taught in Rugeley at one time.) Suggestions that this loco duplicates P or B4 are meaningless. They were from different railways, and there are scant locations where an E1 could substitute for the others. Southern was never one big homogeneous railway, any more than the other Big 3, and locos often remained on or about their original Pre-Grouping patch.

 

These will sell like hot cakes, and I bet there are more Southern Small Tanks to come.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

The E1 doesn't have the "pretty" factor of the P, it looks like a Terrier on steroids.  However, you can't have too many Panniers!!!  :jester:

 

Well there were over 3000 of them.

 

 

 

Why build loads of classes of non standard or compatible locomotives when you have a range of locomotives that were different sizes yet had many exchangeable parts? It's no accident that the only mainline locomotives to last in service past the end of BR steam were Panniers on both the NCB and LT.

 

What replaced all those Southern Tank engines? You guessed it, Pannier Tanks. So those with a Southern layout post 1960ish would probably need more Pannier Tanks than E1s.

 

 

 

Jason

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

 

What replaced all those Southern Tank engines? You guessed it, Pannier Tanks. So those with a Southern layout post 1960ish would probably need more Pannier Tanks than E1s.

 

 

 

Jason

All those Southern Tanks? Most of the small tank classes we are seeing modelled were very old by Nationalisation, so replacing them with newer locos made sense, of course. But by the time the panniers appeared most of them had already gone. The Brighton, in particular, was essentially a tank-engine railway, with a large and complex suburban network serving South London from Victoria and London Bridge, as well as Baltic tanks on the heaviest peak trains to the coast. The rise of the electric tram in the same area had put the Brighton on its mettle, and thus suburban electrification was well in progress by the time of grouping. Southern amplified this and before the Hitler war the Brighton Main line and east and west coastal routes were 630 v dc. So older locos were shorter lived on the Brighton than the SE or SW. Incidentally, I do not recall any pannier workings on the former Brighton lines.
Link to post
Share on other sites

All those Southern Tanks? Most of the small tank classes we are seeing modelled were very old by Nationalisation, so replacing them with newer locos made sense, of course. But by the time the panniers appeared most of them had already gone. The Brighton, in particular, was essentially a tank-engine railway, with a large and complex suburban network serving South London from Victoria and London Bridge, as well as Baltic tanks on the heaviest peak trains to the coast. The rise of the electric tram in the same area had put the Brighton on its mettle, and thus suburban electrification was well in progress by the time of grouping. Southern amplified this and before the Hitler war the Brighton Main line and east and west coastal routes were 630 v dc. So older locos were shorter lived on the Brighton than the SE or SW. Incidentally, I do not recall any pannier workings on the former Brighton lines.

 

There were still about 400 in 1956.

 

Okay. Just a random year since I was looking at it anyway. 1956 ABC.

 

A1/A!X 13

B4 11

C14 3

D3 1

E1 11

E1/R 9

E2 10

E3 13

E4 E4X 70

E5 E5X 4

E6 E6X 12

G6 11

H 55

M7 103

O2 43

P 8

R R1 4

R1 11

757 2

0298 3

0415 3

 

So plenty of old antiquated SR locomotives still about well after nationalisation.

 

 

Jason

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This might be about the viability of ever-smaller batch sizes.

 

Modern techniques change the balance of costs in the "research, design, tool, manufacture, pack, and distribute" chain.

 

Given that everything at the front end is software mediated, and that the tool-making is probably very largely done by robots, the 'front end' of the chain must be vastly less-costly in real terms than it used to be.

 

My niche in the hobby is old-fashioned-style 0 gauge ('modern tinplate'), and talking with those in the U.K. Who commission production of such things from the Far East and The Czech Republic I've been amazed by how small the batch sizes are ........ a complete 'run' of a particular loco class, in all variants, can be in the low hundreds, and a particular 'livery and fittings' variant in the initial batch are often less than fifty. Follow-on batches, which are livery variants of physical configurations that have been made previously, can be very tiny ...... five items in one case that I know of!

 

It's quite interesting that suppliers to the old-fashioned 0 gauge people like me have actually, for nearly twenty years, been ploughing the path that finescale suppliers are now following. And, that provides a clue as to what the future might look like: small firms of commissioners and capitalisers of production, who then sell direct to customers by internet, by internet through a few selected stockists, and by appearance at key 'shows'.

 

One key thing in all this is that the 'commissioners' need to really, really understand their customer-base, and keep-up a lively dialogue with them through all available channels.

 

Upshot? I don't think people need get tense about 'weird' subjects being chosen on the grounds that it will divert resource from their pet loco, because if there is a market for their pet loco, sooner or later someone commission it.

Edited by Nearholmer
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

All those Southern Tanks? Most of the small tank classes we are seeing modelled were very old by Nationalisation, so replacing them with newer locos made sense, of course. But by the time the panniers appeared most of them had already gone. The Brighton, in particular, was essentially a tank-engine railway, with a large and complex suburban network serving South London from Victoria and London Bridge, as well as Baltic tanks on the heaviest peak trains to the coast. The rise of the electric tram in the same area had put the Brighton on its mettle, and thus suburban electrification was well in progress by the time of grouping. Southern amplified this and before the Hitler war the Brighton Main line and east and west coastal routes were 630 v dc. So older locos were shorter lived on the Brighton than the SE or SW. Incidentally, I do not recall any pannier workings on the former Brighton lines.

 

Yes, to show, again, the false comparison, extant WR Panniers were much more recently constructed locomotives than the Stroudley tanks of the 1870s! 

 

And the fact is, former Brighton lines do not seem to have required a fleet of E1 modern equivalents, for various reasons.

 

The relative longevity of the Stroudley designs, of an E1 or A1, is a point in their favour.  In comparison, a we are unlikely to see a 517 or a Buffalo 

Edited by Edwardian
Link to post
Share on other sites

This might be about the viability of ever-smaller batch sizes.

 

Modern techniques change the balance of costs in the "research, design, tool, manufacture, pack, and distribute" chain.

 

Given that everything at the front end is software mediated, and that the tool-making is probably very largely done by robots, the 'front end' of the chain must be vastly less-costly in real terms than it used to be.

 

My niche in the hobby is old-fashioned-style 0 gauge ('modern tinplate'), and talking with those in the U.K. Who commission production of such things from the Far East and The Czech Republic I've been amazed by how small the batch sizes are ........ a complete 'run' of a particular loco class, in all variants, can be in the low hundreds, and a particular 'livery and fittings' variant in the initial batch are often less than fifty. Follow-on batches, which are livery variants of physical configurations, can be very tiny ...... five items in one case that I know of.

 

It's quite interesting that suppliers to the old-fashioned 0 gauge people like me have actually, for nearly twenty years, been ploughing the path that finescale suppliers are now following. And, that provides a clue as to what the future might look like: small firms of commissioners and capitalisers of production, who then sell direct to customers by internet, by internet through a few selected stockists, and by appearance at key 'shows'.

 

One key thing in all this is that the 'commissioners' need to really, really understand their customer-base, and keep-up a lively dialogue with them through all available channels.

 

Upshot? I don't think people need get tense about 'weird' subjects being chosen on the grounds that it will divert resource from their pet loco, because if there is a market for their pet loco, sooner or later someone commission it.

 

Ultimately a model version is justified where there is an expectation of meeting the minimum number required for a given version, be that 150, 250 or 350.

 

The ability safely to dismiss Pre-Grouping versions as something not enough people want is, therefore, behind us.

 

This wasn't so when I became active on RMWeb just a few years ago, but it is now.

 

Thanks be!

Link to post
Share on other sites

This might be about the viability of ever-smaller batch sizes.

 

Modern techniques change the balance of costs in the "research, design, tool, manufacture, pack, and distribute" chain.

 

----

Upshot? I don't think people need get tense about 'weird' subjects being chosen on the grounds that it will divert resource from their pet loco, because if there is a market for their pet loco, sooner or later someone commission it.

 

On the other side, there are more parts to tool up or have jigs made for them (separate handrails are not going to be shaped by hand). Production is now 200 to 300 parts assembled by hand (with tweezers in some cases), it takes me about 2 weeks for me to build a kit loco with a similar number of parts, granted, the person assembling the RTRs will not need to figure out how to build it, nor have as much cleaning up to do, as that will have been done prior to production, but there must be a couple or more man days per model.

 

I guess anything can get commissioned but tooling costs still seem to be at least 6 figures, if the run was 100 models, that will be a four figure sum for each just to cover tooling. A four figure run makes it a 3 figure sum for tooling alone per model. You then need to add assembly, shipping, tax etc etc..... If you have cash to spare and can sit on it for a couple of years (Hattons?), the exercise is worth while. Otherwise a challenging investment and you'd want a return quick enough on the 6 figures put up front.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Edwardian’s point about RTR Pre-Grouping models now passing the commercial viability test has only helped the general sales model, meaning that with a few tweaks the commissioner or manufacturer can offer more versions and cover more bases. I think the Bachmann C Class started the demonstration of P-G sales potential, and really the sky is now the limit. Heads we all win, tails none of us lose, surely. And the news that Hornby is able to borrow a little more wonga - should it need to - will give that company a bit more creative wiggle-room. Good times.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Ultimately a model version is justified where there is an expectation of meeting the minimum number required for a given version, be that 150, 250 or 350.

 

The ability safely to dismiss Pre-Grouping versions as something not enough people want is, therefore, behind us.

 

This wasn't so when I became active on RMWeb just a few years ago, but it is now.

 

Thanks be!

This might be about the viability of ever-smaller batch sizes.

Modern techniques change the balance of costs in the "research, design, tool, manufacture, pack, and distribute" chain.

Given that everything at the front end is software mediated, and that the tool-making is probably very largely done by robots, the 'front end' of the chain must be vastly less-costly in real terms than it used to be.

My niche in the hobby is old-fashioned-style 0 gauge ('modern tinplate'), and talking with those in the U.K. Who commission production of such things from the Far East and The Czech Republic I've been amazed by how small the batch sizes are ........ a complete 'run' of a particular loco class, in all variants, can be in the low hundreds, and a particular 'livery and fittings' variant in the initial batch are often less than fifty. Follow-on batches, which are livery variants of physical configurations that have been made previously, can be very tiny ...... five items in one case that I know of!

It's quite interesting that suppliers to the old-fashioned 0 gauge people like me have actually, for nearly twenty years, been ploughing the path that finescale suppliers are now following. And, that provides a clue as to what the future might look like: small firms of commissioners and capitalisers of production, who then sell direct to customers by internet, by internet through a few selected stockists, and by appearance at key 'shows'.

One key thing in all this is that the 'commissioners' need to really, really understand their customer-base, and keep-up a lively dialogue with them through all available channels.

Upshot? I don't think people need get tense about 'weird' subjects being chosen on the grounds that it will divert resource from their pet loco, because if there is a market for their pet loco, sooner or later someone commission it.

Not just O gauge...

 

This ready to run HO gauge beauty was a production run of just 50, it had another in black also of 50.

https://youtu.be/zD7k3B90u9g

 

It was nearly £450 DCC ready mind, but it sold out and never seen since.

 

The manufacturer made around 5 other variants, also in low voltage numbers. I’d imagine there isn’t more than 500 out there even including the main steam editions.

Edited by adb968008
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

OD

 

If you had a want to get an E1 next to a Pannier, I think that you could model South Lambert and Battersea Goods.

 

The GWR ran milk and goods trains via the WLER to Battersea The only photo of one of these trains that I've found is of a milk train with a 517 at the front, but I wouldn't mind betting that panniers were used on goods trains, once panniers existed.

 

Clearly SECR locos could be present, and the SR used some ex-LSWR types there too, to cope with very sharp curve into a milk depot that probably didn't exist when the map below was drawn.

 

Good place to use as inspiration for an 'underneath the arches' layout for lots of small engines.

 

Looks very American in the photo, doesn't it?

 

K

post-26817-0-04367600-1528284728_thumb.jpg

post-26817-0-49202000-1528285732_thumb.png

Edited by Nearholmer
  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

The only Southern REGION (Note the capitalisation) workings of Panniers that I'm aware of were on the South Eastern Division (Folkestone Harbour to replace the R1's and before them the P's) and out West of Weymouth where the Southern and Western met anyway. None on the Central Division or (better put) the LBSCR. There were times they would have intermingled, such as Nearholmer's example, but none were ever operated there by the Southern Region.

 

Based on that there really is no replacement for a LBSCR/Central Division E1!

 

Eventually one of my dream projects is Victoria circa-1880 so I can have LC&DR, LB&SCR (Stroudley stuff as well as Craven by this point!) and GWR Broad Gauge!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Yes, to show, again, the false comparison, extant WR Panniers were much more recently constructed locomotives than the Stroudley tanks of the 1870s! 

 

And the fact is, former Brighton lines do not seem to have required a fleet of E1 modern equivalents, for various reasons.

 

The relative longevity of the Stroudley designs, of an E1 or A1, is a point in their favour.  In comparison, a we are unlikely to see a 517 or a Buffalo 

Depends what you call "modern"; E1s were being displaced from some work even prior to WW1. Their main replacements were the E2 and E4 classes, required to handle increasing loads, with excess E1s then going onto shunting duties previously covered by Terriers, which were sold or scrapped in turn.

 

E1s were fast becoming surplus to requirements even by the mid-1920s, with sales to industry and the ten rebuilt into 0-6-2 tanks for use in the West Country being indicators that there was, by then, only suitable work for around half the class in their original form. 

 

Later, the 30 or so inherited at nationalisation dwindled to less than a dozen by 1955 and five by 1959. This final rump was easily displaced by newer redundant locos, Ivatt 2MTs, Drewry diesels or simply the loss of traffic. Presumably, none received the later BR emblem, as no model is offered so adorned.

 

John

Edited by Dunsignalling
Link to post
Share on other sites

As both the Bachmann C Class and I except the Hattons P Class will demonstrate I'm not convinced that the number of real engines built has that much bearing on how well the model sells. A long working life in various guises is probably more relevant to model sales.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...