Bachmann 2019 Speculation

[Dunsignalling]

I'm pretty sure the 57XX BR power rating was changed when the route availability changed from Blue to Yellow. 4P 3F.

 

The L1s weren't even built until the late 1920s. Certainly not Edwardian. But they are still small. I think of a Black Five or Hall as being a medium sized locomotive. Small compared to a Duchess, but big compared to a 2P. Most people would think a 2P is small. The L1 is the SR equivalent of an LMS 2P.

 

But I did say power rather than speed. I can walk down to Speke and watch an 08 pull a huge train of containers which has just been brought in by a Class 66. It's powerful, but I'm not expecting it to deputise for a Pendolino to London.

 

BTW I'm not dumping on the SR 4-4-0s as I actually like them. They just aren't large in any way, shape or form.

 

 

 

Jason

Under BR, all three of the Southern classes, the D1/E1 rebuilds and the new-build L1s, were rated 3P despite the theoretical TE being only marginally higher than a LMS 2P. Incidentally, none were Edwardian, the first of the E1s not appearing until 1919 and the D1s two years later.

 

The rebuilds earned excellent reputations for themselves on demanding duties, and were widely considered superior to the highly regarded T9 "Greyhounds".

 

However, the L1 was (like the 2P) seen by many as rather lacklustre on anything more than relatively lightweight trains.

 

I tend to agree with your definition of small, though. For me, power class 4 is on the borders between small/medium for tender locos and medium/large for tanks. It's probably set by what was around during ones impressionable years.   

 

 

 

John

Edited December 21, 2018 by Dunsignalling

[NHY 581]

Given that Bachmann already have a decent stable of small ex-Midland types, a 2P to the same standards would be a decent development to pursue. The 1P is going to fill quite a gap and of the Small Midland types, a 2P 4.4.0 would be very useful. Lots of livery possibilities if they we to produce a pukka Midland Loco as opposed to the later LM&SR variant ( even this has a few....S&DJR blue anyone?).

 

Rob.

[number6]

Everyone should welcome a Hastings Diesels railtour on their layout... is there anywhere one [or two] of these units hasn't been?

Edited December 21, 2018 by number6

[Wickham Green]

 

 

 

But all this is ignoring the fact what was originally pointed out, that there aren't any large SR locomotives left to do apart from the N15X and H15. Everything has been done.

 

 

 

Jason

One class of large Southern locos is still absent from the mass R.T.R. market : the 'Hornbys' ........ if I'm allowed to use that word on this thread !!?!   ( I'm sure I'll be kicked out for even mentioning the word 'Leader' - so I won't.)

As hinted at above, a 'U Boat' would be a nice addition to the medium sized loco fleet ..... wasn't it the original intention to follow the 'N' with one anyway ?

[89A]

Given that Bachmann announced the 94xx went into tooling in September they obviously feel the answer is yes - you don't spend a lot of money on tooling to only turn around and not produce the model.

Latest Bachmann Times indicates that an EP sample of the 94xx is in a list (Also including the Midland 1P, 117 and 121 24/1 and 414 (2HAP)), which have been received or are awaited.

[wombatofludham]

Given that Bachmann already have a decent stable of small ex-Midland types, a 2P to the same standards would be a decent development to pursue. The 1P is going to fill quite a gap and of the Small Midland types, a 2P 4.4.0 would be very useful. Lots of livery possibilities if they we to produce a pukka Midland Loco as opposed to the later LM&SR variant ( even this has a few....S&DJR blue anyone?).

 

Rob.

 

To be honest I'd rather they did a proper crimson LMS Fowler Compound instead of the daft black number they did first.  Wartime economy livery wasn't the longest livery style they carried, it was various styles of crimson.  Surely any non-competition clause with the NRM that might have stopped them launching with a red Compound (although the NRM livery wasn't LMS anyway) must surely be over by now.  And if anyone says "they didn't sell well" I'd just say "well, go figure.  How many model the LMS in wartime or post war, and how many more model it pre war when they would be red?"

[Neal Ball]

When did Bachmann say they would retool the 8750 pannier?  I missed that announcement

A B set would be fantastic, I would have at least 2 of the E140 sets

 

 

I have previously posted on RMWeb the news that Bachmann want to re-tool the 8750 Panier.

 

On the Bachmann members day at the Watercress in 2017, I asked what happened to the sound fitted 8750 that was announced a few years ago. The Bachmann rep told me they looked at the moulds and found they were shot to pieces and needed replacing. Adding that as far as he was concerned the 8750 is a Bachmann loco and the feeling was that they wanted to keep it in the range. (It was one of their first locos as it came from the Mainline range.)

 

No dates were offered / discussed, but as everyone knows Bachmann play their cards very close to their chest.

 

I had previously asked the same question at the Bachmann open day at the Bluebell, which must be around 2014/5. On that occasion I was told "Oh, watch this space!" Which could mean anything.

 

There is a pretty good chance they might announce one early in 2019. I suspect if they leave it much longer, someone else might announce a new 8750 Pannier. Clearly let's hope when they do announce they make them with and without top feeds. (Without for me please!)

 

Given there have been no clues / hints about what might be coming, its all guess work and speculation. Loco wise, I wouldn't mind betting we might see a new Manor; I can't see Bachmann doing a new GWR mogul in competition with Dapol.

 

New GWR carriages are clearly overdue in the range.

 

But they have to get over all the product delays and the enforced factory move earlier this year first. 

Edited December 21, 2018 by Neal Ball

[Forester]

I'm pretty sure the 57XX BR power rating was changed when the route availability changed from Blue to Yellow. 4P 3F.

 

The L1s weren't even built until the late 1920s. Certainly not Edwardian. But they are still small. I think of a Black Five or Hall as being a medium sized locomotive. Small compared to a Duchess, but big compared to a 2P. Most people would think a 2P is small. The L1 is the SR equivalent of an LMS 2P.

 

But I did say power rather than speed. I can walk down to Speke and watch an 08 pull a huge train of containers which has just been brought in by a Class 66. It's powerful, but I'm not expecting it to deputise for a Pendolino to London.

 

BTW I'm not dumping on the SR 4-4-0s as I actually like them. They just aren't large in any way, shape or form.

 

 

 

Jason

 

Think you're using power classification because it happens to suit your argument, rather than any rational description of "large"..

 

If that's what you want how about some missing Southern Class 5s; W class, H16,

 

or some Sevens: G16 class, Z class ?

[PenrithBeacon]

Hudswell Clarke Jazzer

Kirtley d/f 0-6-0

LNW Cauliflower/Watford Tank

MR 2F 0-6-0

FR Pettigrew 0-6-0

LYR 0-6-0

[The Johnster]

Think you're using power classification because it happens to suit your argument, rather than any rational description of "large"..

 

If that's what you want how about some missing Southern Class 5s; W class, H16,

 

or some Sevens: G16 class, Z class ?

 

There was never a perfect method for describing how powerful a steam locomotive was, which is perhaps a function of the way that driving wheel size is effectively the final gear ratio and locomotives with similar steam raising capacities and cylinders, such as Black 5 and Stanier 8F, differ widely in their characteristics out on the road in normal use.  BR used an adapted version of the LMS system, which had included an XP category which they abandoned, which lead to some power ratings that I would regard as anomalous.  The GW 56xx, for instance, was classed as 5MT but I don't think it was ever intended to mean that it would do the same work as a Black 5, or a Hall.  The 'Star' 4-6-0s, of which the 7P Castles were an uprated version and had the same steam raising capacity as a Hall or 28xx, were rated 4P, which seems a bit too low to my mind.

 

Size is relative (and I've got some sizeable relatives...).  A Jinty or 57xx would have been considered very large at any time before about 1880, and it was well into the 20th century before anything larger than 0-6-0s and 4-4-0s, sometimes sharing the same boilers and engines, became common anywhere; they never did on the Midland!  The Midland originated the LMS power classification system, and had nothing above 4 even when the GN and NER were building pacifics that would later attract or have attracted a 7P rating.  By these lights a Star and a Midland Compound are equals, which puts cats amongst the pigeons a bit...

[Robin Brasher]

A lot of people would like someone to make a Great Western Manor class.

 

We tested a 38 year old Mainline 9/37078 7819 Hinton Manor at our meeting at Winterborne Kingston this month and we could see why people want a new one. The Manor started working noisily after we oiled it and then ground to a halt. Bachmann reintroduced the Manor 10 years later and I think that they supplied a chassis for people to update their Mainline locomotives.

 

The owner of the model could not understand why so many people wanted a Manor. When he went locomotive spotting he was only interested in Castles and Kings and did not bother with Manors and Granges.

[GWR8700]

I have previously posted on RMWeb the news that Bachmann want to re-tool the 8750 Panier.

 

On the Bachmann members day at the Watercress in 2017, I asked what happened to the sound fitted 8750 that was announced a few years ago. The Bachmann rep told me they looked at the moulds and found they were shot to pieces and needed replacing. Adding that as far as he was concerned the 8750 is a Bachmann loco and the feeling was that they wanted to keep it in the range. (It was one of their first locos as it came from the Mainline range.)

 

No dates were offered / discussed, but as everyone knows Bachmann play their cards very close to their chest.

 

I had previously asked the same question at the Bachmann open day at the Bluebell, which must be around 2014/5. On that occasion I was told "Oh, watch this space!" Which could mean anything.

 

There is a pretty good chance they might announce one early in 2019. I suspect if they leave it much longer, someone else might announce a new 8750 Pannier. Clearly let's hope when they do announce they make them with and without top feeds. (Without for me please!)

 

Given there have been no clues / hints about what might be coming, its all guess work and speculation. Loco wise, I wouldn't mind betting we might see a new Manor; I can't see Bachmann doing a new GWR mogul in competition with Dapol.

 

New GWR carriages are clearly overdue in the range.

 

But they have to get over all the product delays and the enforced factory move earlier this year first. 

That's good to hear, you've got me all excited now!  Completely agree with regards to the topfeed, I feel they missed a trick in that regard with the 64xx.

Agree on the coaches, some new centenary stock, toplights or sunshine stock would be fantastic.  I get the feeling that the suburbans/b sets are more likely to come from Dapol or Hornby.

[Dunsignalling]

Think you're using power classification because it happens to suit your argument, rather than any rational description of "large"..

 

If that's what you want how about some missing Southern Class 5s; W class, H16,

 

or some Sevens: G16 class, Z class ?

The BR classifications were: H16, W and Z, all 6F, the G16 was 8F.

 

John

[Dunsignalling]

A lot of people would like someone to make a Great Western Manor class.

 

We tested a 38 year old Mainline 9/37078 7819 Hinton Manor at our meeting at Winterborne Kingston this month and we could see why people want a new one. The Manor started working noisily after we oiled it and then ground to a halt. Bachmann reintroduced the Manor 10 years later and I think that they supplied a chassis for people to update their Mainline locomotives.

 

The owner of the model could not understand why so many people wanted a Manor. When he went locomotive spotting he was only interested in Castles and Kings and did not bother with Manors and Granges.

Surprised it still went at all.

 

My indispensable old 4MT, which must be pushing forty by now, has gone through two Bachmann replacement chassis since its original pancake-motored "squealer" expired. One through sheer wear and tear, with the motor in the second having burned out when the loco got stuck in a tunnel and nobody noticed until it started to smell. Amazingly, the plastic tender axleboxes are still just fine...

 

She currently has one of the final type mechanisms produced before the retool (metal slidebars) which runs beautifully.

 

John

Edited December 21, 2018 by Dunsignalling

[mdvle]

A lot of people would like someone to make a Great Western Manor class.

 

 

I almost wonder at this point if the problem is everybody, when deciding what to produce for the next planning period, take a look at the Manor and assume it is so obvious thus someone else must be making it, so move on to their 2nd choice ...

[Dunsignalling]

I almost wonder at this point if the problem is everybody, when deciding what to produce for the next planning period, take a look at the Manor and assume it is so obvious thus someone else must be making it, so move on to their 2nd choice ...

Bachmann haven't produced any of the old ones, it feels, almost in living memory.   How long ago was it actually?

 

An upgrade is at least a decade overdue IMHO, and most people seem to be expecting Hornby to exploit their inaction, just as they (eventually) did with the Lord Nelson, which had been similarly ignored for improvement.

 

If neither of them go for it, I'd not be surprised if Hatton's were to jump on it. or for it to become Dapol's follow-up to their forthcoming Mogul and Large Prairie, both of which are being made largely as a result of the neglectful ways of others.

 

John

Edited December 21, 2018 by Dunsignalling

[FJ1701]

Speculating the Bachmann 2019 range is quite difficult with regard to their current situation. Personally, I'm not particularly sure how many models will be announced for the 2019 range when there are still backdated models with unknown release dates. For me however, I feel the class 66 will take a back seat to make way for the Rails version, a lower price point will make it more appealing than it's high priced rival so it could still be produced, just in small quantities. 

 

The issue with the current market is the well known void of modern image models. Now "modern image" is a very broad term so I'm suggesting post 2005, units which still run in the current era but may have also been used in the BR days. We have a variety of EMU's and DMU's available however there still isn't a large enough offering. What we are lacking on our layouts is a third rail suburban commuter which is small enough in size for Bachmann to produce but with a large amount of liveries available to make the model profitable. To connect the dots between the different operating companies so our layouts don't look so random. The British Rail class 313, 455 or 456 come to mind and would suit most layouts operating in the southern area. Cheers, Rory.

[brittannia]

I think you mean Hattons for the 66, not Rails, Bachmann very rarely, if ever, reduce prices on their models,

[FJ1701]

I think you mean Hattons for the 66, not Rails, Bachmann very rarely, if ever, reduce prices on their models,

Ah yes, Hattons. Well they could perhaps lower the price or just reduce production but as you said they rarely do so I guess all we can do is sit and wait.

[County of Yorkshire]

If neither of them go for it, I'd not be surprised if Hatton's were to jump on it. 

 

A wide variety of livery options offered. Quick to market. Communicative during development. Competitively priced. Yes please!

 

CoY

[Covkid]

Hmm.  Not quite, and by the way 57xx/8750s were rated 3F by BR.  A Jinty, or a 57xx (there's probably not that much between them) can haul a full length passenger express train of 10 or more coaches from carriage sidings to a station, but looks very silly compared to even an Edwardian 4-4-0 like an L1 when that train's speed gets above 25mph; I agree the L1 is going to struggle to get to more than about 50, but it'll run, and haul, rings around an 0-6-0 with a smaller boiler and cylinders.  And it'll do it with much less damage to the track and it's own springs as well...

 

As for large(ish) Southern locomotives, some big pre-grouping tanks like the Rivers and the big Brighton tanks have not been done.  The Rivers are a bit niche in terms of period, though, withdrawn from service en bloc after the Sevenoaks derailment in 1927 to be rebuilt as mogul tender locos.

 

Apologies "Johnster" but right at the end of steam in the West Midlands under the LMR, pannier tanks were rated as class 4 on working documents.  In 1966 there was actually a trip diagram for a Stourbridge based class 4 panner tank to work in and out of Bescot yard. Unfortunately the introduction of diesels saw the diagram actually become EE type 1 traction outstabled at Stourbridge shed. 

 

Whether BR(LM) reclassifed the panniers after 1963's regional changes I am not sure.  

[The Stationmaster]

Apologies "Johnster" but right at the end of steam in the West Midlands under the LMR, pannier tanks were rated as class 4 on working documents.  In 1966 there was actually a trip diagram for a Stourbridge based class 4 panner tank to work in and out of Bescot yard. Unfortunately the introduction of diesels saw the diagram actually become EE type 1 traction outstabled at Stourbridge shed. 

 

Whether BR(LM) reclassifed the panniers after 1963's regional changes I am not sure.  

 

The only source I can find which shows 57XX as 3F is the Ian Allan ABC, elsewhere they are shown as 4F.  They were (G)WR Power Group C, the same as the 94XX which were definitely regarded as 4F by BR and the 1962 Passenger Loads Book shows the same permitted loads for both classes.

 

As the WR carried on using the GWR Power Group system and showed loads by Power group the BR classification was basically irrelevant in any case.

[tomparryharry]

That's good to hear, you've got me all excited now!  Completely agree with regards to the topfeed, I feel they missed a trick in that regard with the 64xx.

Agree on the coaches, some new centenary stock, toplights or sunshine stock would be fantastic.  I get the feeling that the suburbans/b sets are more likely to come from Dapol or Hornby.

I'd guess you'll still be stuck with the topfeed.

 

"We're the only game in town, and you're stuck with it, chum".

 

Of course, they might try to prove me wrong, and I will stand to be corrected.

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

[The Johnster]

Apologies "Johnster" but right at the end of steam in the West Midlands under the LMR, pannier tanks were rated as class 4 on working documents.  In 1966 there was actually a trip diagram for a Stourbridge based class 4 panner tank to work in and out of Bescot yard. Unfortunately the introduction of diesels saw the diagram actually become EE type 1 traction outstabled at Stourbridge shed. 

 

Whether BR(LM) reclassifed the panniers after 1963's regional changes I am not sure.  

 

 

The only source I can find which shows 57XX as 3F is the Ian Allan ABC, elsewhere they are shown as 4F.  They were (G)WR Power Group C, the same as the 94XX which were definitely regarded as 4F by BR and the 1962 Passenger Loads Book shows the same permitted loads for both classes.

 

As the WR carried on using the GWR Power Group system and showed loads by Power group the BR classification was basically irrelevant in any case.

Wikipedia also list the 57xx'/8750 as 3F, though of course they may have been taking their information from Ian Allan.  The GW power groups, A to E, was used by WR and applied to BR standard and AFAIK Stanier 8F and Austerity 2-8-0s allocated to the region.  The colour code route availability spots were used as well, including on diesels in the pre- corporate blue liveries.  BR gave ex GW locos their own LMS type power classifications, but they were generally ignored on the WR, and probably at ex WR depots following the 1963 regional changes.  

 

As Mike says, the 94xx was rated as 4F, but as power class C in GW/WR terms.  It had a red route availability.  Drivers at Canton at least did not regard them as better than a 57xx/8750 in any way, though.

Edited December 22, 2018 by The Johnster

[The Johnster]

I would prefer pukka non corridor coaches before a new B set, simply because the non corridors are more flexible for the modeller. Certainly my piece of BR(WR) in the West Midlands saw good numbers of non corridors whereas B sets were more the bucolic fayre of BLTs 

 

Not entirely bucolic BLTs, Covkid; they were common on semi-urban heavily industrial South Wales branches which do not by and large fit the bucolic image.  They were not suitable for intense suburban work where the name of the game is maximum bums on seats, though; far too much space was wasted by the duplication of guards and van facilities.  Two second class compartments carry 40 fare payers in third class.