hornby 2020 Hornby A2/2 and A2/3 (2020 Range)

[micklner]

41 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Thanks Mick,

If the wisdom tooth doesn't come through I shall 3d print a replacement.

 

Re the Bachmann A2. I always find the Bachmann stuff a little clunky compared to Hornby locomotives. Even the new V2 looks a bit thick and chunky on the boiler bands, the depth of the running board and tender side sheets for example, though the over all shape looks to be the finest that Bachmann have achieved with an LNER locomotive. There is something about the shape of the Bachmann A1/ A2 that doesn't quite flow together properly, there is something of the silhouette that is wrong. There is no doubt that the A1 in particular is inferior to the DJH model in all respects. Bachmann seem to do much better with, more angular, industrial looking stuff.

I'm not sure how much of the Bachmann A2 you retain in your conversions, so some of this is possibly not relevant. It's the atrophied parts, such as the tender and Cartazzi axle boxes and the stubby steps. The horrible dome, the superheater and the reversing leaver covers, all look to have melted. The rear loco frames look very wide apart as do the tender frames, is this so? The valve gear is probably not relevant to our conversion, though it is usually better proportioned (except the terrible K3) than Hornby's, it tends to be spoilt by some toy like giant screw sticking out of some unfortunate location. I don't like them as models, however, a lot of what I have pointed out can be corrected so the fundamentals are probably rightish.

 

So, no A2/2 as built and Lord P and Mons Meg are no go at anytime. Lord P and C of the N are the two I have referances for, both York engines, nothing on Earl M though.

Re the A2

They suffer from Cab droop at the rear possible caused by a slightly overlong footplate , it can be adjusted/bodged with washers . Cabsides are quite thick compared to Hornby.  Cab detail poor compared to Hornby

 

Caratazzi frames are overwide to allow for the wheelset to have rims and get the extra space needed for curves. As a result axleboxes and steps are shallow as said.

 

Tender, one big mark down as again as on other Bachmann Tenders the brake shoes are still moulded as  part of the frames very poor nowdays. Horrible pin idea ,used as a means of coupling to the Loco , this can be very fiddly to connect and release on occasions.

 

Valve gear has a bit of meat to it, better looking than the thin Hornby versions. The screw you mention (on the crank?) is a real pain to convert to the correct angle on Thompson conversions. Two tiny cast pins lock it too the crankpin very easily broken off when reattaching ,and you can only buy replacements from Bachmann as a complete set of valve gear  about £20 last time I broke one !.

 

As said Meg and President are original Boilers about original build as you would get on any loco. Shame I would have bought one of them if they had been made. I might get a A2/3 ,will see when released what they are like, as I already Thommo and Chamossaire models built.

[30368]

Alex,

 

Sorry, I was both lamenting and praising Hornby's decision!

 

The A2/3 kit will not be for sale I am sure I will enjoy building it - it will be 60523, Sun Castle a loco that my late brother and myself saw a fair amount of on the ex GN. I bought it for his birthday but mortality intervened.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard B

 

[MGR Hooper!]

Hatton's have posted a short video on the brand new Hornby LNER Thompson 4-6-2 A2/2 and A2/3 locomotives

 

 

 

[Headstock]

14 hours ago, robmcg said:

A2/2 LNER 505 'Thane of Fife'  for me please , maybe I'll paint mine wartime black and run it without plates. Park it next to a wartime black V2 and watch them hiss steam at each other.

 

 

Good morning robmcg,

you could paint T of F in wartime black if you so wish, that is your prerogative. As already discussed, your model would have the wrong boiler, cab and running board for war time black condition.

 

13 hours ago, robmcg said:

 

I think also the LNER built too many Pacifics, in the end.  The A2 ride and front end flexing was an issue but not insurmountable,  Thompson had to build many parts of engines by fabricating them. His B1, K1 and O1 engines were excellent,  and I love the prospect of seeing the A2/2 and A2/3s by Hornby.

 

 

The LNER certainly did not have too many Pacific's. Stannier went on record bemoaning the LMS locomotive policy for not having enough Pacific's. He was very critical of the board unwillingness to build any more. He was aware of the waste and cost of double heading trains and the expense invoved in the systematic thrashing of the 4-6-0's passenger types in to the ground. Good engines though the rebuilt Scots were, they had a comparatively short lives, by the 1960's they were well and truly knackered.

[atom3624]

16 hours ago, Corbs said:

I think it's great that Hornby have chosen to do these models. It was less than a year ago I was talking to Simon A.C.Martin on the Edward Thompson podcast episode and we discussed the lack of focus on Thompson's locos and their representation in model form.

The full episode is here in case anyone is interested or hasn't seen it before:

 

 

Going by the 'poster' indicated, 100% villain - beautiful monster to absolute monstrosity!!

 

Nevertheless, it'll be a very interesting addition to the model railways ... 

 

Al.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

On ‎08‎/‎01‎/‎2020 at 10:17, Joseph_Pestell said:

...Why did Thompson feel the need to "re-invent the wheel" with a new design rather than build more V2's? The V2 had really proved its ability with heavy trains during the war.

He had an idea of a 'better way', so once in the CME's chair he had the chance to try it out. And he was proven wrong, evaluated by the criteria he set. The revised layout did not become the new standard, and mechanical reliability was worse than that of what was to be improved on. Neatly, once the succeeding CME was in office, revision of the layout to that previously used,  proved that using the same power production components the end result was a reliable machine.

Thompson's particular ideas in respect of pacifics therefore unsuccessful.

 

On ‎08‎/‎01‎/‎2020 at 12:49, Denbridge said:

The evidence is out there in numerous publications by engineers and authors who actually know or knew their stuff and wrote without bias towards a particular railway or designer.

I have the evidence thank you, and technically it is incomplete, and I am well qualifed by training and practise in engineering to understand that. Simply: you cannot state this design is superior because given this specific superior fuel it yields this class leading result. For that to stand up as a claim, alternative designs have to be tested with the same fuel. (Testing a falsifiable hypothesis, the first requirement of scientifically managed engineering evaluation.)

 

And when that was done, the Belpaire firebox was proven to be a vanity: it did not outperform the round top. (In fact the reverse, it was inferior.) What was not done - for obvious reasons, as it was pointless - was to test the round top with the superior fuel. But coal will burn on any suitable grate, and the higher energy output of a superior coal will benefit the performance of any competently designed boiler. It's very simple to understand.

[Niels]

On 09/01/2020 at 14:30, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

And when that was done, the Belpaire firebox was proven to be a vanity: it did not outperform the round top. (In fact the reverse, it was inferior.) What was not done - for obvious reasons, as it was pointless - was to test the round top with the superior fuel. But coal will burn on any suitable grate, and the higher energy output of a superior coal will benefit the performance of any competently designed boiler. It's very simple to understand.

 

I have looked up the  (BR Rugby) boiler efficiency tests of Britannia/9F (Belpaire) and V2 (same boiler as A4) at 3000lbs Blidworth coal per hour.

To  my eyes they are all 73%.

If we asume that mass of Belpaires are higher than round tops it is vanity.

B1,Halls and Black Fives had also identical boiler efficiencies if I remember OK.

I do not have the Hall and Black Five reports anymore.

Some good Pacifics had round firebox covers.

History has proved  that if You must have more than two cylinders for mechanical balance at speed or gauge, three is a good number and inside cylinder drive to front big wheel shaft is good.

You were getting very close Thompson.

It is therefore strange that he opted for having outside cylinders hanging in the middle of nowhere as he  could not reuse the Darlington cast monoblock cylinders from the P2 for clearence reasons.

We can with the benefit of hindsigth and Hornbys phantastic gift to humanty  help him.

Edited January 10, 2020 by Niels

[Niels]

To follow up on posting above

Thomson could also have ordered :

 

 

Two simple outside and some kind of extra balancing between frames

Two inside like B12 and some outside counterbalancing

Three cylinder compound ala Sauvage /Smith

One low pressure between frames and one high pressure on starboard side and a counter balancer on other outside.

 

According to a German 1942 source, fuel for same work will be from 114 for a three cylinder simple to 100 for a two cylinder compound

 

It is my hope to be able to convince mr Thompson that his scheme can be improved somewhat.

I cannot afford four full size A2/(4 , 5, 6 and 7) but two or three modified Hornbys is possible.

Thank You Hornby.

 

 

Edited January 10, 2020 by Niels
clearness

[Les1952]

On 08/01/2020 at 11:26, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

You lack the evidence to support these claims. Use a superior coal - higher energy content, minimal ash, among other significant characteristics - and the boiler performs better, naturally enough: but to make the argument this has to be tested on both boilers.

 

The counter claim of reason is that the superior coal will yield better results in any sound boiler design. And the cheaper design starts with that advantage, efficiency is about total costs for the end result. You might recall that the GWR gave Mr Churchward a hard time over this, leading to his famously incorrect answer that one of his could drag two of their's backwards. Something of a joker who knew his argument was a weak one. Shame the GWR board didn't call him on it at the time.

 

Significantly the proposal from Crewe to rebuild B1s with Belpaire boilers to correct a perceived weakness with their round-topped varieties was vetoed as the resulting increase in weight would have moved them up a Route Availability class and prohibited them from some of the routes that depended on them as the best locos they had....

 

Les

[Headstock]

1 hour ago, Les1952 said:

 

Significantly the proposal from Crewe to rebuild B1s with Belpaire boilers to correct a perceived weakness with their round-topped varieties was vetoed as the resulting increase in weight would have moved them up a Route Availability class and prohibited them from some of the routes that depended on them as the best locos they had....

 

Les

 

Afternoon Les 1952, (The two A2/2's, as proposed as Hornby models, lost there original P2 boilers in 1952, on topic?)

 

Re B1 boiler, not a perceived weakness, an actual weakness, the boilers were prone to cracking. Fitting the B1's with a BR standard boiler was a bit of a silly idea, strengthening plates sufficed to solve the problem for the life time of the boilers.

[Les1952]

23 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

Afternoon Les 1952, (The two A2/2's, as proposed as Hornby models, lost there original P2 boilers in 1952, on topic?)

 

Re B1 boiler, not a perceived weakness, an actual weakness, the boilers were prone to cracking. Fitting the B1's with a BR standard boiler was a bit of a silly idea, strengthening plates sufficed to solve the problem for the life time of the boilers.

 

Turning to the fount of all LNER loco knowledge (the late Willie Yeadon) - 

 

2001/60501 had 2002's original P2 boiler when converted to an A2/2, then acquired an A1 boiler ex-60115 in October 1952.  The cab front was cut back at this time.  A seond one ex- 60161 was fitted in Sept 54 and it ran with two more of this type to withdrawal.

 

2005/60505 had its original boiler when converted, and gained a brand new boiler (29872) in March 1952, when the cab front was cut back.  It had two more of this type to withdrawal.  Significantly the last was a Thompson round-dome boiler hiding under a streamlined dome cover. It is not beyond the bounds of possibility that this would mean the cover was not QUITE in the same place as it would be with a genuine banjo dome under the  cover. I can't find enough broadside-on pictures of the class to check.

 

However 60503 Lord President and 60505 Mons Meg  only ran with P2 boilers and their cabs were never cut back.  60502 and 60506 were altered to take A1 boilers in 1951 and 1952 respectively.

 

Definitely something to look out for if renumbering A2/2s, they were by no means all the same - but why should they have been? After all the six P2s were all different from each other even if four looked the same.

 

The B1 cracking was at the bottom rather than the top of the boiler.  Oddly enough it doesn't seem that B1 type boilers suffered the same problems in the other classes they were used in.  Cowlairs tackled frame issues on B1s by fitting strengtheners to the ends of the B1 footplate.  Could this have caused the boiler problems on B1s?  Certainly the round-top boilers were a deal cheaper to make and even under Crewe's costing regime they were significantly cheaper to repair than the Belpaire equivalents.

 

Les

 

Edited January 11, 2020 by Les1952
typos as ever.....

[Les1952]

Just looking at boiler 29876 which is the one carried by Thane of Fife (60505) in its late crest form

 - it was new on 516 Hycilla in Nov 1946, then was used on 60512 Steady Aim and 60520 Owen Tudor before going to 60505 in September 1957.  

 

60512 is modelled by Hormby- it would have had an early crest at the time.  So if you buy Hornby's 60505 and 60512 you are buying two models of the same boiler, even though the dome covers are different.

 

Strange hobby this...

 

Les

[Synch]

So are the A2/2s only being tooled up with the A1 boilers?  If so I'll be put off buying these, only looking for LNER liveries and BR period only would really limit their scope on the market.

[Headstock]

10 hours ago, Les1952 said:

 

Turning to the fount of all LNER loco knowledge (the late Willie Yeadon) - 

 

2001/60501 had 2002's original P2 boiler when converted to an A2/2, then acquired an A1 boiler ex-60115 in October 1952.  The cab front was cut back at this time.  A seond one ex- 60161 was fitted in Sept 54 and it ran with two more of this type to withdrawal.

 

2005/60505 had its original boiler when converted, and gained a brand new boiler (29872) in March 1952, when the cab front was cut back.  It had two more of this type to withdrawal.  Significantly the last was a Thompson round-dome boiler hiding under a banjo dome cover. It is not beyond the bounds of possibility that this would mean the cover was not QUITE in the same place as it would be with a genuine banjo dome under the  cover. I can't find enough broadside-on pictures of the class to check.

 

However 60503 Lord President and 60505 Mons Meg  only ran with P2 boilers and their cabs were never cut back.  60502 and 60506 were altered to take A1 boilers in 1951 and 1952 respectively.

 

Definitely something to look out for if renumbering A2/2s, they were by no means all the same - but why should they have been? After all the six P2s were all different from each other even if four looked the same.

 

The B1 cracking was at the bottom rather than the top of the boiler.  Oddly enough it doesn't seem that B1 type boilers suffered the same problems in the other classes they were used in.  Cowlairs tackled frame issues on B1s by fitting strengtheners to the ends of the B1 footplate.  Could this have caused the boiler problems on B1s?  Certainly the round-top boilers were a deal cheaper to make and even under Crewe's costing regime they were significantly cheaper to repair than the Belpaire equivalents.

 

Les

 

 

Good morning Les 1952,

 

The cutting back of the cab was not the only visible alteration when Thompson and or Peppercorn replacement boilers were fitted. There was also the redesign of the s curve on the running board. The s curve on the running board of the Peppercorn dia 118 ( A1and A2) and Thompson boiler dia 117 (A2/3) locomotives intersects the firebox with the lower firebox corners very prominently on display. On the original Gresley boiler as altered to fit the P2 rebuilds, (dia 106a A2/2) the S curve is steeper and is more to the forwards edge of the firebox, with the extreme corners of the firebox just visible below the curve of the running board.

 

Boiler 29872 (brand new) as fitted to 60505 was also a Pepercorn dia 118 (A1 and A2) boiler. No Thompson Pacific was ever fitted with a 'banjo dome cover'. The banjo dome cover was fitted to the last batch of A3's only. It was superseded by the streamlined dome cover relatively quickly. 60502 received a streamlined dome cover as fitted to class A1, A2, A3 ect.You are correct, the streamlined dome cover on 60505 was mounted further forwards on the Thompson dia 117 than on the Peppercorn dia 118 boiler.

 

The B1 boiler was a development of the B17 boiler but with higher pressure. I suspect the higher pressure was the root of the problem and was down to insufficient allowance made for this. The B1 being designed to be as light as possible, suffered from a number of corners being cut in terms of general bracing and strength of the design. Also, British manufacturing quality was not at its best in the period, with many other locomotives such as the rebuilt Royal Scots and the post war Castles being a bit of a lash up job, in comparison to the quality seen pre war. Other developments of the B1 boiler did received attention on class K1 and O1 for example.

[Headstock]

5 hours ago, Synch said:

So are the A2/2s only being tooled up with the A1 boilers?  If so I'll be put off buying these, only looking for LNER liveries and BR period only would really limit their scope on the market.

 

Good morning Synch,

60501 has the A1 boiler, 60505 has the A2/3 boiler. However, both are fitted with the streamlined dome, on 60505 this is mounted further forwards and was only for show.  This was because the A2/3 boiler had a round top dome and not a perforated steam collector as fitted to the A1 boiler. I too was interested in the LNER A2/2, the Hornby tooling dose not cater for this variant, or the two locomotives that survived up until scraping in original rebuilt condition.

Edited January 11, 2020 by Headstock
clarify a point

[Les1952]

4 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

Good morning Les 1952,

 

The cutting back of the cab was not the only visible alteration when Thompson and or Peppercorn replacement boilers were fitted. There was also the redesign of the s curve on the running board. The s curve on the running board of the Peppercorn dia 118 ( A1and A2) and Thompson boiler dia 117 (A2/3) locomotives intersects the firebox with the lower firebox corners very prominently on display. On the original Gresley boiler as altered to fit the P2 rebuilds, (dia 106a A2/2) the S curve is steeper and is more to the forwards edge of the firebox, with the extreme corners of the firebox just visible below the curve of the running board.

 

Boiler 29872 (brand new) as fitted to 60505 was also a Pepercorn dia 118 (A1 and A2) boiler. No Thompson Pacific was ever fitted with a 'banjo dome cover'. The banjo dome cover was fitted to the last batch of A3's only. It was superseded by the streamlined dome cover relatively quickly. 60502 received a streamlined dome cover as fitted to class A1, A2, A3 ect.You are correct, the streamlined dome cover on 60505 was mounted further forwards on the Thompson dia 117 than on the Peppercorn dia 118 boiler.

 

The B1 boiler was a development of the B17 boiler but with higher pressure. I suspect the higher pressure was the root of the problem and was down to insufficient allowance made for this. The B1 being designed to be as light as possible, suffered from a number of corners being cut in terms of general bracing and strength of the design. Also, British manufacturing quality was not at its best in the period, with many other locomotives such as the rebuilt Royal Scots and the post war Castles being a bit of a lash up job, in comparison to the quality seen pre war. Other developments of the B1 boiler did received attention on class K1 and O1 for example.

 

I stand corrected on banjo vs streamlined dome cover- and in the distinguished company of messrs Nock, Allen and a good number of others.....

 

I assume then that 100A boilers used at B17 pressures (on B17s) didn't have the same problems as 100A boilers fitted to B1s?

 

Les

 

[Headstock]

13 minutes ago, Les1952 said:

 

I stand corrected on banjo vs streamlined dome cover- and in the distinguished company of messrs Nock, Allen and a good number of others.....

 

I assume then that 100A boilers used at B17 pressures (on B17s) didn't have the same problems as 100A boilers fitted to B1s?

 

Les

 

 

Les,

 

a good question, I don't have enough data to say for sure with regard the dia 100A boiler. I wouldn't assume there was no problem, it may be that the information to the contrary is out there, but we are only aware of it in relation to the B1. Alternatively, maybe the three cylinder arrangement on class B17 was more forgiving in terms of general wear and tear than the two big cylinders on the B1. Quite a bit of in depth research would be required to say for sure.

[Dominion]

The first 2 diagram 117 boilers as fitted to 500 and 511 had different spacing of boiler bands behind the steam dome than on the subsequent A2/3s, with six segments along the boiler and firebox instead of 7 on the rest. This means that Hornby will have to tool both of these types of Diagram 117 boiler for the A2/3s if they are doing 500 and 514 at the beginning of their lives and the BR livery 117 types. The 3D print in Graham Muz's photo earlier and also also the photo in the very first post of this topic shows the less common type as fitted to 500 so it seems likely Hornby are doing both, perhaps to accommodate "Edward Thompson" in LNER livery. 

 

The 117 boilers were swapped around not just amongst the A2/3 class but also onto Thompson A2s, A1's, and even one on 60505 later in its life as mentioned above. I have seen photos of the 117 boiler fitted to all those other classes. But so far they all seem to be the more numerous 7 segment type. I am wondering if the boilers from 500 and 511 went onto other locos with their different boiler band spacing, or if the cladding and boiler bands would have been redone when the boilers were overhauled to bring them in line with the rest of the 117 boilers. 

[Londoner]

On 08/01/2020 at 10:40, Denbridge said:

A Belpaire firebox was not a complete vanity. With the right coal, they were vastly superior to a round top, wide firebox. The latter were designed specifically to burn coal with a lower calorific value, such as Yorkshire hards. Swindon machines suffered from WW2 onwards once the government realised it could sell Welsh coal abroad for more than the railways would pay. Pre war a Swindon boiler was the most efficient steam producer in the country.

The principle reason Doncaster chose the round top firebox, rather than the Belpaire style, was because the plates could be rolled, not requiring flanging blocks, which made the boiler much cheaper to manufacture with no loss in performance, efficiency or maintenance cost. The idea that LNER boilers were inferior to those of the GW is ridiculous.

 

The A4 heads all the meaningful statistics from the 48 exchanges for boiler performance and efficiency. It also produced one of the highest power output of the trials when climbing the 1:42 Hemerdon bank  from a 16mph check at its foot. Seagull was worked full regulator and at 53% cut off, (admitting steam for 53% of the stroke), When PN Townend later asked the Great Way Round Inspector, who was riding on the footplate of Seagull at the time, what he remembered of the trials, he said, "Your A4 climbing Hemerdon Bank with a glass full of water, both injectors on and still making steam". "You couldn't do that with one of ours. You dare not put the second injector on, and when you got to the top you were looking for the water in the bottom of the nut". (East Coast Pacifics at Work P N Townend, Page 128 (sic).

['CHARD]

On 07/01/2020 at 22:10, D9001 said:

I have seen photos of “Honeyway” on the Waverley Route but did any A2/2s ever run on the Waverley? Unlikely I know...

 

60501             Cock o' the North
60502             Earl Marischal
60503             Lord President
60505             Thane of Fife
60506             Wolf of Badenoch
 

[WD0-6-0]

I'm fairly certain, from what I've gathered above, but would just like to double check with those who know better than I. Neither of the A2/2 are appropriate for representing 60506 Wolf of Badenoch? 

Thanks

Rhys

[davidw]

Thane of Fife is close to 60506. Minor differences.

[WD0-6-0]

That's the one I've pre-ordered. Whether I can rename it or not I'm still getting it and looking forward to it.

I'm also trying to decide whether to get Edward Thompson or Sun Castle. BR green is more useful to me but Apple green is so pretty (and pretty is winning)

 

Rhys

[John Tomlinson]

19 hours ago, AlexHolt said:

Originally I was going to pre order 60505 Thane of Fife, but now I think I'll be ordering an A2/3 instead, most likely 500 Edward Thompson. With my layout being more of a preserved/running whatever I want I feel like the LNER livery would fit in more, I also think another Thompson Pacific in BR livery would be a bit boring as I already have an A2/1 in BR early crest. 

 

I'm kind of interested to know which of the models people are most interested in or likely to buy. 

 

 

 

 

A very fair question!

 

A rather boring answer is that I'll wait and see how these are when actually made. I also have a DJH kit for an A2/3 which possibly might get built by the time they come out (but probably won't).

 

John.

[micklner]

2 hours ago, davidw said:

Thane of Fife is close to 60506. Minor differences.

No rimmed chimney on the Wolf ? (from memory I havent checked)