Jump to content
 

Hornby W1 Hush Hush


truffy
 Share

Recommended Posts

Some very strange recent comments on here .

 

As already said before .

 

Hush Hush had a double chimney for two months or less, at the end of its life in this shape , before a total rebuild of the Locomotive. It was fitted for Testing purposes only, and a additonal Cowling was also fitted around the chimney area. It would also appear it never ran in service at all in that period. Why on earth would Hornby go to the expense of modifying moulds etc for this version?.  Info the book Hush Hush by Brown.

 

The only reason they are doing non existent named and green versions is to get the maximum £££ out the moulds from collectors, and good luck to them for doing so .

 

Personally a Single Chimney version , as the Loco actually ran in service is the one for me, and for the vast majority of buyers.

 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect they are going for three different livery models to maximise a single use of the tooling /get up to a viable production number.  I guess they have no real idea how well this will sell.  I think the same logic applies on the rebuilt W1 with the same chassis under different moulded tops to allow sufficient economy of scale on the bespoke chassis.  

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Off Topic.

Discussing the other short lived experimental locos, then LMS 6399 Fury would be another option, and it would sit on a Royal Scott chassis, well slightly lengthened I believe. Perhaps steam locomotives are going to undergo the same coverage of one-offs that diesel locos have seen in recent years.
 

Looking forward to seeing this, especially as it is likely to make a present for someone, I want to pay back for their help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Jamiel said:

Off Topic.

Discussing the other short lived experimental locos, then LMS 6399 Fury would be another option, and it would sit on a Royal Scott chassis, well slightly lengthened I believe. Perhaps steam locomotives are going to undergo the same coverage of one-offs that diesel locos have seen in recent years.
 

Looking forward to seeing this, especially as it is likely to make a present for someone, I want to pay back for their help.

 

Maybe, but hopefully not before they've done The Great Bear, the Raven A2, the Paget locomotive, and other, less explosive prototypes.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

15 months with a Kylchap - July 1935 - October 1936 by this text - 'LNER Ecyclopaedia'.

 

Looks better IMhO, 'though, after rebuild one, or two ... the single blastpipe diameter was reduced and outlet lowered to flush - not sticking out .... looked interesting, and somehow 'streamlined' with the modified single.

 

 

Another of Chapelon's recommendations was the addition of a Kylchap (Kylala-Chapelon) exhaust arrangement. In 1934, the P2 Cock o'the North appeared. This was the first LNER locomotive with the Kylchap arrangement, and in 1935 Gresley ordered No. 10000 to have the same arrangement fitted. Due to the unconventional nature of No. 10000, a number of trials were performed with different variations in the Kylchap arrangement. No. 10000 ran through May and early-June 1935, testing final adjustments to these different variations. After these adjustments were completed, it re-entered Darlington on 14th June for a hood smoke-lifter to be fitted. This was a cowl which bridged the gap between the two wings of the casing around the chimney, and was intended to increase the smoke clearance. No. 10000 re-entered service on 10th July 1935.

The End of the Water-Tube Boiler

W1 No. 10000 ('Hush-Hush') entered Darlington Works again on 21st August 1935 for further repairs, having run about 90,000 miles since new. A number of further modifications were being considered, when Gresley ordered all further work to stop whilst he considered a scheme to rebuild it with a conventional fire-tube boiler.

On 13th October 1936, the water-tube boiler W1 made its last journey: from Darlington Works to Doncaster Works to be rebuilt with a conventional fire-tube boiler. Out of the 1,888 days since it was built, No. 10000 spent 1,105 days in Darlington Works.

 

 

Al.

Edited by atom3624
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, atom3624 said:

15 months with a Kylchap - July 1935 - October 1936 by this text - 'LNER Ecyclopaedia'.

...

No. 10000 ran through May and early-June 1935, testing final adjustments to these different variations. After these adjustments were completed, it re-entered Darlington on 14th June for a hood smoke-lifter to be fitted. This was a cowl which bridged the gap between the two wings of the casing around the chimney, and was intended to increase the smoke clearance. No. 10000 re-entered service on 10th July 1935.

The End of the Water-Tube Boiler

W1 No. 10000 ('Hush-Hush') entered Darlington Works again on 21st August 1935 for further repairs, having run about 90,000 miles since new. A number of further modifications were being considered, when Gresley ordered all further work to stop whilst he considered a scheme to rebuild it with a conventional fire-tube boiler.

On 13th October 1936, the water-tube boiler W1 made its last journey: from Darlington Works to Doncaster Works to be rebuilt with a conventional fire-tube boiler. Out of the 1,888 days since it was built, No. 10000 spent 1,105 days in Darlington Works.

 

 

Al.

But I think what Micklner is trying to say is that between 21st August 1935 and 13th October 1936, the W1 never actually ran in service, effectively meaning it ran for 3 months with the double chimney and spent the rest of the time either in the works or being tested.

 

Sorry if I've misinterpreted things,

Jamie

  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've suggested in the past that somebody, it could now be Hornby, produces the Hush Hush in a special double chimney variation. Only to be available in a lovely gift set, with ex NER dynamometer car and counter pressure locomotive 761. Do Hornby or some other company produce the Dynamometer car? Hush Hush wouldn't have had the cowling fitted during the test runs with 761 but the hinged front plate had been removed to reveal the smoke box door. What a shame that 761 survived until 1951 at the rugby test plant but was then scrapped.  Does anybody produce a kit of the S class?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Further to above comments , again below has been taken from the Brown book.

 

26.05.1935 Double Chimney fitted Test runs commence.

 

All the Blast Pipe tests are listed in the book from the 30.05.1935 to 06.06.1935. On the 05.06.1935 she produced 1702 H.P at the Drawbar !!

 

06.06.1935 Test ended Loco @ Leeds Neville Hiil Shed in storage. The Cowl is shown in a photo fitted  in July 1935 , the book doesnt say it it was used or not during the tests.

No further information then.

 

21.08.1935 Stooperdale paint shop in storage.

 

13.10.1936 Doncaster for rebuild .

 

There is no mention in the book of anymore running other than to Doncaster for the rebuild, over a year later . There is no mention of the source of  the information in the LNER enclyclopedia .

https://www.lner.info/locos/W/w1.php

 

So after a bit more reading ,the Double Chimney appears ?? to have had a Test life of about 2 weeks.

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Headstock said:

I've suggested in the past that somebody, it could now be Hornby, produces the Hush Hush in a special double chimney variation. Only to be available in a lovely gift set, with ex NER dynamometer car and counter pressure locomotive 761. Do Hornby or some other company produce the Dynamometer car? Hush Hush wouldn't have had the cowling fitted during the test runs with 761 but the hinged front plate had been removed to reveal the smoke box door. What a shame that 761 survived until 1951 at the rugby test plant but was then scrapped.  Does anybody produce a kit of the S class?

Rapido did the Dyno Car , never heard of a S class LNER  B13 kit .

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, micklner said:

Rapido did the Dyno Car , never heard of a S class LNER  B13 kit .

 

Thanks, Mick,

 

do you think I should scratch build or wish list the S?

 

One point springs to mind, didn't Hush Hush lose its hinged front plate in the early thirties? So the exposed smokebox door was always the most common appearance for the locomotive, even with single chimney? Though it is mostly modelled with the hinged plate in place.

Edited by Headstock
single not double
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Thanks, Mick,

 

do you think I should scratch build or wish list the S?

 

One point springs to mind, didn't Hush Hush lose its hinged front plate in the early thirties? So the exposed smokebox door was always the most common appearance for the locomotive, even with single chimney? Though it is mostly modelled with the hinged plate in place.

Andrew

         Whatever you "wish" re the S , I doubt very much if it will appear as a kit however !! . Having said that Arthur Kimber on here made the kit for the  S2/ LNER B15 which I have built , so you never know !!

 

   The hinged front cover on W1 is not in place in a September 1933 photo , perhaps Hornby might be clever and make it with a removable cover with the Smokebox door also moulded !!

 

Mick

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, micklner said:

Andrew

         Whatever you "wish" re the S , I doubt very much if it will appear as a kit however !! . Having said that Arthur Kimber on here made the kit for the  S2/ LNER B15 which I have built , so you never know !!

 

   The hinged front cover on W1 is not in place in a September 1933 photo , perhaps Hornby might be clever and make it with a removable cover with the Smokebox door also moulded !!

 

Mick

 

Mick,

 

I've done a bit of checking. The earliest reliably dated photo of Hush Hush without the hinged cover plate is 1931, Brown has it that this is when it was removed. Just to confirm, the only available photo of Hush Hush working with the ex NER Dynamometer car and the counter pressure locomotive, shows the locomotive without the smoke clearing cowl or the hinged plate. That cowl must have been a Bulleid contraption, it's very primitive Merchant Navy.

Edited by Headstock
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Mick,

 

I've done a bit of checking. The earliest reliably dated photo of Hush Hush without the hinged cover plate is 1931, Brown has it that this is when it was removed. Just to confirm, the only available photo of Hush Hush working with the ex NER Dynamometer car and the counter pressure locomotive, shows the locomotive without the smoke clearing cowl or the hinged plate. That cowl must have been a Bulleid contraption, it's very primitive Merchant Navy.

Yes ,Brown has made the same comment re the Cowling being a Bulleid Pacific type invention , not exactly a attractive addition to the Loco !

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, micklner said:

Further to above comments , again below has been taken from the Brown book.

 

26.05.1935 Double Chimney fitted Test runs commence.

 

All the Blast Pipe tests are listed in the book from the 30.05.1935 to 06.06.1935. On the 05.06.1935 she produced 1702 H.P at the Drawbar !!

 

13.10.1936 Doncaster for rebuild .

 

So after a bit more reading ,the Double Chimney appears ?? to have had a Test life of about 2 weeks.

 

Are you implying the double chimney was fitted on/before 26MAY35 then removed on/after 05JUN35?

 

I don't see the point if the rebuild is planned, then made on/after 13OCT36.

 

Totally agree, W1 carried the single blastpipe / chimney for much longer.

 

Curious after the 1st rebuild with the narrower blastpipe it appears the chimney was trimmed flush with the side plates / deflectors and appears to be shamfered, sloping up in line with the delfectors.

 

Proof of the pudding, as they say ...

 

After all I've 'said' (!!) I suppose I could live with a single - this doesn't look half bad: 

 

 

Al.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, atom3624 said:

 

Are you implying the double chimney was fitted on/before 26MAY35 then removed on/after 05JUN35?

 

I don't see the point if the rebuild is planned, then made on/after 13OCT36.

 

Totally agree, W1 carried the single blastpipe / chimney for much longer.

 

Curious after the 1st rebuild with the narrower blastpipe it appears the chimney was trimmed flush with the side plates / deflectors and appears to be shamfered, sloping up in line with the delfectors.

 

Proof of the pudding, as they say ...

 

After all I've 'said' (!!) I suppose I could live with a single - this doesn't look half bad: 

 

 

Al.

Chimney?, no I am not . It would appear it was dumped for around a year and then rebuilt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On ‎14‎/‎01‎/‎2020 at 18:32, Black Marlin said:


Taking 'Pegasus' as the class pathfinder, and knowing the LNER's fondness for an equestrian theme, why not name the others after other mythical horses? Llamrei and Hengroen were King Arthur's; Sleipnir was Odin's; Balius and Xanthus in Greek mythology; Tulpar, a winged horse in Turkish mythology; Bayard in French legend...


Off topic:

I'm leaning towards the idea of Greek mythology creatures... Charybdis, Scylla, etc... soon have the paint brush out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 19/01/2020 at 09:41, Headstock said:

I'm not a fan of the double chimney myself, from an aesthetic point of view. It sticks up like wedge of cheese, rather spoiling the beautiful lines. With the double chimney affixed the loco ran without the hinged front plate, the result was rather ugly.

 

https://d240vprofozpi.cloudfront.net/locos/W/w1front.jpg

Add the additional cowling ,and the front end  looks like a Basking Shark mouth , not pretty that for sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 18/01/2020 at 12:45, Dungrange said:

 

I agree with you, that if the prototype spent longer with a single chimney that a double chimney, it would seem to make sense for Hornby to produce the model with a single chimney.  All things being equal, that is what I would do if I were Hornby and that is the model I'm potentially most likely to buy, but for me that decision will be price sensitive.

 

How many of those who will purchase this model will do so because it is correct for their layout?  It's not really a branch line locomotive suitable for the typical end to end layout and it wasn't even around all that long in its original form - about eight years, I think.  In my case, a W1 does not fit with a post-privatisation era layout and therefore if I purchase one of these models when they are released (as I'm tempted to do), I'd have to assume that it was a new build like Tornado to allow it to run alongside an EWS Class 66.  Therefore, should it really matter to me whether it has a single chimney or a double chimney?  If it's to represent a 21st Century rebuild, I could argue that a model in LNER Green would be as likely as one with the authentic grey livery from the 1930's and it may help with publicity for rail tours if the locomotive were named.

 

I find it strange that Hornby have announced three versions of the W1 in its original form (I'd only have been producing one if I were them), but I'm assuming that Hornby must know what they are doing and must expect to sell a significant number of models of the W1 to those who are not modelling the East Coast Mainline between 1929 and 1937.

 

Yes, some people want an accurate representation of a model in their time period but many will buy this model simply because it is different.

 

 

Although I have no great interest in the LNER, I can envisage the purchase of one, even if it only sits in the sidings next to one of the Bachmann cranes I have

 

regards

 

Nigel

  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, micklner said:

Add the additional cowling ,and the front end  looks like a Basking Shark mouth , not pretty that for sure.

 

I wonder if the name Plankton was considered, Gresley must have taken one look at the thing and ordered the rebuild.

  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what sound it made?  Quick look on Youtube and the original footage was silent.  Would a HP Boiler make different sounds?  I suppose changing the chimney would also have some difference?

 

Maybe a Hornby R8119 would work? ;-)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The sound was definitely unique, being a high pressure four cylinder compound. I have some film of the locomotive travelling at speed with the Dynamometer car. The exhaust is rather interesting and the 'streamlining' seems to work very well with the single chimney. The sound that the locomotive made has been described as Hush Hush. What's a R8119?

Edited by Headstock
ask question.
  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Headstock said:

The sound that the locomotive made has been described as Hush Hush.

 

That was the alternative (and better) explanation, other than it being super secret, that I read for its nickname.

 

43 minutes ago, Headstock said:

What's a R8119?

 

A Hornby TTS sound decoder.

  • Like 1
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...