Jump to content
 

Is the time right for a new Pannier? If you think so, please add your support and ideas to this thread


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold

GWR and BR Western Region modellers will all have at least one Pannier on their layout, probably from Bachmann and talk on several threads recently has raised the desire for a freshly tooled version to bring the ubiquitous Pannier bang up to date.

 

Panniers saw very long service, early examples being converted from saddle tanks with the type seeing continuous development right up to powerful 94xx, given to us by Bachmann, so what next?

 

Hopefully some manufacturers' attention will be drawn to our thread and will consider the merits of bringing a new high fidelity and ever popular Pannier to market.

 

So to help the discussion along, what new Pannier type would you buy and which features would you like to be present? Would you like the ability to choose options such as a removable top feed, coal load with fully modelled interior, posable roof vents, removable roof for ease of inserting crew and detailing, super easy decoder and sound capability, etc?

 

Please contribute your thoughts and desires to help promote the idea of a new Pannier or Panniers and therefore help inform a manufactures of the potential demand within the model railway community.

 

Let the discussion continue  .  .  . 

  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
25 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

Define a Pannier

 

There are so many of them or do you just mean one of the 57xx variety?

In this instance, a GWR loco bearing pannier water tanks across the boiler. These include many classes, including the 57xx class and all bear a strong resemblance to one another through the arrangement of the water tanks.

 

We all have favourites and I hope sometime in the not too distant future that we get some of the older types, such as the outside frames, like the class 1076.

 

Best,

 

Bill

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

  • RMweb Premium

Surely the 16xx that Rapido have made for Model Rail magazine is the latest in the long line pannier tank models that GWR and Western Region fans are able to enjoy. Which class does the OP think should be next in line to be modelled?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is it, there are so many, recently Kernow & Heljan did the 1360s and Rapido are doing the 16xx.  Bachman’s did the 64xx and the 94xx as well as continuing the 57xx

 

A new 2721 would be a nice addition to the Hornby stable.

 

Given all the other GW locos that have recently arrived or are about to arrive then a new 57xx will be on someone’s radar, but one of the earlier types would be nice too, maybe a 517 as well

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

For 57xx ‘family’ variants, a removable top feed doesn’t work. It and it’s associated pipe work would need a firm fixing, and the injectors are different. When the feed and pipes are removed the fixing locations are going to be visible, and un prototypical. Then if it’s BR lined there’s the livery which will need to be taken into account.

Tooling for either top feed fitted, or no top feed would be the logical and practical solution. In terms of sales of those types that got into the BR era, top feed fitted are more prevalent, therefore cost effectiveness would mean top feed fitted are more likely.

 

 

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

  • RMweb Gold
2 hours ago, woodenhead said:

new 2721 would be a nice addition to the Hornby stable.

 

 

Preaching to the choir, sir, though I'd prefer Bachmann to make it!  I would be up for one of these in pannier form, or an 1854 (very similar) or an 850.  Anyone producing one would be in a position to provide different toolings for saddle tank, spectacle plate, half-cab, and full cab versions.

 

On the top feed debate, I'd prefer to see the models sold with the top feed and plumbing in the box as retrofit parts, locating into holes part drilled from the inside of the body that can easily be drilled out by the customer.  This would probably mean the supply of alternative number plates as separate retrofit items, perhaps located and fitted in the same way.  We are sort of heading this way anyway, with Bachmann providing etched plates to retrofit to thier 94xx. 

 

Top feeds are an awkward issue, as the boilers, both topfeed and topfeedless, migrated around between locos of all the classes they were suitable for.  This is because a loco taken int for major overhaul can be overhauled in less time than it takes to do the specialist work and testing of the boiler, so it would be fitted with the next available suitable boiler.  There is TTBOMK no record of which locos carried which boilers when, or whether they had topfeed fitted, and while the plain boilers with no top feed were getting thin on the ground towards the end of steam on the WR, some locos were withdrawn with them as late as 1965.  Classes affected are 1854, 2721, 57xx/8750 and variants, and, with a different type of boiler, the 54/64/74xx, which I think was in the same boiler pool as the 14xx/58xx. and the 1366.  TTBOMK all 16xx always had topfeed boilers, but I'm happy to be proved wrong on that point.

 

Dated and ratified photographic evidence of established provenance is best, but not always available.  I have only managed to establish one pannier at Tondu in my 1948-58 period that I can confirm ran without a topfeed, 5797, which I have modelled including it's smokebox door mounted lamp bracket.  I'd like to find a Tondu 8750 without a topfeed for this period as well, but have failed so far; 9660 had one in 1962, but not in 1957 when it still had  unicycling lions.

 

The 54xx and later series of 64xx, with squared off cabside/bunker joins and no lip on the front of the cab roof, and 74xx which were visually very similar to the later 64xx, have not yet been produced as RTR models, and neither have the 67xx or 6750 (versions of the 57xx and 8750 respectively with no vacuum brakes and laterally jointed coupling rods for dock shunting at the Bristol Channel ports), though the latter types can easily be converted from the Bachmann 57xx and 8750.  There is also no RTR 97xx yet either. 

 

Another non-GW type was an RSH Stephenson Long Boiler produced as late as 1954 for the NCB's Philadelphia system in the Northeast of England.

 

Let's see if Hornby come up with the goods later this morning, but I'm not holding my breath!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The current panniers available are all of the later versions. Although the 57xx is perhaps the most commonly modelled, those available are secondhand and their lineage goes back around forty years to the old Mainline models, survivors of which are on borrowed time. My Mainline pannier is actually parts of three locos. I have several twenty year old Bachmann versions and judging from the bidding on eBay, I am certain that there's a demand for a new version. The 87xx is another viable model and the old Hornby 2721 if revamped would be a good seller, as they were another long lived class.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
59 minutes ago, Chris M said:

You 00 modellers - you don't know your born when it comes to model availability.

 

Exactly. This is a most odd thread. Panniers are popular locos to both enthusiasts and modellers. The market is not barren of them in at least one scale - yet the OP makes no mention of scale. Why? And panniers come in several different flavours - again at least some of which are available in some scales - and no, they are not all generally interchangeable, having different power ratings and capabilities.

 

I suspect a troll. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't people read anymore? Clearly says Bachmann which implies OO and GWR/WR in the OP.

 

It was originally in the Bachmann section and does mention Bachmann in the post. He was asked to post it elsewhere by the Moderators.

 

 

I don't know why we need the snarky comments and the foreign prototypes posted as a joke. 

 

 

 :rolleyes:

 

 

 

Jason

 

  • Agree 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Andy Kirkham said:

Or how about this one

Egypt Railways - Egyptian State Railways 0-6-0ST steam locomotive No. 1177 (Henschel, 1904)

 

Or this one, mainly for the Southern enthusiast, but also similar ones were sold on to the Alexandra Docks  etc.  so could be said to be GWR.  

 

image.png.5313ea2b6daff6eb19cf225ebb0de153.png

Photo courtesy of the Dave Searle collection

Four similar locos were built by the LBSCR in the 1860's, and three ended up in South Wales.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
48 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

Don't people read anymore? Clearly says Bachmann which implies OO and GWR/WR in the OP.

 

It was originally in the Bachmann section and does mention Bachmann in the post. He was asked to post it elsewhere by the Moderators.

 

 

I don't know why we need the snarky comments and the foreign prototypes posted as a joke. 

 

 

 :rolleyes:

 

 

 

Jason

 

Indeed …. “Probably from Bachman” …. statically most modellers probably do have a pannier from Bachman as they produce the most types in the most common scale. It doesn’t mean others can’t call for one one by other manufacturers or in other scales in an open discussion.

 

oh what was that about snarky comments? :) 

 

I apologise for mine in advance ;)

 

Griff

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Oldddudders said:

Exactly. This is a most odd thread. Panniers are popular locos to both enthusiasts and modellers. The market is not barren of them in at least one scale - yet the OP makes no mention of scale. Why? And panniers come in several different flavours - again at least some of which are available in some scales - and no, they are not all generally interchangeable, having different power ratings and capabilities.

 

I suspect a troll. 

 

Hi Olddudder,

 

Far from being a troll, in reaching my mature years, I’ve learned to be respectively tolerant of other people’s opinions, as they are entitled to them even when they happen not to accord with my own.

 

However, in this forum’s context (social media), a troll can be seen to be defined as one who posts inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous or off topic content to our modelling fraternity. Hmm, I’m really not sure how you figure that one, but let me just say that I started my model railway journey in my youth and returned to it a generation or more later and am happy to be slowly researching and building my model railway and in response to several discussions here, I was encouraged sufficiently to start this thread regarding the venerable pannier. This was done in the interests of sharing opinions and trying to gauge the degree of desire for a new Pannier model to current standards of accuracy and performance. My hope is that a manufacturer may find our discussion of interest.

 

Scale will obviously be a factor for production decisions, but as sufficient demand for popular models becomes apparent, manufacturer’s will be more inclined to take note. Dapol for example, manufacture several prototype models in 2, 4 and 7mm scale. I model in 4mm, OO gauge, as indicated on many of my posts on the forum, but I did not want to deter participation from anyone with a valid opinion or point to make.

 

I am here to enjoy the forum as part of my ongoing lifelong interest to railway modelling, so I hope you can overcome your mistrust and accept me for what I am and respect me for what I am not.

 

My sincere kindest regards,

 

Bill

Edited by longchap
  • Like 4
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Friendly/supportive 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, MrWolf said:

The current panniers available are all of the later versions. Although the 57xx is perhaps the most commonly modelled, those available are secondhand and their lineage goes back around forty years to the old Mainline models, survivors of which are on borrowed time. My Mainline pannier is actually parts of three locos. I have several twenty year old Bachmann versions and judging from the bidding on eBay, I am certain that there's a demand for a new version. The 87xx is another viable model and the old Hornby 2721 if revamped would be a good seller, as they were another long lived class.

A long lasting model that can be kept working by cannibalising older worn out models, the GWR would be proud.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
9 hours ago, The Johnster said:

 

On the top feed debate, I'd prefer to see the models sold with the top feed and plumbing in the box as retrofit parts, locating into holes part drilled from the inside of the body that can easily be drilled out by the customer.  This would probably mean the supply of alternative number plates as separate retrofit items, perhaps located and fitted in the same way.  We are sort of heading this way anyway, with Bachmann providing etched plates to retrofit to thier 94xx. 

 

 

The 54xx and later series of 64xx, with squared off cabside/bunker joins and no lip on the front of the cab roof, and 74xx which were visually very similar to the later 64xx, have not yet been produced as RTR models, and neither have the 67xx or 6750 (versions of the 57xx and 8750 respectively with no vacuum brakes and laterally jointed coupling rods for dock shunting at the Bristol Channel ports), though the latter types can easily be converted from the Bachmann 57xx and 8750.  There is also no RTR 97xx yet either. 

 

The drill out holes wouldnt be a viable tooling cost for the handful of people who would actually do it. That would mean taking the model apart, there’s more than enough evidence that the greater majority of RTR purchasers wouldn’t do that, see Vitrains. It also means all liveries will need to be early ones so you restrict your market immediately and you’ve still got livery issues to overcome, including two sets of handrails required. So it makes no commercial or manufacturing sense to take that path.

Etched plates are nothing new, we’re not heading down any new path there, they’ve been supplied for years, and people still don’t fit them. The lack of people fitting simple things like etched plates more than adequately demonstrates why they won’t drill holes in their models to fit extra details, back to Vitrains.

 

The 54xx is highly unlikely to be done, it requires a new chassis. 74xx’s and late 64’s need new cab tooling and if they (Bachmann) did that, they may as well correct the tanks to reflect the classes rather than one specific locomotive as currently. I very much doubt there’s sufficient market in each of those classes at the moment for revised tooling, when an appropriate renumber/livery will make good use of existing tooling. The 97xx in its condenser form might be viable, if enough ‘rule1’ modellers go for it but it’s likely due to top feed the tooling would favour a late version rather than GWR liveries, so potentially reducing the market interest.

 

With the cost of today’s tooling the most likely route would be a refreshing of the existing Bachmann 57xx family tools if practical, with some additional factory fitted details, and DCC sound. At the moment of course it provides a good, accurate and reliable model, which no doubt is cost effective to produce.

Edited by PMP
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a problem with the idea of a late condition 57XX which could be sold as previously in several liveries. Backdating it is not a big issue for me.

I suspect that the reason for supplied etched plates and other details never being fitted is down to the collector market, rather than actual modellers.

Don't alter anything, leave the extras in their little packets, or you won't be able to sell it for twice as much...

Not everyone wants models of large glamorous locos with limited edition liveries and all the tech included. They prefer the idea of a workaday loco that whilst accurate and reliable, can be improved and modified if they choose to do so.

 

As for the accusations of trolling, this thread came out of genuine discussions on several threads, mine included.

 

If you actually use your locos, they wear out eventually and a good number of new products have been found to be lacking in the operational and reliability categories.

Perhaps it was assumed that ninety percent would be in display cases?

I could do with replacing several of mine.

  • 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...