LMS 10001 delayed until mid to late 2020

[drt7uk]

Hi folks - for anyone interested, I spoke with Bachmann last week and sadly the LMS 10001 diesel, originally due out about now, is now not likely to come out until mid to late 2020. Sharing this for anyone interested as their website just says TBA - at least now we know. Disappointing, most likely because of the factory delays in China, but at least they said they're definitely still doing it!

 

https://www.Bachmann.co.uk/product/branchline-lms-10001-br-black-early-emblem-31-998/

 

A beaut of a loco...

Edited February 25, 2019 by drt7uk

[tomparryharry]

3 minutes ago, drt7uk said:

Hi folks - for anyone interested, I spoke with Bachmann last week and sadly the LMS 10001 diesel, originally due out about now, is now not likely to come out until mid to late 2020. Sharing this for anyone interested as their website just says TBA - at least now we know. Disappointing, most likely because of the factory delays in China, but at least they said they're definitely still doing it!

 

https://www.Bachmann.co.uk/product/branchline-lms-10001-br-black-early-emblem-31-998/

 

A beaut of a loco...

 

That's a nice-looking model, fair play.

[No Decorum]

My Rule 1, well, perhaps Rule 2, is never to buy more than one model of any particular loco. I shattered the rule for these; I have three of 10000 and two of 10001. They were beautiful machines (IMHO the most beautiful diesels ever built) and the Bachmann model does them justice. With apologies to Bachmann, I shan’t buy this particular model. I have to draw the line somewhere!

[Ian Hargrave]

4 minutes ago, No Decorum said:

My Rule 1, well, perhaps Rule 2, is never to buy more than one model of any particular loco. I shattered the rule for these; I have three of 10000 and two of 10001. They were beautiful machines (IMHO the most beautiful diesels ever built) and the Bachmann model does them justice. With apologies to Bachmann, I shan’t buy this particular model. I have to draw the line somewhere!

 

And for a truly different experience,suggest you also try the FIAtrains version.

[No Decorum]

1 minute ago, Ian Hargrave said:

 

And for a truly different experience,suggest you also try the FIAtrains version.

I’m afraid the FIAtrains version is on the wrong side of the line for me. 

[rob D2]

8 hours ago, No Decorum said:

My Rule 1, well, perhaps Rule 2, is never to buy more than one model of any particular loco. I shattered the rule for these; I have three of 10000 and two of 10001. They were beautiful machines (IMHO the most beautiful diesels ever built) and the Bachmann model does them justice. With apologies to Bachmann, I shan’t buy this particular model. I have to draw the line somewhere!

Beautiful ? Maybe a trip to specsavers in order .....;)

[Ian Hargrave]

12 hours ago, rob D2 said:

Beautiful ? Maybe a trip to specsavers in order .....;)

 

Well that opens up a can of worms doesn’t it ? Any aesthetic judgement is entirely subjective surely ?

[Downer]

In the eye of the beholder, etc etc

[rob D2]

,

indeed, each to their own !

[John Tomlinson]

The other variant that would be very welcome to me would be 10001 in the lined green with primrose roof, that is 1957 condition, to match 10000 in this state per their 31-995.

 

Whilst resprays would be possible the probability of a perfect match of colour and lining is quite slim, other than by Bachmann doing it!

 

John.

[MikeParkin65]

15 hours ago, rob D2 said:

Beautiful ? Maybe a trip to specsavers in order .....;)

Certainly a more functionally cohesive and handsome design than many of its successors (Peak, Sulzer type 2's, Co Bo, Brush Type 2 etc).

 

All imho of course

[atom3624]

IMHO definitely one of the more interesting and historically relative and important additions to the diesel fleets within Britain's railways.

 

I'm definitely a fan of them - having to buy 'a pair' is somewhat limiting however.

 

This model does look fantastic - detailing superb.

 

Al.

[No Decorum]

2 hours ago, atom3624 said:

IMHO definitely one of the more interesting and historically relative and important additions to the diesel fleets within Britain's railways.

 

I'm definitely a fan of them - having to buy 'a pair' is somewhat limiting however.

 

This model does look fantastic - detailing superb.

 

Al.

The “Royal Scot” was a heavy train and did need both diesels to pull it but they were used singly a lot, on both passenger and goods trains.

[The Johnster]

Ivatt's basic concept was a very sound one; the locos were estimated to be equivalent to a Black 5 singly and a Duchess as a pair.  They were used in pairs for the heavy London-Glasgow trains, Royal Scot included, turn and turn about with Duchesses, 3.200hp on 12 powered axles. and singly on outer suburban work from Euston and on fast freight jobs, a very versatile and useful design by the standards of experimental or prototype locos.  The styling was of it's era and very American influenced, but echoes of it can be detected in the 'Peak' class 44/5/6 series.

[The Stationmaster]

9 hours ago, The Johnster said:

Ivatt's basic concept was a very sound one; the locos were estimated to be equivalent to a Black 5 singly and a Duchess as a pair.  They were used in pairs for the heavy London-Glasgow trains, Royal Scot included, turn and turn about with Duchesses, 3.200hp on 12 powered axles. and singly on outer suburban work from Euston and on fast freight jobs, a very versatile and useful design by the standards of experimental or prototype locos.  The styling was of it's era and very American influenced, but echoes of it can be detected in the 'Peak' class 44/5/6 series.

Their use on Euston suburban workings came quite late on in their working lives as far as I know - probably about the time that Modernisation Plan dieselisation of those services started.  and even then they seemed to spend rather a lot of time on shed at Willesden from what I regularly saw there in my spotting days

[Ian Hargrave]

They were used on the WCML singly on express passenger turns from 1956 until the arrival of the EE type4  ( aka 40 ) in late 1959 .They were then in BR green.

[The Johnster]

One assumes that, had nationalisation not taken place, the LMS would have built a fleet of them and compared the running costs and availability with Black 5s and Duchesses, taking into consideration that 2 were needed to do the work of a Duchess.  Had that happened, no doubt reliability would have improved and less time per loco spent at Willesden...

 

In the event, diesel development was put back until the aftermath of the 1955 Modernisation Plan except for these two, the Southern trio, all ordered before BR came into being and decided, for sound enough politico-economic reasons, on another 7 years of steam production for everything except shunting engines.  There were also 10800 and the Fell, ultimately both dead ends.

 

I reckon the Ivatt twins were by no means bad locos and certainly not the worst that could have been built at the time, but it was inevitable that prototype and to some extent experimental locos were going to show poor reliability and availability.  But they had the longest working life of the early diesels, and were a common enough sight on the WCML; I would certainly want one if not both to run on any layout based on the southern half of it during the period.  Building a workable diesel electric with any decent power output to the British loading gauge was an impressive feat in 1947; they were more powerful for the size than the 31s, produced over a decade later and comparable in size and weight.

 

Ivatt presumably intended them to be a standard design that could do most main line jobs on his railway, and there is no reason so suggest that they couldn't have!

Edited February 28, 2019 by The Johnster

[Steamport Southport]

Don't forget they still needed two diesels to pull The Royal Scot and other WCML Scottish expresses until the electrics arrived. Hence the Class 50s with multiple working.

 

Even the lighter expresses usually needed assistance over Shap and Beattock. I've seen loads of photographs of Class 40s being banked by Standards.

 

 

Jason

[John Tomlinson]

For younger readers, it's perhaps worth remembering that trains were a lot longer in the mid 20th century.

 

The standard in 1970 for the Anglo - Scottish expresses was 13 coaches, with 2 Class 50's on the front from Crewe to Glasgow.

 

Going back a bit further, I suspect in the late '50's, the heyday of the Ivatt twins, we might well have been up to 15 or 16 coaches.

 

A bit different to today!

 

John.

[The Johnster]

Modern timetables usually have shorter lighter trains at a higher frequency to move the same number of people between destinations over a given time; shorter lighter trains are of course easier to make go faster, which means you can put more of them, and therefor sell more seats, on a given length of track.

 

But there are still some longish modern workings, notably Eurostar.

[No Decorum]

11 hours ago, The Johnster said:

Modern timetables usually have shorter lighter trains at a higher frequency to move the same number of people between destinations over a given time; shorter lighter trains are of course easier to make go faster, which means you can put more of them, and therefor sell more seats, on a given length of track.

 

But there are still some longish modern workings, notably Eurostar.

That was, was it not, one of the ideas the Midland Railway had in its battle with the LNWR? The consequence was that the Midland men who gained control in the early days of the LMS tried to impose their standard designs. Midland locomotives were not altogether bad; they were just underpowered for the heavy trains on the former LNWR section.

 

Speed is a headline grabber but it has been pointed out that it probably suits passengers better if they can turn up at a station, knowing that they will have to wait, say, twenty minutes or so rather than an hour. Never mind that the shorter wait gets them onto a slightly slower train.

[adb968008]

Dont mention the war....

 

in the 1930’s the UK was considerably disadvantaged to other nations diesel developments, most noticeably the US, which had long distance services at high speeds at mass production levels before Mallard did 126mph. 6220’s appearance in New York in 1939 was a kin to a museum piece rather than Staniers finest.

i’m sure trips like this were foremost in mind when post war turned to diesels.

 

indeed pre-war attentions were all Electric in the UK. The depression of the 1920’s stalled this development and it was very possible the LNER could have had an electrified ECML by the mid 1930’s had it not, London’s suburbs had already been a nonstandard spaghetti of Electric schemes for 30 years already at this point by the LBSC, LSWR, LNWR, GER etc so it was clear not just the benefits of Electrification were known but it was actively increasing.

 

Dieselisation came about from American war time influence, otherwise I suspect the UK would have continued the Swiss model of independent companies making their own solutions. This would have resulted in a diverse overhead and 3rd rail systems tailored to each company rather than a national standard, mixed with steam, more rural bus services and even further advancements of civil aviation services by rail companies.

 

The SR recognised the need for standards but took the wrong decision to stick with the LSWR standard, resulting in the OHLE being removed from Victoria to Sutton instead of expanding it down to Portsmouth and beyond.

 

it was the war that focussed the minds on Britain’s technical disadvantages in relation to diesel power and energies were spent on advancing war time diesel technology, rather than advancing electric technology like the rest of Europe. I assume on an oil based agenda, with the flexibility of diesel mobility in advent of further hostilities in Europe that electric would be disadvantaged militarily. That and as well as being perceived to be keeping up with the Americans.

Edited March 1, 2019 by adb968008

[The Johnster]

Very good points, adb, especially the perception of 'keeping up with the Americans'.  Many of our higher ranking military officers during the war, and business or political leaders after it, not to mention the very influential media types, had spent time in the States and were impressed by their diesel hauled expresses, with their aluminium streamlined air conditioned coaches pulled by modern looking locos that could be just added to if you wanted more power.  Those who knew a little about railways were also impressed by the air braked bogie freight cars with automatic buffer/couplings.

 

These were the great and good, the movers and shakers of their day, and asked questions in important places.  Some of these questions included 'why can't we have trains like that', and the answers often sounded a bit unsatisfactory to them.  Their influence on the post war railway and on early BR was considerable and led to the 1955 Modernisation Plan, which included air brakes, eth, and bogie freight vehicles as well as the locomotive policy decisions.  But by that time these influential types were being impressed by the spread of 25kv electrification on the European mainland, funded by Marshall Plan money in many cases, and the focus changed.

 

Nowadays their successors come back from visits to Japan with tales of tech that is 20 years ahead of ours as well as 250mph trains that run to time.  It is difficult to asses what effect they had in those days on railway company or early BR policy and investment, but it must have been considerable.  American streamlined diesel trains, European 25kv, and high speed Bullet Train clones have successively been the aspirational desire of Britain's post WW2 railway, always thwarted by lack of capital and political will.  

[Steamport Southport]

Eh? Millions of people turned up to see the brand new futuristic train.

 

6220 was far from a museum piece, it was the future. The US was heavily investing in steam at the time. It wasn't diesels that killed off steam in America, it was air travel. Why use a train to travel fast between cities when a plane could do it? It didn't help having thousands of surplus WW2 planes such as Dakotas and trained pilots.

 

These were 6220s American equivalents.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milwaukee_Road_class_A

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milwaukee_Road_class_F7

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norfolk_and_Western_Railway_class_J_(1941)

 

 

 

Jason

Edited March 1, 2019 by Steamport Southport

[The Johnster]

KGV, Royal Scot, and Coronation all made very big and favourable impressions in the States, but had very little influence on their methods of building or running steam locomotives.  I absolutely agree that the DC3s were the beginning of the end for a lot of US passenger operation except for commuter traffic, but there were other factors as well, including the huge loss of freight to the trucking industry which rose on the back of the interstate highway network; much the same happened here but 20 years later.

 

The impression of Merkan servicemen based in the UK during the war of our railways was that they were quaint at best, and largely inferior to theirs.  This was not always true; an unofficial 'pull off' to see which could haul the greater load on Barry Docks in 1944 between a USATC 0-6-0 and a fairly new 6750 pannier which the US army considered a museum piece with it's Victorian chimney and dome (to be fair it was a basically Victorian design) came out heavily in favour of the 6750.  This was not a scientific comparison, though, and largely done for the purposes of illegal gambling.