Bachmann NRM/Locomotionmodels.com - GNR Ivatt C1

[Bon Accord]

And he was also an LNER employee  (and reportedly a man with a strong Christian faith which might have meant he wasn't biased)

 

OS Nock thought quite highly of them too and both were probably quite correct that they were likely the best Atlantics on the ECML, although the NER version would probably come a close second with the NBR version. Of the latter, a plan is beginning to form regarding shoving a Bachmann C1 chassis under a GEM body......

[railroadbill]

And he was also an LNER employee  (and reportedly a man with a strong Christian faith which might have meant he wasn't biased)

We see through a glass darkly. Hopefully there is integrity in his writings!

There are quite a lot of statistics  in Allen's book, mainly timed runs for each type of engine but also for example the results of trials between GN, NE and NB atlantics, rather inconclusive, and trials between an NB atlantic and an LNWR Experiment.  C J Allen's comment seems based on the GN engines good performance with both heavy and fast trains. 

I suppose in reality if a locomotive class ran the trains they were supposed to reasonably reliably and safely, without costing too much, then that was enough for the railway company. But looking back through the mists of time, these are very  interesting comparisons!

[CUTLER2579]

Got one (a nurse that is). She doesn't know about the Atlantic......... and I hope it stays that way. I will build up to it being a Christmas present  "Would you like to get me something for the railway..... I have just the thing in mind".

 

Apparently wallet opening is bad for my health (but only if she finds out about it!).

 

And I am only a Yorkshireman by residence, not birth!

 

 

Only a   TYKE by RESIDENCE,   But surely  tho  knos  tis.:-

 

                                                                                                                  

Tykes Motto

'Ear all, see all, say nowt

Eyt all, sup all, pay nowt

And if ivver tha does owt fer nowt

Alus does it fer thissen.

[Guest Belgian]

My RCTS books on the LNER  cover classes A1-A10, B1-B19, L1-N19 and Q1-Y10, plus the preliminary survey - but not regrettably C1!  Could someone with the appropriate volume comment on the 251 preservation story, please?

I agree.

 

I put the bit about no.251 being something else as a light-hearted posting expecting a few laughs. However, it does appear that a number of people have taken it seriously and are getting hot under the collar. I really couldn't care less which engine it really is, I'm just glad that someone, well before the modern preservation era, made sure a pair of Ivatt Atlantics made it into that era. I doubt whether there is a single preserved engine that is what was originally built for the originating company - 'Flying Scotsman' probably having not one single piece of the first LNER engine in it except perhaps the nameplates* - except 'Evening Star', and that's probably got another 9F's original boiler!

 

I suppose one should put a 'joker smiley' in to indicate one is not being too serious, so here are four - one for this post and one for each of my previous ones! :jester: :jester:

 

JE

 

* are they original????

Edited August 2, 2014 by Belgian

[JSpencer]

Many southern N class had their frames replaced during the lifetime. It was a part like any other.

 

The Bluebell have kept every original part of Stephany. After the current rebuild, what will effectively exist is enough parts to make a non working original and a working replica (with some minor original parts).

 

What was not well understood prewar was metal fatigue. This is normally not a problem with steels that are stressed lower than say 60% of the elastic limit! However most items made from steel began to be designed close to the elastic limit from say 1910.

Square corners from hornblocks combined with constant back and forth stressing from the motion combined with exploring the elastic limit (this done to keep down weight) will of course eventually lead to cracking in the frames that we see.

 

You have to wait until the 1950s, when stressed glass model replicas could be used to find the stress points in any design to eliminate the problem ( today computers do all this work).

 

OS Nock gives good accounts of these Atlantics when they replaced a failed larger engine under emergency circumstances. It looks amazing on paper however what is missed is that the larger locos were never working beyond 80% capacity (this to increase periods between maintenance) while doubtless the Atlantic was being pushed to the limits. This is after all a 1 off circumstance so will not affect the loco much, but you can bet she would be in the workshops far far sooner if she did it daily. What mattered to crew at the moment was running the train on time.

Edited August 2, 2014 by JSpencer

[railroadbill]

I agree.

 

I put the bit about no.251 being something else as a light-hearted posting expecting a few laughs. However, it does appear that a number of people have taken it seriously and are getting hot under the collar. I really couldn't care less which engine it really is, I'm just glad that someone, well before the modern preservation era, made sure a pair of Ivatt Atlantics made it into that era. I doubt whether there is a single preserved engine that is what was originally built for the originating company - 'Flying Scotsman' probably having not one single piece of the first LNER engine in it except perhaps the nameplates* - except 'Evening Star', and that's probably got another 9F's original boiler!

 

I suppose one should put a 'joker smiley' in to indicate one is not being too serious, so here are four - one for this post and one for each of my previous ones! :jester: :jester:

 

JE

 

* are they original????

Don't think anyone's getting hot under the collar about this, just some find it interesting to find out how a particular historical artifact is preserved. The classic car fraternity certainly do take the historical accuracy of old vehicles seriously and it can make a tremendous difference to the value. There have been court cases about the provenance of classic raciing cars, for instance, that aren't what they seem.

 

It's the difference between lets say a particular aircraft of historical importance being preserved by the RAF museum, explaining it's significance and another similar aircraft being restored to flying order and maintained as such at Duxford or Shuttleworth. The FAA museum have a Corsair fighter that is preserved in the original condition it had been left in and quite deliberately didn't have any new paint, new markings, new parts at all. This kept it as a museum piece that could be studied seriously to confirm manufacturing techniques and so on. 

On the other hand a restored aircraft will involve current techniques, materials, remanufactured parts to current regulations, to enable it to operate.

With locomotives, Mallard must have needed a lot doing to get it back to steaming condition in the 1980s.

 

It's preservation versus restoration and operation.

 

So we're really looking at how museums should keep artifacts to enable the past to be available for study, and this has also brought up interesting  issues as to how steam locomotives were operated and maintained in that past. 

 

I personally find the steam railway and how it worked very interesting (and indeed other types of railway) but it is just a hobby (unless you are a museum curator of course).

 

cheers,

 

Bill

[Dunsignalling]

Many southern N class had their frames replaced during the lifetime. It was a part like any other.

 

The Bluebell have kept every original part of Stephany. After the current rebuild, what will effectively exist is enough parts to make a non working original and a working replica (with some minor original parts).

 

 

 

 

I remember reading an account of dismantling a preserved Black Five prior to restoration some years back that revealed it to be made up of parts originating from upwards of two dozen locos of various classes.

 

This included one bogie wheelset from an Ivatt tank, the other from an 8F and right and left mainframes from two different Black Fives.  

 

I'd imagine that this was not untypical of how most locos would break down if analysed after a number of general repairs.

 

John

[Dava]

The Bluebell have kept every original part of Stephany. After the current rebuild, what will effectively exist is enough parts to make a non working original and a working replica (with some minor original parts)..

So they could call the original Stepney and the replica Stephany? This predictive texting gets to us all!

 

Dava

[Guest spet0114]

 

* are they original????

No - the originals were prone to cracking and were replaced in about 1930 by some of a slightly different design.

Edited August 4, 2014 by spet0114

[Hroth]

Don't think anyone's getting hot under the collar about this, just some find it interesting to find out how a particular historical artifact is preserved. The classic car fraternity certainly do take the historical accuracy of old vehicles seriously and it can make a tremendous difference to the value. There have been court cases about the provenance of classic raciing cars, for instance, that aren't what they seem.

Its not just high-end classic cars that need provenance.

 

If you're restoring an ordinary car from the 50s (say a Ford Pop 103e) and want to retain the original number plates or get a set of "age related" plates from DVLC, then you need to prove that the chassis number is authentic and can be linked to a number of other numbers related to engine, drivetrain and so on.  Its a minefield to be sure and sometimes you end up diving deep into the "Ship of Theseus" paradox.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus

 

I think all that can be said is that an artefact is as original as its last day of service.

[durham light infantry]

The FAA museum have a Corsair fighter that is preserved in the original condition it had been left in and quite deliberately didn't have any new paint, new markings, new parts at all. This kept it as a museum piece that could be studied seriously to confirm manufacturing techniques and so on. 

 

The Corsair (along with the other original FAAM aircraft) was subjected to a unsympathetic 1960's makeover, which involved a repaint using paint left over from the Skyraider AEW's. It was only later that it was painstaking restored using conservation techniques similar to art restoration.

 

Mike

[Rail-Online]

Back to the model.

 

As is well known there is virtually no clearance between the prototype wheel flanges. This precludes fitting of model wheels with overscale flanges unless you model in 18.83/P4 with scale wheels. There are two ways round this:

 

1. Fit smaller Diameter driving wheels

2. Stretch the wheelbase (and therefore splasher spacing etc) to fit prototype (or close to prototype) sized wheels

 

If the splasher diameter are enlarged (even by @1mm) this effects the look of the loco when they are fitted so close together. Also plastic splashers are thicker than the metal prototypes.

 

Do we know yet what the approach taken by the model will be?

 

Tony

[railroadbill]

The Corsair (along with the other original FAAM aircraft) was subjected to a unsympathetic 1960's makeover, which involved a repaint using paint left over from the Skyraider AEW's. It was only later that it was painstaking restored using conservation techniques similar to art restoration.

 

Mike

Thanks for that, just found the  book on the FAAMs restoration of KD431 to original condition - and indeed as you say they had to painstakingly remove the 1963 makeover paint. Fortunately the original makeover hadn't involved stripping back to bare metal.   I quote "removing polyurethane paint (best described as coloured glue) from on top of thin cellulose paint applied some 60 years ago provided a very new challenge".   Fascinating.

[t-b-g]

Back to the model.

 

As is well known there is virtually no clearance between the prototype wheel flanges. This precludes fitting of model wheels with overscale flanges unless you model in 18.83/P4 with scale wheels. There are two ways round this:

 

1. Fit smaller Diameter driving wheels

2. Stretch the wheelbase (and therefore splasher spacing etc) to fit prototype (or close to prototype) sized wheels

 

If the splasher diameter are enlarged (even by @1mm) this effects the look of the loco when they are fitted so close together. Also plastic splashers are thicker than the metal prototypes.

 

Do we know yet what the approach taken by the model will be?

 

Tony

 

I don't know what Bachmann are doing but my choice in such circumstances is always to fit slightly smaller driving wheels.

 

Real loco driving wheels could vary as they were turned down possibly several times before they reached scrapping tolerances. I seem to recall that this could be by as much as a couple of inches but I can't remember where I heard or saw that figure. It may have come from Malcolm Crawley, who knew about such matters.

 

That has to be a much better option than increasing a wheelbase or enlarging splashers.

 

Tony

[railroadbill]

Its not just high-end classic cars that need provenance.

 

If you're restoring an ordinary car from the 50s (say a Ford Pop 103e) and want to retain the original number plates or get a set of "age related" plates from DVLC, then you need to prove that the chassis number is authentic and can be linked to a number of other numbers related to engine, drivetrain and so on.  Its a minefield to be sure and sometimes you end up diving deep into the "Ship of Theseus" paradox.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus

 

I think all that can be said is that an artefact is as original as its last day of service.

Excellent! thanks for the Ship of Theseus reference, the wikipedia article is very good.  (Would RMweb be the same with different members?)

[The Stationmaster]

Back to the model.

 

As is well known there is virtually no clearance between the prototype wheel flanges. This precludes fitting of model wheels with overscale flanges unless you model in 18.83/P4 with scale wheels. There are two ways round this:

 

1. Fit smaller Diameter driving wheels

2. Stretch the wheelbase (and therefore splasher spacing etc) to fit prototype (or close to prototype) sized wheels

 

If the splasher diameter are enlarged (even by @1mm) this effects the look of the loco when they are fitted so close together. Also plastic splashers are thicker than the metal prototypes.

 

Do we know yet what the approach taken by the model will be?

 

Tony

Yes - already mentioned up-thread (but it is getting a bit long now so you're excused ).  The driving wheel diameter has been reduced which, among other things, keeps the proportions of the splashers correct.  And in view of the distance between the flanges on the real thing (pics up-thread) I wonder if you would even get P4 wheels in?

[JaymzHatstand]

I'm aware that the driving wheels and indeed other wheels are the same diameters across both the C1 and C2 Atlantis, so could the same chassis/drive train arrangement be used if Bachmann decided to add the smaller boilerd variant to their main range? I understand that the same tools probably wouldn't be used as it would lead to excessive wear and tear, but at least it would cut down on the required R&D to an extent.

 

Fingers crossed

 

Cheers

 

J

[The Stationmaster]

I'm aware that the driving wheels and indeed other wheels are the same diameters across both the C1 and C2 Atlantis, so could the same chassis/drive train arrangement be used if Bachmann decided to add the smaller boilerd variant to their main range? I understand that the same tools probably wouldn't be used as it would lead to excessive wear and tear, but at least it would cut down on the required R&D to an extent.

 

Fingers crossed

 

Cheers

 

J

Or the NRM could do the same of course (not that I have heard such an idea even whispered but does the 'exclusive' also extend to an 'exclusive' on the chassis as well as complete locos?)

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

The same running chassis layout (axle spacings) is required for the announced H2 which is a regular release; so no exclusivity in respect of that aspect, and whatever saving results from using the same layout over two different models. (And potentially four, in the unlikely event Bach were ever to go on to offer the C2 and H1.)

[JaymzHatstand]

I had considered that, in a twin pack with 'Plant Centenarian' headboards and such!

 

Cheers

 

J

[coachmann]

A much lower motor would be required for a C1. If Bachmann have thought ahead and done this already, then there is hope.

[Jenny Emily]

Just bought today the GNR liveried version. Paid in full because I'm nice, and it'll make it all the nicer when it arrives late this year/early next year.

 

If the NRM has exclusivity over this model in the same way that they did for the prototype DELTIC, does this mean no chance for other stablemates without renumbering ourselves?

[The Stationmaster]

Just bought today the GNR liveried version. Paid in full because I'm nice, and it'll make it all the nicer when it arrives late this year/early next year.

 

If the NRM has exclusivity over this model in the same way that they did for the prototype DELTIC, does this mean no chance for other stablemates without renumbering ourselves?

I think that goes back to an earlier question where the answer is that Locomotion doesn't talk about commercial matters including its future plans for models.  And in any case whatever those plans might, or might not, be a lot depends on the initial sales.   Although Locomotion is a museum it is in many respects in no different a position from other commissioners (or, in a way, manufacturers) as the models have got to wash their face financially before there is a future to consider.  So hanging back on buying at this stage could possibly backfire on those wishing for variants later.

[gr.king]

The cynic could say that sounds like sales talk.....

 

I'm glad Larry mentioned the need for a low slung motor, saving me repetition of things said elsewhere. Track record suggests such planning ahead is unlikely, but now I've said that I shall be wrong of course.

[Jenny Emily]

Well, I have supported the project by paying the full price up front for the GNR liveried version. Noticed today though that my card has yet to be debited.