Steamport Southport Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 Come on guys, the Barclay has drawn ahead with 7 pages of interest while we remain at 5. We must find additional things to say about the P class such as: Look -- the P class also served as an Industrial, there are 2 offered. Boy this will go well with the Dapol B4 in a harbour setting, a Barclay probably won't. Wow... they were even used at Folkstone, imagine it helping to push the Golden Arrow - you never saw a Barclay do that.... etc..... Erm. Eight P Class used in a tiny corner of the country, as opposed to hundreds of Andrew Barclays that were used all over the country including harbours and even lasted into the mid 1980s? I think I know the winner already. Wasn't it R1s that were used on the Folkestone Branch though? Needing four of them until replaced by a 57XX Pannier Tank. Jason 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSpencer Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 Erm. Eight P Class used in a tiny corner of the country, as opposed to hundreds of Andrew Barclays that were used all over the country including harbours and even lasted into the mid 1980s? I think I know the winner already. Wasn't it R1s that were used on the Folkestone Branch though? Needing four of them until replaced by a 57XX Pannier Tank. Jason Indeed the R1s replaced the P class! I am seriously disappointed that an R1 never made it into preservation. All that is left is 2 boilers and 1 chassis of this magnificent class. In any case Barclay's are bogged down in two pages of skirts. No skirts on our P! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Captain Kernow Posted September 14, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 14, 2017 Indeed the R1s replaced the P class! I am seriously disappointed that an R1 never made it into preservation. All that is left is 2 boilers and 1 chassis of this magnificent class. I've preserved an old Hornby Dublo one. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ady77014 Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 (edited) Indeed the R1s replaced the P class! I am seriously disappointed that an R1 never made it into preservation. All that is left is 2 boilers and 1 chassis of this magnificent class. Huh? Explain, I thought there was nothing left... Edited September 14, 2017 by ady77014 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Froxfield2012 Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 Erm. Eight P Class used in a tiny corner of the country, as opposed to hundreds of Andrew Barclays that were used all over the country including harbours and even lasted into the mid 1980s? I think I know the winner already. Wasn't it R1s that were used on the Folkestone Branch though? Needing four of them until replaced by a 57XX Pannier Tank. Jason Yes, it was R1s. But it took more than one Pannier tank to heave the Golden Arrow up the Folkestone Tramway. As I recall (although memory can play tricks about so long ago) the thing the Folkestone residents didn't like about the Pannier tanks was that they threw a lot more soot and sparks out of the chimney than the R1s!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodenhead Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 Indeed the R1s replaced the P class! I am seriously disappointed that an R1 never made it into preservation. All that is left is 2 boilers and 1 chassis of this magnificent class. That's more than is left of Flying Scotsman. If they have a Chassis and a boiler all it needs is wheels and a cab Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSpencer Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 (edited) Huh? Explain, I thought there was nothing left... Both boilers and one chassis are in use on the O1 and H. That's more than is left of Flying Scotsman. If they have a Chassis and a boiler all it needs is wheels and a cab But then we would loose an O1! What the Bluebell could do is first make a spare boiler for the current 2 locos, then spare chassis parts for the O1 and gradually creep towards having enough parts to do an R1. At a certain point, the cab, side tanks and bunker will be all that is required. They could even make a Stirling chimney. The SECR had quite a high degree of standardization (the P class being rather unique in everything and it is amazing that half of them survived). Edited September 14, 2017 by JSpencer Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold adb968008 Posted September 15, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 15, 2017 Both boilers and one chassis are in use on the O1 and H. But then we would loose an O1! What the Bluebell could do is first make a spare boiler for the current 2 locos, then spare chassis parts for the O1 and gradually creep towards having enough parts to do an R1. At a certain point, the cab, side tanks and bunker will be all that is required. They could even make a Stirling chimney. The SECR had quite a high degree of standardization (the P class being rather unique in everything and it is amazing that half of them survived). They need to finish the 84xxx and 32424 first ! Plus the overhaul queue is quite long :-) 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSpencer Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 They need to finish the 84xxx and 32424 first ! Plus the overhaul queue is quite long :-) Apparently they have an extra H boiler, only the to do around 2050 once the queue is done! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les1952 Posted September 16, 2017 Share Posted September 16, 2017 Under Rule 1 I can confidently announce that the East Stanley Locomotive Preservation Society is expecting a Class P in SECR livery to join its fleet at No Place Wagon Works in County Durham sometime around the turn of the year. This will join a Beattie well tank, a B4 0-4-0T, a 1361 and various other locos shunting No Place screens and working the vintage passenger train. Funny what small tank locos are finding their way to County Durham..... Les 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Roy Langridge Posted September 17, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 17, 2017 Under Rule 1 I can confidently announce that the East Stanley Locomotive Preservation Society is expecting a Class P in SECR livery to join its fleet at No Place Wagon Works in County Durham sometime around the turn of the year. This will join a Beattie well tank, a B4 0-4-0T, a 1361 and various other locos shunting No Place screens and working the vintage passenger train. Funny what small tank locos are finding their way to County Durham..... Les Clearly some mistake here, I thought I had a water tight agreement for it to be based at Bassetts Road. Roy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium gc4946 Posted September 17, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 17, 2017 A P class loco (don't know its number) was trialled on the Hayling Island branch, but was unsuccessful, and the Terriers continued running on the branch until its closure http://haylingbillyheritage.org/places/the-branch/the-hayling-railway-by-robin-french/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatC Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 (edited) A P class loco (don't know its number) was trialled on the Hayling Island branch, but was unsuccessful, and the Terriers continued running on the branch until its closure http://haylingbillyheritage.org/places/the-branch/the-hayling-railway-by-robin-french/ Yes, it was 31325 and it was trialled on 12 June 1957. It was temporarily allocated to Eastleigh and outstationed at Winchester to cover for the normal B4 on shunting duties. Apparently it was considered under powered for the Hayling branch compared to the Terriers and was returned to Winchester. Edited September 17, 2017 by PatC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold NHY 581 Posted September 17, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 17, 2017 (edited) A558 was tried on the Lamb Regis branch whilst in the West Country having had a go on the Wenford branch. Neither occasion was deemed to be a success... On the Lamb Regis branch the poor little chap even failed to keep time with the one coach forming the services......not good. Rob. Edited September 17, 2017 by nhy581 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 The P Class were quite feeble machines in reality and could only have survived on the Southern. I doubt even the cash-strapped LNER would have kept them beyond 1930 while the LMS and GWR would have crushed them in on January 2nd 1923..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steamport Southport Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 (edited) They would have been among the most modern shunters the LNER had if they had them. Don't forget they are the ones that built a new batch of J72s in 1951..... Jason Edited September 17, 2017 by Steamport Southport Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Captain Kernow Posted September 17, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 17, 2017 On the Lamb Regis branch the poor little chap even failed to keep time with the one coach forming the services......not good. But they did keep it there, didn't they, Rob? They did, didn't they? Please say yes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold NHY 581 Posted September 17, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 17, 2017 But they did keep it there, didn't they, Rob? They did, didn't they? Please say yes. May have............... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les1952 Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 They would have been among the most modern shunters the LNER had if they had them. Don't forget they are the ones that built a new batch of J72s in 1951..... Jason Ah yes, but that was to get a batch of lighter locos for which the J50s and J94s were too heavy..... Les Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 (edited) They would have been among the most modern shunters the LNER had if they had them. Don't forget they are the ones that built a new batch of J72s in 1951..... To put things into perspective,.... J72 Class) Tractive effort 16,760 lbs 2F P Class) Tractive effort 7,810lbs. Unclassified Terrior) Tractive effort 10,695 lbs 0P Even the little L&YR 'pug' 0-4-0ST had a tractive effort of 11,335 and Drummonds diminutive C14 0-4-0T (ex-steamrailmotor) had a tractive effort of 9,720lbs. As an aside, I suspect Wainwrights 'P' holds the record for the most feeble steam loco on record despite its 0-6-0T configuration. Edited September 17, 2017 by coachmann Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted September 17, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 17, 2017 (edited) Let's hope the model is suitably realistic then and struggles to move two coaches on a Lyme (or lamb!) Regis style gradient . . . I wonder how many will complain if it's over powered Edited September 17, 2017 by PaulRhB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
darren01 Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 First time in nearly a year not ordering any new loco and then this little one, well have to have one!. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold NHY 581 Posted September 17, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 17, 2017 (edited) But they did keep it there, didn't they, Rob? They did, didn't they? Please say yes. May have............... Let's hope the model is suitably realistic then and struggles to move two coaches on a Lyme (or lamb!) Regis style gradient . . . I wonder how many will complain if it's over powered I am not in a position to confirm or deny whether I've asked for a P or not......to grace the Lamb Regis branch..... Rob. Edited September 17, 2017 by nhy581 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSpencer Posted September 18, 2017 Share Posted September 18, 2017 To put things into perspective,.... J72 Class) Tractive effort 16,760 lbs 2F P Class) Tractive effort 7,810lbs. Unclassified Terrior) Tractive effort 10,695 lbs 0P Even the little L&YR 'pug' 0-4-0ST had a tractive effort of 11,335 and Drummonds diminutive C14 0-4-0T (ex-steamrailmotor) had a tractive effort of 9,720lbs. As an aside, I suspect Wainwrights 'P' holds the record for the most feeble steam loco on record despite its 0-6-0T configuration. It is this feebleness that made me order 6. The only way to match the power of a Merchant Navy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted September 18, 2017 Share Posted September 18, 2017 It is this feebleness that made me order 6. The only way to match the power of a Merchant Navy. Yup, I see the joke. Funnily enough, the 4mm scale 'P' just might have more haulage power than some larger models. It certainly would if it had an all-metal body casting, which seems to be the direction in which models are heading now that the innards need to be hollow for a DCC decoder and speaker. My regret is the Hattons GWR 14XX was not designed by the maker of the 'P' instead of being a full scale British cock-up in just about every department. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now