"Bill Davies" ...
How about this one Rake of Maunsell coaches ??? now Hornby put there's on
the shelf A Blue Pullman and a Southern EMU :o))
Simon Kohler care of Hornby take note :o)))
All the best Steve.
make it a
Just catching up, perhaps if they withdraw all the ex LNER loco's you
would start to remember what it's like not have RTR loco's
Not another ruddy Standard, what about those who model pre 1948, let
alone pre grouping?! :~)
"John Turner" wrote in message
I would look forward to that!
Ideal for a branch line needing something a bit bigger than a tank loco and
easily adapted to a BR 780xx type.
It would probably be too light to pull much unless it could be fitted with
loco AND tender drive but no traction tyres please!
In message ,
Roger T. writes
Yes, I've ordered one of those, with DCC and sound. I've got to have
something to pull all those ore cars :-) The pictures of the prototype
and the early test shots look nice.
So it is. Oh, well, ... never mind.
From: "David Westerman"
Subject: Re: any Ideas on Bachmann Production for 2006?
Why would it be too light? The Ivatt 4F 2-6-0 model just introduced by
Bachmann can't be made much heavier than a similar 2F 2-6-0. My 4F pulls 12
coaches or 60 wagons with no difficulty. You must have a very big layout to
handle trains longer than those.
Well I don't know about that. Size isn't everything, and small wheeled
locos can often surprise. The ex CR 439 class 0-4-4T classed 2P by the LMS
would pull the coaches of the overnight Euston sleepers (500T at least) out
to the carriage sidings without too much fuss.
I have a kit built ex CR 'Beetlecrusher' which will pull 60 wagons and it
weighs a lot less than the Bachmann Ivatt.
Isn't it all about whether or not a smaller loco can "sustain* hauling a
big load that counts. It is one thing pulling empty stock at
comparatively slow speeds, another for the same train on a quick sprint
It was suggested to me once that the whole system could have been
operated by Black 5's, since on many occasions these locos have been on
record as keeping times intended for Pacifics. Of course the fact that
the Black 5 needed to be in top order & the crew prepared to have a go
are minor details affecting a good story.
Presumably 2MT 2-6-0's were the ideal machines for lighter lines where
the Black 5's were not permitted, everything else was a waste of resources.
"Kevin Martin" wrote
As far as I'm aware they were designed to replace a whole plethora of
ancient locos mainly in branch line use where a couple of coaches or a
handful of wagons would have been the norm. In other words they would be
very user-friendly to a great many railway modellers rather than yet another
Well as the Southern was the smallest of the four pre-nationalisation
companies, I think you can take it that I mean those whose interests lay
beyond that bit of southern England south of the Thames.
Hmmm. I can think of a way in which they might statisfy both sets of
folk. You just need a prototype which put in notable service both
north and south of the Thames, which isn't modelled by anyone else,
which appeared in a wide range of liveries and lasted well into
BR ownership (and, ideally, into preservation) and which is
likely to have wide appeal. I can think of one which fits perfectly:
the Ivatt/Marsh large atlantic. Very little difference between
the GN and LB&SC versions (certainly easily accomodated given
modern production techniques), choice of liveries from GNR
green through LN&E green to BR black for the one and LB&SC
chocolate through Southern green to BR black for t'other. Active
on prestigious expresses until late in their lives, but also
used on local trains and freights. And 251 is preserved and
the Bluebell is building a Marsh atlantic.
Usefully shorter than a pacific, too :)