LNER P1 2-8-2

producer of

ponted

Hmm, it would be nice, but I think the fact that there was only three and what's more they only ran on a certain part of the LNER main line - as with many Gresley loco's, they were designed and built to do a particular job, in this case moving 100+ wagon coal trains in and out of the North London yards a few miles out of KX - means that the chances are slim. I also doubt that even if there was a wish to produce the model it won't be just a case of 'slapping' the A3 body onto a new chassis!

I would prefer their time and money to be spent on a Thompson's L1

2-6-4T... :~)

So would I, and, either a ROD 2-8-0 or a Gresley O2.

The P1s were withdrawn so early that they would be wrong for the majority of even ER modellers.

I gather that they had a very unique sound as my father can remember them at Ferme Park. Are there any actual recordings?

Kevin

Err, all TWO of them :-)

A while back I wondered about hacking a Farish A3 to make a P1, but I have so many kits waiting to be built, I never got around to identifying a suitable chassis.

With only two engines and a short life, I don't think any mass-production RTR manufacture will ever seriously consider them. They're also pretty obscure - I bet an original-body Cock o'the North or Earl Marischal would sell better as they're more distinctive and well known.

Richard Marsden The LNER Enclycopedia

Richard, this has to be the most bonkers thread I've ever tried to follow!

Here we have a pointless locomotive, of which two were built, there was no work for them, they didn't perform very well, and they were scrapped early. (All taken from your excellent website, of course).

That must make them just about the most uncharismatic objects ever to venture on the main line.

If anyone really, really, wants one, then AppleGreen can supply.

And here we are, discussing whether Margate might be interested........

Either this whole thing is a jolly good prank, or we need to get out more often!

Cheers, Steve

.....snip.............

Bear in mind that art does not always imitate life. Whether a locomotive was successful or produced in great numbers does not always reflect on its marketability in the modeling sector. Sometimes the very scarcity of a prototype will enhance its marketability in model form. There have been a number of models of rare/unsuccessful locomotives produced in the last fifteen years on my side of the lake that have yielded a profit for the manufacturer. It is a somewhat risky game to play, but it can be played and won. Some modelers can only understand copying a prototype exactly, while others are more eclectic and buy a model simply because it appeals to them. Perhaps they do not even model the actual railway which owned the unfortunate beast, but model in a freelanced style. Interest can be generated, and the models can be sold. A case in point is the upcoming release of a model by a company in Canada of a loco that only operated in eastern Canada, and of which only six were built. I expect they will sell many thousands of models before they are through. There are a great many more modelers than there are actual railway companies.

producer of

identifying a

mass-production

scrapped early.

No work, these loco's shifted an awful lot of coal into London in the

1930's then for not having any work to do! The real reason they were scrapped was due to, yes being only two in number (yet sharing many components with other classes), but more importantly more modern / newer loco's were available at a time when materials and workshop space were still limited.

Oh, and don't forget the neurotic Thompson [1] on his one man crusade against Gresley and his designs (all because Thompson was to young to become CME of the new then LNER and then suffered a public put-down at the hands of Gresley when he made some daft suggestion or other.

[1] the very same person who, on complaining that his office was to hot, decided that the best course of action was to smash the office window!

I suggest that people interested in the professional careers of the 3 LNER CME's, and how they interacted with each other, read the book "Thompson & Peppercorn - locomotive Engineers" by Colonel H C B Rogers, OBE Ian Allen 1979 ISBN: 0 7110 0910 4

I do take your point, but someone (Apple Green - who they?) is already producing an RTR model of the P1 for anyone who really wants one. I have no idea how good it is, or how many they have sold, having never heard of them until I revisited the lner.info website. And £395 is a lot of money.

I'm one of those eclectic modellers myself, who buys things just because I find them interesting. But in the relatively constricted UK market, I cannot see the major RTR makers venturing into the tooling-up investment for a locomotive unless it is one or more of the following:

1. Commonplace when it was in operation;
2. Highly iconic;
3. Available to see now in preservation.

I mean, if we can't get a RTR "City of Truro" or "Rocket" or Prototype "Deltic" or Blue Pullman or LMS Garrett, then I can't see a P1 on the horizon any time soon!

Cheers, Steve

I do take your points too, Jerry. I went round the house of a chap I once worked for, and found a shrine to Sir Nigel at one end of the living room. And another one to Bulleid at the other. So, I have heard (and read) the full story.

I know little about the P1's, so can't really comment, but the coal must have got shifted before they came along, and then again after they were scrapped. My point is that there was nothing inspiring about their careers.

I'm just trying to picture how many modellers actually need to run 100 wagon coal trains round their layouts. Well, there's Jane of course, who I suspect has her layout in a garden... so that's *one* possible customer!

Oh, and as for [1], I sincerely hope that he sent for a minion to do the window-smashing. Leadership is surely the priority in a CME.

Cheers, Steve

You missed one out;

1. An easy and / or cheap conversion of existing tooling (or minimal new tooling) that offers something that is not otherwise available, and that is were we came in...

Prototype

With reference to the above reasons, the only model you list above that I'm surprised has not be released in 'modern times' [1] is City of Truro.

[1] most have been released as RTR models over the last 50 years IIRC with the exception of the LMS Garrett - and the same observations about their prototype use can be made as can be made with the LNER P1 class.

Well, I suppose then you have the same disregard for the LMS Garett's then? Both did much the same job, namely coal traffic workings into London, yes the coal was moved before they came along but many more trains (and thus loco's) were needed which in turn was not compatible with a passenger carrying railway (even with the use of four track main lines).

How about another reason why they did not carry on in service? Jerry quoted the book by Col Rogers and I cannot remember if that book had the real reason why they were withdrawn. The LNER was looking at using continuous braked bogie wagons for the transport of goods which would have resulted in higher speeds with shorter bulk trains and this was a reason why the P1's were constructed. Unfortunately a majority of the wagons at the time were privately owned and the owners did not want to invest in in higher specification wagons which resulted in the P1's hauling up to 100 four wheel unbraked wagons which could not be accomodated in a lot of the passing loops as well as a lot of broken couplings. Todays bulk air braked trains have taken a long time to realise such forward thinking by the LNER.

Ian Robinson

":::Jerry::::" wrote

Can't comment on the P1s but the Garretts were fairly ineffective and were displaced from heavy coal trains pretty much as soon as the Stanier 8Fs came onto the scene. The really surprising thing was they survived into the late

1950s.

John.

AFAIK one cannot get a decent Garrett of any kind for a reasonable price. They were quite common outside of North America and proliferated all over Africa, Australia and India. Maybe in more places than that which I do not yet know about. I would very much like to have a model of one of the larger Garretts, but they are all much too expensive for me, and besides that, my first priority is getting models of the three diesel classes I mentioned earlier. My main interest in pre-consolidation times is the LMS and I am plesed to find that they ran Garretts. Maybe one day I can have one.

Then the Robinson 2-8-0 is definitely long overdue as it fits all three criterea.

Kevin

pre-consolidation

"Pre-consolidation" times? I suspect you mean 'nationalisation' (taken over by then owned by the nation / state and run by people appointed by the state government), there was a consolidation of the separate railways in the UK, this grouped all the 28 or so railways companies into the "Big Four" [1] in 1923 (referred to, logically, as) "The Grouping".

[1] The GWR was the only pre 1923 company to keep it's original name.

Garett's

compatible

track

But they did continue to work the coal trains into London, the reason they survived was because they could move more coal in a single train load than otherwise would be the case, which allowed the for more train loads on the congested lines into and out of London.

Jerry quoted

I suspect that the supply of cheap, relatively new and more, powerful WD 2-10-0 and 2-8-0 loco's, some of which IIRC were given to the LNER as part settlement of war receipts, played a large part in the demise of the P1's.

The unavailability of fitted coal wagons wasn't really a bearing on the matter, what was a bearing was the problem of fitting the number of coal trains that had to be moved into London into an already congested WTT - hence the 100 plus wagon coal train making slow progress between loops that could accommodate such train length.

":::Jerry::::" wrote

I read that they had less haulage capability than an 8F, and were dispersed onto other less onerous duties including working reagularly to York.

John.