No.75 Midland or were they LMS Fowler 4Fs?
Stocks of the latest Bachmann Midland 4Fs have appeared in the shops and I have taken delivery of one of the examples with a Late Crest. Well I have taken delivery of two engines but more of that later.
It is now over 100 years since Sir Henry Fowler introduced
his 4F goods engine. 192 of these engines were built by the Midland Railway
between 1911 and 1922 and according to Casserley and Asher (1961) all these
engines were still in service up until May 1954.
The ‘Midland’ 4F continued to be constructed by the LMS
Railway after grouping. Between 1924 and 1940 a further 580 engines were built
giving a final total of 772 engines, the highest of any class in the UK.
Casserley and Asher reported that withdrawals of the later engines constructed
under LMS ownership did not commence until 1959.
The fact that such large numbers of relatively small 0-6-0
goods engines were still being employed in the 1950s has often been used as
evidence to demonstrate the inefficient way that freight was handled by the UK
rail network. You might also say that it shows that the 4Fs were simple to
maintain and cheap to run.
Ex LMS 4F 44605 passing Barrows Green Widnes in the early
60's
I admired the 4Fs and my picture from the early 1960s shows
the penultimate member of the class gently sauntering along on a sleepy
summer’s day. Those of you with an eye for detail will notice in the distance
the wooden outside framing to the lead chambers used to make sulphuric acid
(the lead chamber process for those of you who studied ‘O’ Level Chemistry!).
Airfix ex LMS 4F
Airfix I think copied the LMS. When they introduced their
model in the 1970s they seem to have manufactured copious numbers of their
model. Certainly by the early 1980s there were lots for sale and I bought a
couple. One came from C&G Models – trading from Newton Aycliffe, and
another from Kings Cross Models – all at around £10.00 approximately half the
manufacturer’s recommended price.
Airfix LMS 4F renumbered 44605
As a tribute to the engine in my Widnes photograph I
renumbered my first Airfix ex LMS 4F to represent the engine in the picture.
Adding a smoke box number and shed plate I think makes a huge improvement – as
does the addition of some black paint to the metal tyres on the driving wheels.
I thought the Airfix models to be good for their time and
with their heavy tender drive and rubber traction tyres they had excellent
haulage capacities. Why some motors were noisy and others extremely quiet was
always a mystery – although I did have theories about the strength of the brush
springs. Soft springs might equate to quiet motors?
Hornby Tender Drive
I guess the 4F has always been a popular model and Hornby
re–released the Airfix model with a revised tender drive and improved handrail
detailing. Small changes that I thought made quite a presentable looking model.
I had to change the bottom plate on my Hornby model which seemed over brittle
and just disintegrated. It now says Airfix which might puzzle a future buyer!
I know very little about the design of the various
prototypes. However comparing pictures of the ex MR and the ex LMS 4Fs does
suggest that new Bachman model is a good representation. Obvious difference
between the MR and LMS versions are the position of the reversing lever and
what I think might be the top feed. On the MR version these are on the right
hand side looking from the cab, whilst on the LMS version they have moved to
the left hand side. Does that mean that the MR engines were RH drive the LMS ones
LH drive? It also looks as though the LMS company indulged in a bit of value
engineering because the fine beading on the MR version disappeared on the LMS
version. Bachmann are to be commended for their rendering of this detail. In
fact the Bachmann model as a whole seems much more finely detailed than the
older models. A friend summed it up by saying – ‘neatly superior’.
Bachmann 4F left, Hornby Tender Drive 4F right
The view above shows the old and new models head to head and
highlights the heavier detail and thicker handrails used on the older models.
Wiring harness made too long
I mentioned at the start of this post that I had taken
delivery of two Bachmann models. The view above shows the first model. The
wiring harness was over long and it was just not possible to get the engine and
tender close enough to couple them together. The little ladies in China had
obviously tried and the surplus wire had pushed sideways and bent one of the
copper tender pickups.
A word of warning – I parcelled my engine back up and posted
it straight back to the retailer. There were very good family reasons why I
wanted it out of the way. Subsequently the retailer refused to refund my
postage on the basis that he had sent out a prepaid postage slip and that I
should have waited to use that before posting. Black marks to Rails of
Sheffield they should have been quicker to acknowledge a problem and say that
they would send the return postage label.
Comments