Bachmann Class 117

[BR(S)]

I've never seen anywhere that Bachmann were doing a 116 or 118.

 

 

Not necessarily Bachmann, but Kernow were definitely planning on commissioning them.  The last sentence on the page linked to states:

 

"We have not forgotten about the Class 116 and Class 118 and further news about these will be added to this web page when it becomes available."

 

Edit: looking on Google, it appears there was a Kernow page with details of all the 116/117/118s they were going to do, but which now gives a 404 (http://www.kernowmodelrailcentre.com/pg/80/wr_suburban_dmu).  This must be where I saw the Telecoms livery 118, but this was all changed when Bachmann announced they were doing the 117.  

Edited March 27, 2018 by BR(S)

[rob D2]

What's the major difference between a 116/7 ?

 

I'd like Bachmann to do a trailer set with forthcoming bubble , so I can run the marlow donkey of my youth !

 

£300 is a bit much if only need one coach and a whole 117 will be almost a metre . Maybe have to leave it 15 years till I retire and recreate Paddington in the loft !

[Zunnan]

What's the major difference between a 116/7 ?

 

Off the top of my head for the DMBS/DMS the obvious differences are - the roof indicator box, larger on the 117. The 116 had round buffers from the start, the 117 were clipped originally but later replaced with round as per the 116. The 117 originally didn't have marker lights where at least some 116 did. Some 116 had a 2 character headcode panel below the middle windscreen. Later on the only real difference I noticed was the roof indicator as 117s gained marker lights and the 116 lost the 2 character headcode panel and the units all gained gangway bellows. The big difference was the centre trailer, the 116 having a non lavatory TC or TS, the 117 having a lavatory TCL.

 

There are probably plenty more subtle differences, but the ones I've noted are what I used to look for when distinguishing them on the Cross City line as well as other high density classes and hybrids thereof that appeared. You could usually tell the origins of the centre trailers by their window layouts alone.

[chrisf]

Thank you, Zunnan.  I suppose we ought to discuss buffers on the 116 thread at some point but I draw the attention of those puzzled by marker lights to early posts there.

 

While I'm about it, let us not forget the 118.  These are close enough in appearance to the 117 for me to be interested in what Bachmann propose to make.  The two classes are easily and frequently confused, not least by certain authors who really ought to know better.  The principal difference is that the headcode box on the 117 had a flat top whereas those on the 118 were curved.  That said, I have a nagging suspicion that the first few 118s also had flat topped headcode boxes.  If that doesn't bring out the experts nothing will!  Oh, and some of Reading's sets had 117 power cars and 118 trailers ...

 

Chris

[Phil Bullock]

Chris, I fail to see how a manufacturer cannot pick up the 116 given the excellent reference piece you are giving them!

 

Kind regards

 

Phil

[chrisf]

Chris, I fail to see how a manufacturer cannot pick up the 116 given the excellent reference piece you are giving them!

 

Oh, I can.  Believe me, I can.

 

Chris

[br2975]

Chris, I fail to see how a manufacturer cannot pick up the 116 given the excellent reference piece you are giving them!

 

Kind regards

 

Phil

 

If the manufacturers are looking for a 'nice little earner' there were few, if any units, more widely spread than the Derby Suburban Cl.116.

 

Allocated to all divisions of the Western Region; Birmingham area of the LMR, Glasgow and other areas of the ScR and back down the east coast to the London area of the E.R.

.

And, that's before we get to the areas to which they were 'loaned' out or worked to.

.

Hence my surprise at Bachmann producing the Pressed Steel Cl.117.

.

What next a Wickham twin set, or Colne Valley Cravens units, or why not something really universal like a Scottish Region battery unit ?

.

Brian R

[Clive Mortimore]

Thank you, Zunnan.  I suppose we ought to discuss buffers on the 116 thread at some point but I draw the attention of those puzzled by marker lights to early posts there.

 

While I'm about it, let us not forget the 118.  These are close enough in appearance to the 117 for me to be interested in what Bachmann propose to make.  The two classes are easily and frequently confused, not least by certain authors who really ought to know better.  The principal difference is that the headcode box on the 117 had a flat top whereas those on the 118 were curved.  That said, I have a nagging suspicion that the first few 118s also had flat topped headcode boxes.  If that doesn't bring out the experts nothing will!  Oh, and some of Reading's sets had 117 power cars and 118 trailers ...

 

Chris

Hi Chris

 

I know the difference between 117 and 118  has been discussed before but didn't the 118s have marker lights to start with?

 

More importantly, and the one Brian missed out of his list of limited DMUs, a Lea Valley set (class 125), all of us GER north east London modellers need one of them.

[The Stationmaster]

I must admit to being left with the impression somewhere along the line that the116 was going to 'come along later' possibly as a commission rather than Bachmann own name - time will no doubt (hopefully) tell.  and of course any 116 model will face the problem of the marker lights and how many to go for - bring on howls about the fact that the 'wrong' combination will be offered for at least one person

 

Oh and as far as 117 buffers are concerned it is no doubt too much to expect Bachmann to copy the right prototype set and produce one with a mixture of original and round replacement buffers on the same outer end of a power car 

[chrisf]

Good question, Clive.  The earliest photo of a 118 that I can find is in the June 1960 Trains Illustrated and shows the first set on driver training duty at Truro on 8th April of that year.  It has no marker lights.  Just as the decision to apply lining to the bodysides was taken part way through delivery, I have a feeling that the decision to add marker lights was taken during construction but after the first few sets had been placed in service.  Heck, there is never an expert around when you need one!

 

Chris

[rob D2]

ThNks for the insight .

I guess if the 116 is a simple tooling slide change for most of it , it will be done , if not I doubt it TBH

 

I'm one of the few more into the 117 because of my Thames valley background , I guess these got all the way across the WR ?

[Legend]

If the manufacturers are looking for a 'nice little earner' there were few, if any units, more widely spread than the Derby Suburban Cl.116.

 

Allocated to all divisions of the Western Region; Birmingham area of the LMR, Glasgow and other areas of the ScR and back down the east coast to the London area of the E.R.

.

And, that's before we get to the areas to which they were 'loaned' out or worked to.

.

Hence my surprise at Bachmann producing the Pressed Steel Cl.117.

.

What next a Wickham twin set, or Colne Valley Cravens units, or why not something really universal like a Scottish Region battery unit ?

.

Brian R

I fear with Bachmann we are either not there at all or miles away. The 90 is now expected 2019, the 117 has got to be behind that, 2020? They wouldn't dilute sales of 117 if people knew a 116 was coming. Especially as its an expensive ticket item and people are likely to buy sparingly. So where are we 2022 to announce a 116 to ensure the 117 gets a fair run on sales? Another two years ,being optimistic, before it appears 2024

 

I do think the choice of 117 was the wrong one given as folks have pointed out the 116 was much more widespread. However we are where we are. I just wonder if Dapol might be persuaded to go for a 116. Might they have been the people Kernow were talking to in the first place, and of course their 121/122 is available now. The risk is , of course ,that Bachmann do announce one, but even from where we are now, Dapol might still get there first.

[brushman47544]

I fear with Bachmann we are either not there at all or miles away. The 90 is now expected 2019, the 117 has got to be behind that, 2020? They wouldn't dilute sales of 117 if people knew a 116 was coming. Especially as its an expensive ticket item and people are likely to buy sparingly. So where are we 2022 to announce a 116 to ensure the 117 gets a fair run on sales? Another two years ,being optimistic, before it appears 2024

 

I do think the choice of 117 was the wrong one given as folks have pointed out the 116 was much more widespread. However we are where we are. I just wonder if Dapol might be persuaded to go for a 116. Might they have been the people Kernow were talking to in the first place, and of course their 121/122 is available now. The risk is , of course ,that Bachmann do announce one, but even from where we are now, Dapol might still get there first.

 

All Bachmann would have to do would be to say their tooling will allow for 116s and 118s later should sales of the 117 justify the additional tooling cost, and Dapol would run a mile. It's a risky business as it is considering the initial tooling outlay, so why would any manufacturer knowingly duplicate something someone else had announced or could do very easily. A real risk of money down the drain. There are plenty of other DMUs not yet announced that Dapol produce that have been asked for e.g. Class 104, 120 that are as close to low-hanging fruit as any DMU will get.

Edited March 28, 2018 by brushman47544

[Legend]

All Bachmann would have to do would be to say their tooling will allow for 116s and 118s later should sales of the 117 justify the additional tooling cost, and Dapol would run a mile. It's a risky business as it is considering the initial tooling outlay, so why would any manufacturer knowingly duplicate something someone else had announced or could do very easily. A real risk of money down the drain. There are plenty of other DMUs not yet announced that Dapol produce that have been asked for e.g. Class 104, 120 that are as close to low-hanging fruit as any DMU will get.

Agreed , unless they were already working on it. But if Bachmann did announce the tooling could facilitate it , we are still years away from seeing it, which was my main point. Not great for those of us wanting 116s.

Edited March 28, 2018 by Legend

[mdvle]

Might they have been the people Kernow were talking to in the first place,

 

The Kernow model (announced and then cancelled when Bachmann made their intentions known) was with DJM.

[The Stationmaster]

Good question, Clive.  The earliest photo of a 118 that I can find is in the June 1960 Trains Illustrated and shows the first set on driver training duty at Truro on 8th April of that year.  It has no marker lights.  Just as the decision to apply lining to the bodysides was taken part way through delivery, I have a feeling that the decision to add marker lights was taken during construction but after the first few sets had been placed in service.  Heck, there is never an expert around when you need one!

 

Chris

 

A very interesting area and perhaps the real question should be not why they didn't have marker lights but why they were subsequently fitted with them?

 

The original WR Instructions for DMUs issued in 1957 required that the only time marker lights were required to be illuminated was on cars not fitted with route indicator boxes - if there was a route indicator box (2 character or 4 character) it was required to be illuminated at the times lit head lamps would normally be carried which obviously meant there was no need for any marker lights at all on the 117 and 118 units.  Similarly DMUs were required to carry oil tail lamps so there was no need for a marker light which could be given a red shade.

 

Somewhere along the line, and for whatever reason, it was decided to add  a couple of marker lights but that didn't make any difference to the Instructions (and isn't mentioned in any sort of amendment to them).   Oddly the addition of only two marker lights wouldn't have been much use if the lights in the route indicator had failed as they couldn't show the full range of necessary headcodes and they were obviously pointless as far as use with a red shade to create a tail lamp was concerned as that was prohibited anyway.  The only reasons I can immediately think of for adding marker lights would be failure of the lights in the route indicator box, possibly to assist a little (it would be a little) when drawing up behind another train ready to couple to it or, again of limited practical use, to add a bit of light when examining the line.  But whatever - the reason why it was done is lost in the mists of WR DMU history and is unlikely to emerge unless somebody made a habit of 'saving' helpful files in an office long, long, ago

[robertcwp]

The story seems very complicated. So far as I can establish, all 117s were delivered without marker lights as were the early 118s. I had it in mind that some 117s were lined from new but not the early ones.

 

117_MoretonCuttingBox by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

W51400-59510-51358_Eastleigh_1700-Reading-Soton-Term_9-8-61 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

117_L404_Southall_9-77_m by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

118s:

W51305_LymeRegis by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

W51322_Reading_for-Newbury_4-62 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

[1977joey]

Very jealous looking at these pics, gutted that these are not yet going to be available in N gauge as I'd LOVE this DMU, it's been on my wish list for years & loads of other N gaugers! Looks a fantastic model. Come on Bachmann, please do this in N gauge too !!!!!!

 

Cheers,

Mark

Edited March 30, 2018 by 1977joey

[The Stationmaster]

The early Pressed Steel (later Class 117) units were definitely not lined and I'm not sure if later build examples were lined from new.  Also as originally put into traffic they did not have overhead live wire warning plates and they ran, as shown below in my 1959 pic at Twyford, using alpha based headcodes.

 

Edited March 30, 2018 by The Stationmaster

[robertcwp]

The early Pressed Steel (later Class 117) units were definitely not lined and I'm not sure if later build examples were lined from new.  Also as originally put into traffic they did not have overhead live wire warning plates and they ran, as shown below in my 1959 pic at Twyford, using alpha based headcodes.

 

PRESSED STEEL UNIT AT TWYFORD 1959.jpg

The photo shows that the early 117s had the more curved top to the headcode box, more often associated with the BRCW Class 118 units.

 

This page suggests most 117s were lined from new: http://www.railcar.co.uk/type/class-117/liveries

[dibber25]

I hesitate to join the 'why isn't it a 116?' debate but I know how i'd spend my tooling money if I had to choose. Putting it back into a steam scenario, which would bring the biggest sales and give the best return on investment, a BR Standard 2-6-2T or a GWR 'Prairie'? I'd choose the one that ran out of Paddington without hesitation. In fact, I can't help wondering how Bachmann came to do all those short underframe DMUs - Met-Camms, Cravens and Derby Lightweights - before they decided to do a 117. Can't wait to get my hands on one - no need to finish the Lima conversion that I have half-done. (CJL)

[robertcwp]

I hesitate to join the 'why isn't it a 116?' debate but I know how i'd spend my tooling money if I had to choose. Putting it back into a steam scenario, which would bring the biggest sales and give the best return on investment, a BR Standard 2-6-2T or a GWR 'Prairie'? I'd choose the one that ran out of Paddington without hesitation. In fact, I can't help wondering how Bachmann came to do all those short underframe DMUs - Met-Camms, Cravens and Derby Lightweights - before they decided to do a 117. Can't wait to get my hands on one - no need to finish the Lima conversion that I have half-done. (CJL)

I still surprises me that Bachmann did so many short-frame units but I very much welcomed it and have 11 108s, 9 Cravens, 6 Met-Cam and 4 DLWs.

 

Another argument in favour of the 117s is that they lasted a very long time, right up to 1999 I think, and carried more liveries than 116s. I hope that in time Bachmann will follow their own example from the short-frame units and do other long-frame units such as the 116 and the Gloucester (or Swindon) Cross-Country sets. There, the Swindon ones were more numerous and had a wider geographical spread but the Gloucester ones lasted longer and carried more liveries. 

[Michael Delamar]

Funily enough I was watching a 1964 episode of Danger man recently and was wondering about this, he alighted from a unit with no marker lights, the unit with the small yellow panel alongside had none either.

 

[wombatofludham]

Funily enough I was watching a 1964 episode of Danger man recently and was wondering about this, he alighted from a unit with no marker lights, the unit with the small yellow panel alongside had none either.

 

F5BB7F2F-8F1D-498A-85C6-6E26554717F1.jpeg

Recently on Squawking Pictures they re-showed a 1962 movie called "The Hijackers" which starred Tony Blair's father in law in a donkey jacket and several Class 117s belting up and down until Mr Booth and the female lead finally got onto one that stopped. Strange that even in 1962 the film's sound dubbing team couldn't get the right diesel sounds for the DMUs although at least they didn't sound like American GM two stroke lumps, or HSTs as modern trains, even electrics, seem to do.

 

As for Bachmann doing all the short frame units, it was a no-brainer. Class 108s were widespread and once done the same basic chassis with new detailing could be used for other 57ft units. In fact I think the biggest surprise is they chose to do a 117 ahead of a BRCW Class 104, probably the last short-frame unit of any significance in terms of operating area (some even worked out of that London dog-hole in Network SE days) and construction numbers. That said whilst a 116 would arguably have been of more use to me and many others I can use several 117s and am looking forward to it, and the inevitable Class 120 that will come after it.

[SRman]

While I would love a class 120, there may be one drawback to that type compared to all the other long-frame units: the 120 power cars had deeper solebars. This would not be insurmountable to Bachmann, but would probably mean either completely new tooling for the power car chassis, or some sort of insert/add-on for the solebars to adapt exising mouldings. 

Class 119 didn't appear to have this difference, so would be an easier adaptation for the 117-based chassis.