ruggedpeak

Not sure what are you responding to? I don't think anyone suggested anything to do with what you have posted above. I certainly haven't suggested Swiss law should affect UK law. I merely made the observation, in relation to discussions around the application of railway safety rules and discussion around mollycoddling etc here in that Switzerland we have CDL but you can stick your head and body out of the windows, despite clear hazards, whereas in the UK this is not allowed. Nothing more than a potentially pertinent observation and/or comparison of how different but similar systems operate. I'm not sure showing a photo of an asian train with people on the roof and hanging off the sides is relevant as their laws and society are very different to western Europe.

I agree, and Hornby are still dominated by supplying and supporting retail, somethign that I'd argue some of the new entrants are taking advantage of. The feast and famine approach of some of the new entrants would make it impossible for retailers to remain in business if Hornby and Bachmann disappeared. They sell via pre-order, presumably the majority directly and a limited proportion to retailer, again much of the retail stock is pre-ordered. We know the problems that causes both the manufacturer and retailer processing the volumes, and whilst is brings in sales it does not bring in normal retail customers. If Hornby and Bachmann decided to replicate the arguably parasitic pre-order approach of some of the new entrants, many retailers would close. There would be no point maintaining the overheads of a shop if all you do is periodically pick and pack a large quantity of pre-orders. You can do that from a large garage behind your house. So Hornby are a little caught, and as usual get a bashing over direct sales when their competition do it as well (without the bashing.....), and it is the competition who piggyback the full spectrum retail offer Hornby and Bachmann provide. But as others have pointed out above, retail is still the mainstay of Hornby's overall business and where there new sales drive is focused.

Right now they need to be much better at selling stuff, all their stuff. And that is hard nose selling and deal making like the recent Michael's deal. They have consistently made stuff they couldn't sell, but their penetration into retail was pretty weak IMHO and the online direct sales has not exactly been a spectacular success. They are too small to do it themselves efficiently but may be stuck with the legacy decisions on this for a while. With a huge debt pile and thus at cashflow risk from the interest payments, especially if interest rates rise or just don't fall, they need money through the door so Mr D's job is to flog everything and anything to anyone whilst making some money and expand the sales channels and volumes. Mr K spent too much time on product development, marketing and promotion, but neglected the core sales function IMHO as that is where his interest lies. No amount of discussions about fireboxes is going to change the fact the expanded sales team need to knocking on doors day in day out. Firebox or no firebox, a good sales person will get stuff sold. I worked in sales and was rubbish at it (!) but I've worked with people who can sell anything to anyone. Whilst Hornby could do a better job of selecting and developing products etc they still have to sell whatever they make and that is the key right now. Whether Hornby look to depart from their current processes for manufacturing or sales to replicate the new entrants we shall see, the 500 or 1000 batch system may not be suitable any more. But I am also curious about the business models of some of the new entrants as I can see potential problems down the road for one or two of them as their business models are not foolproof.

I think it somewhat unfair to criticise people for not being able to open a door that has a handle system outside the normal types of handles and buttons used on transport systems is 'mollycoddling'. The world of slam doors was a world of heavier and comparatively poor engineering for things that people interacted with. Modern design and materials, cost, safety etc means doors and other systems are entirely different. Imagine being an alien arriving from Mars and wandering through normal society with automatic shop doors, button operated train doors etc. Then present them with a slam door with a brass handle on the outside that requires you to open and then lean out of the window, place a firm grip on the handle and twist it, using a lot of force to an inconsistent and unknown degree and that young children and elderly will struggle with, to open a door that opens outwards and has specifically been designed to assist you falling out of it having put your body weight against it and your centre of gravity the wrong side of the door. Or worse the small slider catches on the inside that often required two hands to push across. Slam doors were of their time but from any contemporary safety, ergonomic, operational perspective they are a ridiculous design that fails on every count. It is unfair to criticise people for not knowing how to operate things outside of their experience (back to the myth of common sense......🙄). And that is the'human factors' element that is so important in relation to safety and specifically CDL. The question was asked above about why it is relevant to CDL that people were trying to open doors incorrectly. The relevance is that the clear real world evidence of problems operating doors means at the human factors people don't know how to use the doors safely and effectively. Whilst the observed actions are operating things other than the correct handles, this does mean that other people at other times may misuse or incorrectly operate handles at other times not realising their error, leading to a "reasonably foreseeable" outcome that someone may operate a door handle whilst the train is moving because they don't realise the full implications of what they are doing. There is clear evidence of misuse or incorrect operation by passengers as well as fatalities, and without CDL someone opening a door on the move is within reasonable bounds of possibility and there is data to prove it. Accusing a victim of being 'mollycoddled' or whatever because they couldn't operate what is a badly designed piece of legacy quipment (by modern standards) is victim blaming and a de factor admission of guilt to safety offences. If someone states the that they think people are so mollycoddled they can't operate old doors then they have prior knowledge that something could go badly wrong and failed to act. Good luck with that in court!

Vegetation isn't much of an issue in the areas where the windows are fully opening, very tight tunnels and infrastructure clearances are however Pop your head in for the tunnel, pop it out again afterwards and smack it on the bridge....tight curves and limited visibility for significant portions of the route.

They should come to Switzerland, here you can open the entire coach window halfway down and fall out to your heart's content!

That is a deliberate political choice but we rightly can't discuss that here.

The subject of foot crossings is an emotive one given various tragedies and multiple prosecutions of Network Rail. Id suggest a thread drift too far.

I don't know of many people who think the Bachmann 08 is better. And the 67 is basic? Maybe you are only aware of the ex Lima Railroad version? Anyone can and does duplicate models that Hornby have done before, but they still have an extensive range that sells. And Bachmann are seeing duplication of core models in the 37 and 47's despite spending over a million on brand new tooling, so it doesn't matter if models are dated or not, they will be duplicated. And 47's also have Heljan in the mix. Hornby are quite happy selling through Railroad 37s and 47s without worrying about massive tooling costs and competition from launch. 31s are now Railroad too, so continue to profit from that aged tooling as Accura do a better one.

It doesn't. What those observations do tell anyone competent in safety is why CDL is likely to be beneficial.

Bit of serendipity I came across an article about how Einstein's theory of relativity was initially rejected by many. Apparently 100 scientists wrote a treatise rejecting his theories despite only about 10 of them were mathematicians or physicists who had the competence to even begin to work through the horrifically complex equations underpinning the theory. Apparently it was common sense that relativity was nonsense. The comment I liked in the article was "common sense doesn't help with things outside our experience." Nail. Head. How can you apply common sense if you have no experience or meaningful understanding of the matter concerned? Obviously you can't, that's common sense 🤣

For those who want an entirely independent view from those actually using the Jacobite I suggest googling the train and looking at the latest Google reviews. I don't know how to link directly to the reviews, and you will need to sort them by date as they post the highest ranked first. Trigger Warning - not all of the latest reviews are 5 stars.

Nope, not you!

It is self evident who the troll is. And bad faith is coming into a thread that has had extensive discussion on complex safety issues and saying that you should just apply common sense, a demonstrably nonsense concept and it is clear from their posts they have not bothered to understand the issues or even read any of the relevant documents. I have no problem disagreeing with people who have some idea what they are talking about or have at least bothered to try and understand the issues, but posting simpled-minded lazy nonsense is rude. And frankly it is insensitive of this troll when a number of us on here have had to deal with the tragic consequences of those who decided safety was not their priority or could be ignored. Something they'd know if they'd bothered to read before posting. I've dealt with the scene at an entirely avoidable double fatality on the railway, it was not nice. Common sense failed that night. So I will call out those who make false accusations, smears or talk nonsense on matters of life and death because I know what happens with people start making decisions about things they don't understand. It is a shame that more people lack the courage to do so, as some of the tragedies that continue to happen might be avoided. I am also assuming nothing, I am reacting to what is in front of me which is clear evidence of ignorance. If you think I am being rude then report me to the Mods, noting that one of them has already challenged this particular troll for their comments. Is it really rude to call out someone who states that they won't pay an extra £10 on a near £100 ticket to comply with the law (law and a decision subject to full High Court scrutiny and confirmed as legal) to ensure the safety of everyone on a family orientated tourist attraction with a known risk of fatality? I'd question the moral standards of anyone who think safety is less important than a small addition to the cost of a non-essential leisure actuivity, however uncomfortable that makes so called 'liberals' feel (their classification, not mine). But of course for so called liberal types it all about their feelings rather than reality or other people or bothering to actually know what they are talking about or listen to experts, of which there are a number on here.

So real world experience, health & safety reports, legal requirements. comments by respected railway experts. No doubt the conspiracty theorists and common sensers will still think there is no need for it. Feeding the troll won't change anything. They have no demonstrable understanding of the most basic elements of safety (as you have highlighted re: the critically important element of "Human factors") nor have bothered to actually read the thread, the comprehensive JR judgement or other relevant docs. Applying 'common sense' to everything as its easier than thinking. After all common sense has worked so well with drink driving, Grenfell, guns in the US, quality control at Boeing etc.