69843

The biggest question to me is how does this affect overseas retailers? Speaking as an Australian, most of our Hornby shipments come through one distributor who does not have a brick and mortar store to deal with, who then sends it out to shops all around the country. As UK isn’t the primary market but is still the second biggest slice of it, there is a LOT of stores down here that would seem to be at risk under this new system. Particularly plenty who do stock a great range of Hornby but are either not large stores or are at other points of the country so do a lot of online as opposed to in person. The AJM post is worrying as if the criteria are as written, the overseas shops may be in for a heap of trouble. And thank you to Phil and Andy for reaching out directly to Hornby for a balanced and mediated reply whilst also maintaining the thread.

Whilst talking lamp irons and lamps, the twin lamp irons on the rear appear to be missing, but also those rear marker lamps look a bit oversized and wrongly positioned (too high and too far in). Or is that just me on that one? (Photo borrowed from https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/93125-building-a-better-gt3/page/5/&tab=comments#comment-2855983) There's also a hole missing in the tender frame at the very rear, as shown in the attached and more clearly here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/blue-diesels/39921992981 Edit: Clear photo of twin front lamp irons here: https://fft-keymodelworld.b-cdn.net/sites/keymodelworld/files/styles/article_body/public/inline-images/hm163_reality_pic 2_lr.jpg?itok=ouipiVQf

Well, at least for once we've remained on the topic of the locomotive with all this hot air being blown around.....

Spring 2020 was about 5 years ago, so I think we might be able to forgive the wait. Plus there's been issues with manufacturing track and other things due to the pandemic. I think we all need to collectively take a step back and take a breath with manufacturers.

I cannot recall where, but I did hear somewhere about the cab light being red being correct, it having that to allow drivers better adjustment to the dark of night than a bright white light. Just wish I could recall a source.

Reply received (via Facebook for those wondering) and tracking numbers given.

Can somebody please scan and 3D print @Mr_Tilt so we can add him inside the car?

I have.

What to me was concerning, as a purchaser of the model and someone who has patiently waited and waited, was this item in the email:

Yup. Still waiting for my pair Down Under.

I'm going to have to vote Y14, later J15. 259 built in 27 batches, a design mostly unimproved on in service bar some minor upgrades and changes, and you have to give credit to one being assembled in 9 hours and 45 minutes-that beats a lot of us for kit build times!

I know it is going right off track as this is Gilbert's thread and not a thread about depression, but it takes a lot to put that out in the open. The last 6 months for me have been an all time low due to many events happening to the extent where even good friends have noticed I've been a different person the last 6 months. Modelling has taken a complete back seat to me to the point where I have not even opened up any projects I have going on in CAD (a personal and professional love) at all this year. Many see the hobby as an escape but it can be a double-edged sword. It takes more to open up and say it than to go hide away in the cave of man and lock out the world.

On the risk of being banished, I'll help Clive along with the K4 vote. I hope no-one sends me to a former penal colony....

^ Basically my argument, 5 minutes before I could make it! A3 for me.

I'm going to abstain from a vote on the basis of all 3 have good reason to win, and all 3 are the peak of refinement of their type. So I can't find myself picking a clear vote here.

I'm going to have to say the Britannia. The first Standard that proved the Standard idea was a goer, even though they had teething troubles. And of course 70013 was the longest serving purely BR steam locomotive, with 17 years and 2 months racked up. Imagine if the Brits had been abject failures-what then?

"These were ordered at an Emergency Board Meeting on 19th February 1941, shortly before Gresley's death." So, in terms of the timeline, actually a Gresley engine. Officer, arrest that man!

I’m with Clive on this one....long as the vote for the B16/3 is legal that is!

I love this thing WAY more than I should have a right to!

As someone with a love of CAD and design/technology, the overcoming of the original obstacles with the original P2 design by using a mix of updated P2, British influence, US influence (Lentz gear mainly) and ground up design has been one of the great joys of this project for me. As much as I like Tornado, beyond the construction there wasn't much changed design wise (a VERY broad statement I wish to point out, which is not quite the truth). Whereas the P2 has been updated with an amazing amount of knowledge and input. On that basis, I'll put in the A2/2 for todays poll. A 'failed' rebuild of a class, designed to iron out the flaws in a much different way of thinking. Plus they kept the names-Wolf of Badenoch is just such a good name for a loco!

Just for the hell of it, I'm saying the 5MT 2-6-0, with respect to the prior comment about them mainly being MT in name only. However they're the locomotive that started it all. Without the design features being proven (and in some case, later rejected), there'd be no Black 5. Well that's my argument anyhow to include a non-Black 'un. I'll go grab the blindfold and put my back against the wall.

At a blind guess, that would be the ETH equivalent

LMS Twins count? In all seriousness though, I'll agree with the K1/Q1-Q2 option.

Still patiently awaiting an email down here in Oz for a pair (one DC, one DCC Sound for a mate). Very late order but I might have to give a nudge if nothing this week.

I'll mention the elephant in the room: Screw heads on rods. There, it's been said. In reality? WOOHOOOOOOO