Roy L S

A fair point about scale/gauge ratio, and no getting away from that being out for both OO and British N. Speaking as a British N modeller I have never concerned myself too much with the discrepancy because the scale four inches the track is too narrow to prototype represents just over 0.5mm, so you would need good eyes to spot it! However in OO (4mm/ft) 16.5mm gauge represents 4ft 1in and so the 2.3 mm discrepancy is arguably more visible and even more so the scales - 4mm/ft v's 3.5mm/ft. Consistent scales (2.5mm/ft) between TT120 and established Continental TT is another distinct advantage as far as mixing and matching British and Continental stock is concerned (for those who want to) too so yep, let's not forget that one. So no argument, that's two very valid points in terms of positives of TT120. Regards Roy

It may prove to be the case for some people with a propensity to (say) scratch-build, but in truth there is otherwise almost nothing that TT120 can offer that is not possible in N. In fact it actually faces some interesting disadvantages, space for one and to take an example, my N layout which is 7.5ft x 2.5ft equates to an area of 18.75 square feet, to create an identical layout in TT120 (which is just 1/5 larger size wise) the dimensions grow to 9.4ft x 3.1ft and the area grows to 29.1 square feet which is in square footage terms significantly more. TT120 is a credible scale for sure, and for some I do not doubt that being that bit bigger than N will make it the right choice for them, but to talk in terms of "advantages" as regards N is actually for the most part more subjective than factual. As regards OO, yes, it takes a lot less space and it could well be that those new to the hobby and attracted to the universally recognised Hornby "Brand" will go for it for that reason alone without looking further and as I recall it was largely those "new" people Hornby were targeting. Roy

You make some interesting points above, and I don't think there is any question that TT120 will carve a niche for some modellers, in fact it is important to bear in mind that TT scaled at 2.5mm/ft is already an established scale with mainstream manufacturers and a following in some countries. The key question is whether what Hornby have marketed as "TT120" (to differentiate it from TT3 that went before) will do the same thing as far as modellers of British Outline are concerned. The so called "rule of thirds" is and idea that is very old, in fact I believe it may go back to the days of Cyril Freezer (Of PECO/Railway Modeller fame) but it is important to appreciate that this is not a strict rule of any kind, more an opinion that may have more relevance in some layout scenarios than others. In terms of the smallest practicable scale, it really depends what you mean. If you are talking from a commercial standpoint then clearly that is wrong, as N has been around for over 60 years (And British N for only a few years less), with many manufacturers worldwide and a huge following. In terms of detail I would respectfully disagree too, comparing the TT120 models I have purchased to my British N models, they are no better detailed (in some cases less so), no more accurate in the sense of fidelity to prototype and in many cases less technically sophisticated. I would concede that as a scratch-builder's scale TT120 is probably going to be easier to get along with for some people, but the advent of 3D printing means you can "draw" a model in any scale in CAD and resize it either in the CAD or slicing software to any scale you wish, and the detail remains pretty much unchanged subject to the capabilities of the chosen printer. In terms of shunting, I have seen plenty of N layouts where shunting is very capably undertaken, N locos' slow running is typically excellent these days and choices of couplings mean it is much easier to do "hands off" than with standard N couplings. The extra volume of TT models may though make though shunting easier with a greater element of weight being possible to prevent unexpected movement of wagons, but I actually think that more important is the choice of coupling used regardless of whether we are talking TT or N. The ones that Hornby models come with look awful and require a fixed operating "ramp" to uncouple "hands off" and so for the TT120 layout I was planning (and still have stock and track for) I was actually looking to use less obtrusive N Gauge "Easi-Shunt" couplings and magnets, taking advantage of the NEM pockets. In terms of TT being smallest practicable size, to an extent that depends on your definition of "practicable". However in terms of what manufacturers think, they clearly do not have the same view, or N would not by comparison to TT globally be orders of magnitude larger as an overall market and in terms of manufacturers producing models. I say all the above with some "skin" in the TT120 game and not as an "armchair" outsider, I see a niche for TT120 as a further choice which will doubtless suit some, just as TT3 has continued to do many years after Tri-Ang production ceased (thanks to the 3mm Scale Association and the sheer volume of TT3 models Tri-Ang produced of which I am lucky to have a modest collection). What I do not see is TT120 challenging the established scales of N or OO to any meaningful extent, but would finish by saying that I don't think it really needs to in order succeed in a commercial sense. Regards Roy

Wow! I was speaking in general, not with any specific layout in mind, and not intending to denigrate anybody's efforts as building a model railway. I do not know the layout, but from what I can see it looks like serious attempt at a model railway to me. However in terms of "credible", how often would a Hymek rub shoulders with an A4 and how often would an A3 shunt the yard? Rule 1 is everyone's friend, what people run is a personal choice, and it certainly isn't my place to judge that - I hadn't even noticed until you pointed it out that some items are 3mm/ft so not strictly TT120 but clearly some skilled modelling irrespective. However, that is not my point. "Credible" doesn't mean you need to have every possible loco and item of rolling stock available, but it does mean having sufficient to provide a representative cross-section for a specific area/location and speaking in a general sense (which I was) that is simply not possible at present for the majority looking at TT120 as an alternative and will not be for some considerable time to come. Whether I or anyone else can or cannot do better is entirely irrelevant, but as it happens by way of just one example, the products are available for me to do something serious and more "credible" in N Gauge right now and in a significantly smaller area relative to TT120 and that is the mountain Hornby need to climb - established scales. Roy

I suppose there is a difference between a "serious" model railway and a truly credible one though? The first, in terms of track, buildings and scenic products along with the as yet limited amount of rolling stock is certainly possible, but the second, without a wider range and better balance of locos and rolling stock is arguably as yet still quite some way off ... Roy

OO has the biggest following in the UK by some margin with British N coming second at around 20-25% of the size. The heavy discounting relates to a number of factors including (over) supply and competition - it is a hugely competitive marketplace with a number of "players" looking to carve a niche and attract market share. Is it a growing Market? Honestly I am not a OO modeller so do not know to what extent that may be true. By contrast TT120 Market Share in the UK is as yet miniscule by comparison to any other major established scale and with only one principal supplier of locos and rolling stock (Hornby) who have almost complete control of pricing, alongside an as yet very limited range thus far and similarly constrained supply, I would not at this point expect to see any heavily discounted British TT120 models at present or indeed for some time to come until/unless the scale becomes more established and another manufacturer or two jump on board. Roy

Sorry I may be missing something, but I am not seeing the relevance of your point to the matter of added detail and comparative lack of impact it has on on overall cost of producing a model or price to the end user?

It is a fallacy Les, the factory added extra detail isn't adding that much to the overall cost of a model at all, this misconception has been done to death, although it seems to me that some people think that if they repeat it often enough it will become fact - it won't. As has been said repeatedly the biggest factor dictating the cost of any model is the volume produced by the factory and typically even in OO in the grand scheme of things these aren't huge so unit cost will be high, added detail or no added detail. Regards Roy

In N as well as OO please 🙂

As an avid N Gauge modeller of steam/diesel transition period and noting that the West Country and GW Mogul will hopefully by now actually be in tooling, I would really like to see those models followed up by a tender loco of an LNER prototype. There are some pretty large classes of loco that might fit the bill and some had very long lives. I am thinking maybe a 4-4-0 like "the Shire" to follow on from the Schools or possibly a K3 which was originally a Great Northern design so a number of livery choices. However the one I would really love to see (and I have badgered another manufacturer about this too!) would be the Great Central Robinson "ROD" 2-8-0. It had a very long service life, loads of livery choices, survived into the 1960s on BR with one preserved in the UK and a couple still surviving in Australia. There were loads of variations over it's life including side-window cabs, round-topped boilers, different valve-gear and more. Even if a little quirky I think it would be an absolutely brilliant choice. Roy

Simple answer to that is that (1) the basic sounds are very much speed related and so would have to be managed via the lead loco, then things like braking on F2 would need to control both locos together so would be the same issue. Things like whistles and ancillary sounds simply because I hadn't thought to select an individual loco within the consist to do so which is about knowledge, so I appreciate the tip.

I have run two Farish Fowler 4Fs in consist, these were the first incarnations of the most recent models (not sound ready) and the sound fits were hard-wired, one by You-Choos and the other I did myself. Both have Zimo decoders and the You-Choos sound-file, running them in consist wasn't a problem and it was quite nice but of course you do not have individual control of sound in each loco.

In some respects yes, but if the twin pack is priced at £60 then after the "usual" 15% discount that is £51 or £25.50 a coach which is considerably less than more recently tooled models like the Thompsons and Mk1s so while I may be completely wrong, it possibly represents positioning some lower spec products at a lower price-point? Roy

A "Twin" will definitely be coming my way, I am gobsmacked, realistically I never thought we would see these produced RTR in N so I am delighted. They tick a lot of boxes in terms or route usage and also I would think as a "collector's" piece. Plus, with a replica one being recreated one could even be "creatively" justified on a preserved railway today. I think my choice will be 10001 sound fitted in the later livery with yellow panel but very hard to decide.... Roy

From the video this new 31 looks to be a lovely model, and I personally I think there looks to be enough about it in terms of quality and features to find an enthusiastic following and adequate "space" in the admittedly somewhat crowded OO Class 31 Market. Many have commented on the lines of "oh no not another duplication" but there surely comes a point in any project (typically when steel starts to be cut) when a manufacturer passes a point of no return with a model financially and has to continue to production irrespective of what another manufacturer does or announces? Not being a OO modeller the whole thing is slightly academic from my perspective, but I can see this loco doing very well, and I am particularly interested in hearing the Mirrlees engine sounds, and it would be even nicer if the sound-file were made available so I can put it in my N Gauge golden ochre one, albeit Bachmann never have done that up to now I appreciate. Roy

I had suggested etched handrails but Andy from Rapido didn't thing that possible. Were it to be, I would suggest that they need to be factory fitted and finished or there would be accusations of it being an "almost" ready to run model - people would (in my opinion) reasonably expect that. Personally, taking the 66 above as an example and reviewing my Farish Peak model I would say moulded on handrails would make for finer ones and if picked out in white would be perfectly acceptable in the case of this specific loco class. Roy

I would expect that GDPR regulations would require it to be deleted, information has to be held for a specific purpose and for no longer that necessary.

You missed nail-bars and men's barbers off the list, they seem to have grown exponentially in town centres in recent years 🤔

Eeek! If it is that one then I have just changed my mind about Polly...

That is correct, I was proud owner of a red "Polly" which I remember being bought from our village toy shop by my parents when I was about 8, if memory serves correctly it cost £2.00. At the time the "Nellie" was also available in blue, but my recollection is that "Connie" was not and may not have been available for as long as the ither two. Nostalgia would certainly "require" I buy a "Polly" even though I have not modelled in OO for 40 plus years 🤔

Very sad news indeed, until their fallout with Bachmann they were my "go to" place for the purchase Farish items in particular and I had been going to them as a customer for over 40 years. Their range of stock has always been extensive and when it was all you could get (we forget how lucky we are now) I would regularly buy Langley steam loco kits and the required Farish chassis from them as one convenient "bundle". I will remember fondly the parcels arriving tied up with string and the paper price-lists always included with my purchases in that pre-digital age that seems so long ago now. As it is an orderly wind down with no issues of insolvency at least everyone will be paid in full so any "shockwaves" in the supply chain will be less painful, but of course like others, in particular, I feel so sorry for all the employees who will be impacted and hope they find new jobs quickly. So much more could be said, but my overwhelming feeling is one of sadness, Hattons will always have a legendary status in the British model railway world for me.

But is a GW four cylinder loco's valve-gear truly conjugated Les? I am happy to stand corrected but my understanding of the term "conjugate" is to join together and in the case of Gresley valve-gear two sets are joined to provide valve movement to a third cylinder. A Castle (for example) has one set of valve gear operating two cylinders via a single rocking arm which is not the same thing mechanically. Regards Roy

Or is it a case of a "pause" due to the number of 08s already delivered saturating the Market and only the blue and green ones selling quickly leaving a number of less popular/common ones on shelves? You can get some of the quirkier liveries at very keen prices currently without too much shopping around..

I have been familiar with Met No.1 over many years and am very aware that it has been in steam on LT metals, however it is described by the centre as under overhaul, and last time I was at Bucks Railway Centre I am sure I saw parts of the disassembled loco out in the open - I will check next time I am there.

Yep somewhere around 20% is my understanding too.