Britain's Model Trains 2016

[dibber25]

Published 2 March. £7.99

[Downer]

This is a more basic version of the 2015 bookazine, a simple listing of available models in N, 00 and 0.  The 'what's coming' and 'who does what' kit sections have disappeared, and so has the advice on which decoder to use for each loco.  I also came across several basic errors during a very cursory thumb-through in Smiths.    I guess it has its uses if you haven't bought one before, but it's a pretty shoddy addition to the series. 

[JeremyKarl]

This is a more basic version of the 2015 bookazine, a simple listing of available models in N, 00 and 0.  The 'what's coming' and 'who does what' kit sections have disappeared, and so has the advice on which decoder to use for each loco.  I also came across several basic errors during a very cursory thumb-through in Smiths.    I guess it has its uses if you haven't bought one before, but it's a pretty shoddy addition to the series. 

 

I promptly bought a copy of the 2016 edition (vol. 8 ) yesterday in Smiths and I wouldn't have described it as particularly more basic compared to volumes 1-7 taken as a whole, (which I also purchased and found useful). It is different to last year's editions in that it now includes reference to items produced since the 2009 bookazine and also "upcoming new items" within each section, so there is less need for a separate "what's coming" section. It still provides information on which type of decoder  is needed with regard to pin type (6-pin, 8-pin, 21-pin, etc.) even if it doesn't give recommended makes. [Personally, I would rather have information on available space (i.e. dimensions) for decoders (and for stay-alive capacitors for short-wheelbase locos) rather than recommended makes.]  I agree that it has the odd error, but then so did the previous versions - almost inevitable IMHO given the time available to produce this encyclopedic 228 page volume. I would like to see it better sorted within each section as per earlier editions (diesel/electric is still sorted by class, but steam seems a bit random and would be better by wheel number & type: e.g. either 4-6-2s first and 0-4-0 last or vice versa). The tables of locomotives by region at the end of last year's edition was rather useful and I would agree that the lack of these tables is a bit disappointing (as per Downer's comment above), so I hope they reappear in any future edition.

 

Jeremy Karl.

[dibber25]

I promptly bought a copy of the 2016 edition (vol. 8 ) yesterday in Smiths and I wouldn't have described it as particularly more basic compared to volumes 1-7 taken as a whole, (which I also purchased and found useful). It is different to last year's editions in that it now includes reference to items produced since the 2009 bookazine and also "upcoming new items" within each section, so there is less need for a separate "what's coming" section. It still provides information on which type of decoder  is needed with regard to pin type (6-pin, 8-pin, 21-pin, etc.) even if it doesn't give recommended makes. [Personally, I would rather have information on available space (i.e. dimensions) for decoders (and for stay-alive capacitors for short-wheelbase locos) rather than recommended makes.]  I agree that it has the odd error, but then so did the previous versions - almost inevitable IMHO given the time available to produce this encyclopedic 228 page volume. I would like to see it better sorted within each section as per earlier editions (diesel/electric is still sorted by class, but steam seems a bit random and would be better by wheel number & type: e.g. either 4-6-2s first and 0-4-0 last or vice versa). The tables of locomotives by region at the end of last year's edition was rather useful and I would agree that the lack of these tables is a bit disappointing (as per Downer's comment above), so I hope they reappear in any future edition.

 

Jeremy Karl.

Some revisions were made to keep within the specified number of pages but very little was deleted. There are so many different decoders suitable for most of the models that it is no longer practical to list them all or to make recommendations. Similarly, assessing the available space in hundreds of different models is not practical. (CJL)

[PaulRhB]

. There are so many different decoders suitable for most of the models that it is no longer practical to list them all or to make recommendations. Similarly, assessing the available space in hundreds of different models is not practical. (CJL)

When you think about it this would be a good thing for manufacturers to include on the maintenance sheet and even the website as they have the CAD that they can accurately measure the space from, very difficult for  reviewer to measure especially in boilers or under the curve of a diesel roof. It's one thing that is particularly difficult to measure and there are a couple of times I've had to wait to buy a smaller decoder to fit it in so couldn't run the new loco on the layout straight away.

[dibber25]

When you think about it this would be a good thing for manufacturers to include on the maintenance sheet and even the website as they have the CAD that they can accurately measure the space from, very difficult for  reviewer to measure especially in boilers or under the curve of a diesel roof. It's one thing that is particularly difficult to measure and there are a couple of times I've had to wait to buy a smaller decoder to fit it in so couldn't run the new loco on the layout straight away.

It is both difficult and time-consuming. Most of the info in BMT comes straight from the reviews but there is data such as this which wasn't logged at the time of the review and to include it in BMT now, would mean working back through dozens of models. In many instances we no longer have access to the models in question. (CJL)

[Baldy]

I bought a copy yesterday having been waiting for a new version for a several months as I bought my last copy a few years back. Whilst it is great to have an up to date version, I echo some of above comments and am disappointed with the proof reading of the document and the ordering of the steam sections. There are many mistakes with lots of sections obviously rolled forward from previous versions - references to new developments on existing models being two or three years out of date, cross references incorrect, inconsistencies with individual write ups where sentences have been added that are out of context with rest of comments with the model etc. The new models clearly have new text; however, it does seem that models brought forward from previous versions have often just had the text rolled forward whether it is relevant/correct now or not.

 

Still think it is a useful publication - just a bit let down as the quality of the final publication is not what I was expecting.

[PaulRhB]

It is both difficult and time-consuming. Most of the info in BMT comes straight from the reviews but there is data such as this which wasn't logged at the time of the review and to include it in BMT now, would mean working back through dozens of models. In many instances we no longer have access to the models in question. (CJL)

Yes and it would be trial and error in reviews too so another reason for the manufacturer to include it from their accurate cad files rather than in BMT.

I agree with your comment about the variety of decoders making it difficult to start recommending ones, there'd be screams from other decoder makers too

[Legend]

I last bought a copy 4 or 5 years ago. But I saw it in WHS , reviewed it and thought it was good value for the money. I model OO but have had a hankering for N for a while , so it does give a comprehensive view of what's available. With the demise of the Hornby catalogue (I know I've got the small one that they've produced) I think it does serve a purpose. I am aware that some bits are a bit out of date and haven't been updated, but overall I can live with it

[Hroth]

Had a look through BMT2016 in WHS this weekend and, surprisingly perhaps, bought a copy as its interesting to have a publication that describes whats available in all the major scales.

 

And if things don't buck up at Hornby, it may be of historical interest too...

[Nearholmer]

Leafed through it in the reading room at the station today, and, to my delight, right at the very back are two pages devoted to my chosen niche, coarse-scale 0.

 

OK, it was written by someone who clearly doesn't quite "get" this format, a bit like an anthropologist trying to describe the culture of a previously undiscovered tribe in the remotest parts of the Amazon jungle, by reference to table-manners in Cheltenham, but it is there, and all credit to whoever put it there.

 

Some innocent N gauger might read it and get seduced by shiny printed tin.

 

Kevin

 

PS: I can think of several unbiased commentators who would be happy to write two pages about the topic, from the perspective of the previously undiscovered tribe, for next years edition.

[Robin Brasher]

I am pleased to see that coarse scale 0 gauge is included in Britain's Model Trains 2016 and I hope it will lead to some vintage 0 gauge layouts appearing in the magazines.Coarse scale layouts have appeared in television documentaries. The latest products from Darstaed and Ace will run on Peco 2-rail track but probably not through the points.

 

What I like about my Ace Q class locomotive is that at an exhibition I can set it off with a rake of 48 goods wagons, leave it running for eight hours and people enjoy watching it run.

It looks like a Q class to me and it captures the weight and power of the prototype far more than the 00 and N gauge models.

[Robin Brasher]

Further to my reply about coarse scale 0 gauge I understand that there are two versions of Darstaed's latest models: a coarse scale 3-rail version that will run on Hornby 0 gauge track and a 2-rail version that will run on Peco track and points.

 

The description does not mention anything about performance and I think the comment about lacking the refinement of a finescale model is a little unfair. The Ace N2 0-6-2T looks as good as the Hornby 00 gauge version and  is a considerable improvement on the Hornby-Dublo version. The performance is considerably better. The Hornby version cannot pull too many coaches yet the ACE N2 can out perform my Ace Q class that can haul 48 Hornby wagons.

 

The coarse scale section and the model railway magazines would benefit from a detailed review of one locomotive such as the N2 and a comparison of an 0 gauge coarse scale model and a Hornby 00 gauge one. One advantage of Darstead and Ace trains is that you can lay track on the carpet as you could with Hornby 0 gauge whereas an 00 gauge engine would grind to a halt after a few laps.

[dibber25]

I believe that section was provided by an independent, unbiased commentator, as we have only ever seen a couple of coarse scale 'O' gauge locomotives for review over the past 19 years. (CJL)

[Nearholmer]

I wasn't seeking with my earlier comment to imply that you commentator was biased or lacking in independence (certainly didn't appear so to me). My point was more about his/her evident unfamiliarity with the format.

 

K

[Robin Brasher]

If the 0 gauge coarse scale manufacturers have only sent two models for review over the last 19 years I would suggest that the author visits a coarse scale layout at one of the Hornby Railway Collectors Association meetings and asks the owner of a model to see how it performs and lets you measure it. Hornby are not sending models to magazines for review but this has not stopped them from reviewing the models.

 

To me the N2. pannier tank and terrier look just as realistic as their 00 and N gauge counterparts where these are available and my Ace BR SR Q class 0-6-0 looks and feels just like the prototype with its heavy metal body. If any comments about lacking the refinement of a finescale model were backed up with the detailed specification as in the description of the Hornby N2 on page 110 I would be more inclined to believe them.

 

While I am pleased to see two pages about coarse scale locomotives on pages 224 and 225 I would like to see a full review of one coarse scale locomotive in the next bookazine and in future editions of model railway magazines. They deserve to be given the same detailed reviews as their 00 and N gauge counterparts.

[dibber25]

If the 0 gauge coarse scale manufacturers have only sent two models for review over the last 19 years I would suggest that the author visits a coarse scale layout at one of the Hornby Railway Collectors Association meetings and asks the owner of a model to see how it performs and lets you measure it. Hornby are not sending models to magazines for review but this has not stopped them from reviewing the models.

 

To me the N2. pannier tank and terrier look just as realistic as their 00 and N gauge counterparts where these are available and my Ace BR SR Q class 0-6-0 looks and feels just like the prototype with its heavy metal body. If any comments about lacking the refinement of a finescale model were backed up with the detailed specification as in the description of the Hornby N2 on page 110 I would be more inclined to believe them.

 

While I am pleased to see two pages about coarse scale locomotives on pages 224 and 225 I would like to see a full review of one coarse scale locomotive in the next bookazine and in future editions of model railway magazines. They deserve to be given the same detailed reviews as their 00 and N gauge counterparts.

The difference between 'OO' and coarse scale 'O' is that one is mainstream and the other is niche, and a small niche at that. The lack of reviews is not a reflection on the quality or accuracy of the models but merely of the level of interest that there is likely to be. Magazine space is always at a premium and we have to use it for material that will interest the greatest number of readers. If we receive review samples (gratis or on loan) they get reviewed, otherwise it depends on whether a member of staff buys the item. We have staff members who model in 'OO' and buy Hornby models but we do not currently have anyone on our team who works in coarse scale 'O'. I do have a Bassett-Lowke 'Mogul' which is  a nice model but it does pose difficulties with some of the clearances on my 'O' gauge layout. (CJL)

[Nearholmer]

What if .......

 

A willing volunteer was to submit an article that surveyed the "state of the niche", and provided short reviews of a selection of recent products within the niche?

 

Would there be sufficient interest to make publication likely?

 

K

[jjb1970]

The seeming non-existence of coarse scale O in terms of magazine coverage mystifies me in some ways. OK it may be something of a niche, but the model railway hobby is full of niches and minority interests, many of which do receive coverage in the magazines. The fact that it is a part of the hobby that has been around for many years and which still supports new products indicates that there are fans with a strong interest in the subject. I find it to be a really charming part of the hobby, I've often wanted to move into it myself and fancied setting up a coarse O train set with the boy before we ended up going for the normal OO set up.

[dibber25]

I'm not in a position to comment regarding whether or not an article might be published. That's the Editor's prerogative and it's his judgement alone as to whether any article or subject area warrants coverage. In Model Rail's case, space is often limited. However, there are two ways to approach it. Either by contacting the Editor and asking him or by actually producing an article and submitting it. The latter means that you might feel you've wasted your time if he says 'No', but when I was Editor I always preferred to see the actual material I was being offered, rather than just being presented with an idea in an e-mail. And if one Editor says no, there are others to try - I'm not aware that this topic has had much coverage in any of the magazines. (CJL)

[Robin Brasher]

I like the tables in the 00 gauge coaches section showing which locomotives they work with. Model coaches have come a long way since they reached an all time low in the 1970s when Hornby and Lima were producing Mk1 coaches in pre-Nationalisation liveries. The authentic Graham Farish Mk1s set me off on N gauge. I am glad that after the 00 gauge coaches improved and I bought them when I did because the present prices are alarming with Bachmann coaches being offered for sale at prices between £38.95 and £54.95. Fortunately many are available for much less second hand. The Heljan BR Mk1 0 gauge coaches with their faults at £325 each seem poor value for money in comparison. Many people modelling 0 gauge still use second hand Lima coaches which can be obtained for about £20 each. The guide highlights the need for the equivalent of Hornby Railroad coaches in 0 gauge.

[Nearholmer]

The MTH ones meet that specification, Robin, see http://www.scalelink.co.uk/acatalog/O-scale-MTH-Fine-scale-British-Passenger-rolling-stock--Retail-only-.html

 

But ...... I think someone needs to run a scale ruler over them, because the one I bought ( the BG) seems ever-so-slightly small, and I wonder if it might be 1/45 scale. I'm not really into LMS, so don't have drawings to allow me to check myself.

 

If so, a great pity, because they are nice models for the price.

 

K

[Robin Brasher]

At £125 each the MTH models look good value for money in comparison to the Heljan Mk1s. Ace Trains are producing some 0 gauge Mk1s with tinplate bodies for £85 each which is about double the cost of 00 gauge Mk1s. These are rugged models that  I think capture the appearance of the real coaches far more than the 00 and N gauge plastic coaches. Ace also produces coaches that 00 and N gauge modellers can only dream about such as a Bulleid Tavern Car and a Coronation nine car blue set. It is a pity that these never seem to be reviewed in model railway magazines or in Britain's Model Trains as a lot of people seem to be unaware of their existence. I think it might encourage Hornby and Graham Farish to produce a wider range of coaching stock as there are huge gaps in their ranges.

[dibber25]

At £125 each the MTH models look good value for money in comparison to the Heljan Mk1s. Ace Trains are producing some 0 gauge Mk1s with tinplate bodies for £85 each which is about double the cost of 00 gauge Mk1s. These are rugged models that  I think capture the appearance of the real coaches far more than the 00 and N gauge plastic coaches. Ace also produces coaches that 00 and N gauge modellers can only dream about such as a Bulleid Tavern Car and a Coronation nine car blue set. It is a pity that these never seem to be reviewed in model railway magazines or in Britain's Model Trains as a lot of people seem to be unaware of their existence. I think it might encourage Hornby and Graham Farish to produce a wider range of coaching stock as there are huge gaps in their ranges.

The whole question of reviews is a lot more complex than just whether magazines get free samples from mainstream manufacturers. With the greatest will in the World it is not possible for us to keep our fingers on the pulse of the dozens of ranges of products that are available to today's modellers from smaller companies. It helps if we get press releases about new products, catalogues or the occasional chance to photograph models for our news pages. To do that, we need the manufacturers to keep us informed and, sadly, few of the smaller companies are set up to do that. We did have some MTH models to photograph, once - maybe 12 years ago, and that's it. We also have a blue 'Duchess' which was reviewed. I don't know who the manufacturer was because the box was destroyed when our storeroom got flooded, but it may have been MTH. So, it is a niche subject which has probably received coverage in proportion to the number of our readers who model in coarse scale 'O'. (CJL)

[Robin Brasher]

Coarse scale 0 gauge has 16,212 views on this site compared with 15,129 views for 2016/17 in Farish on this web site so I think there is more interest in coarse scale 0 gauge than some people think and it is an expanding interest. The people who buy coarse scale actually run their trains rather than counting rivets, cleaning their track or storing engines as an investment and at exhibitions the public enjoy watching the 0 gauge trains pulling 48 wagons or 20 coaches rather than waiting 10 minutes for the next shunting movement on an 00 gauge layout.