Models Hornby Could Make, but probably won't.

[robmcg]

Given that there was recently some speculation in the Engine Shed thread about Hornby producing a Lord Nelson to round-out its Southern theme, 

 

could such a model look somewhat like this edited view of a Bachmann split-chassis version?  Ideal for a 'could but probably won't' thread!

 

 

cheers,

[phil-b259]

When Hornby bought the former Dapol OO tooling did they aquire the 150/2, and if they did they could use it as a basis to create several mid 80s electric units such as 318s and 455s or with a little more retooling 320s 321s 322s and 456s.

 

As for super detailed models a modern spec class 86 (as the Heljan model fell short of expectations) and a class 58 (with a suitably modified cab interior to the same standard as the superb class 60 as again the Heljan model is not to that high a standard).

 

Sorry to say, it but like 99% of modellers you have no idea about tooling do you.

 

Far too many are under the assumption that it is 'easy' to create new tooling because manufacturer x "already has something similar' in their range.

 

Manufacturers are on record that messing round with existing tools is not economic and general produces lousy mouldings. If you want to create a model (however closelky related it might be to another item) then it is necessary to design fresh tooling - which in turn means you might as well do the job properly and release a totally new, high spec model.

[BritishRail60062]

When Hornby bought the former Dapol OO tooling did they aquire the 150/2, and if they did they could use it as a basis to create several mid 80s electric units such as 318s and 455s or with a little more retooling 320s 321s 322s and 456s.

 

As for super detailed models a modern spec class 86 (as the Heljan model fell short of expectations) and a class 58 (with a suitably modified cab interior to the same standard as the superb class 60 as again the Heljan model is not to that high a standard).

Wether or not Hornby bought the 150/2 tooling is irrelivent and I will tell you this. There is no way that it would be financially viable to use that dated tooling for making any 318's or 455's etc as most modellers are seeking newer far more realistic models. Bachmann have done a grand job on the revised 150/1 and 150/2 models and the dated Dapol tooling is just no match. If Hornby did want to make a 455 etc. It would be far more better for their reputation to use fresh tooling and make the unit from scratch.

 

Anyway, I have serious doubts that the former Dapol tooling would be usable now as it must be approaching 30 years old (I am assuming its still around). Besides, could you imagine all the stick from the reviews the model would get if Hornby were "naive" enough to use that tooling and tweaking it to make a similar looking EMU?

 

Its not the 1980's anymore mate .

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...Representatives from all the Big Four, how's that for even-handed?...

 I would have thought that 'even handedness' - maintaining a reasonably stable spread of introductions over the identifiable interest groups in the hobby - should serve a manufacturer best, by ensuring regular engagement with as many as possible within the potential customer base. However the 'famine or feast' effect that we regularly see suggests that this does not rank highly in guiding introduction decisions.

 

... I do wonder how far you can use toolings or parts from other locomotives which are similar to your advantage, as a manufacturer. Take Bachmann's Atlantics, both the new Brighton and the GNR locomotives- given that the former was based on the latter from the off, with minor adjustments, I'd imagine they *might* be able to use the existing chassis, motor and possibly the boiler casting with no alteration. The only changes to be made would be the cab, fittings, the footplate (including splashers) and the wheel diameters (this includes the bogie). On the other hand, why tool things to work around something if it'd be far easier to just create a whole unit from scratch?...

I rather suspect that what gets re-used isn't physical tooling from a prior model, but the CAD files. You wouldn't remap the form of say the BR mk1 coach body and dimensions of windows, doors,  gangways and other common parts: you would start from a 'boilerplate' set of files. (At least I hope so, or the designers are missing a major economy...)

[robmcg]

I'd love to see a Hornby (or Bachmann, for that matter) DCC-ready 'Nelson, preferably with the various tenders; they didn't receive the higher raving as seen there until later in their lives, and some were issued with six wheel tenders along the line; the smoke deflectors weren't employed on all members of the class until the late twenties.

 

...

 

Indeed, a couple of years late-'20s without deflectors, 6 wheeled tenders at first for only a few, with various tender swaps 1928-32  Bradley's RCTS Locos of the SR Vol.One  or Irwell's book of the Lord Nelsons p25 tells all.

 

nice subltetes like 'early 8-wheel tenders rode so well the coal didn't move forward... '  brought re-design of coal space done 1938-40.

 

Boilers varied in length, well, one was longer, used on 860, 855 and 852 successively, after 1958? AWS and speedos were fitted to some not alll?

 

But most had 8-wheel slope top tenders and deflectors, and possibly Hornby have already done the earlier 8-wheel straight-sided tender type for some N15/S15s?

 

And the funnel of course post c1938 le Maitre.

 

Other things no doubt.

 

Cheers

[Dunsignalling]

Indeed, a couple of years late-'20s without deflectors, 6 wheeled tenders at first for only a few, with various tender swaps 1928-32  Bradley's RCTS Locos of the SR Vol.One  or Irwell's book of the Lord Nelsons p25 tells all.

 

nice subltetes like 'early 8-wheel tenders rode so well the coal didn't move forward... '  brought re-design of coal space done 1938-40.

 

Boilers varied in length, well, one was longer, used on 860, 855 and 852 successively, after 1958? AWS and speedos were fitted to some not alll?

 

But most had 8-wheel slope top tenders and deflectors, and possibly Hornby have already done the earlier 8-wheel straight-sided tender type for some N15/S15s?

 

And the funnel of course post c1938 le Maitre.

 

Other things no doubt.

 

Cheers

Further variations later on too, e.g.. 30852 carried a Merchant Navy chimney in its latter years of service.

 

John

[Ravenser]

How about Maunsell's River class, with different fittings to cater for those sold on to the LNER and Metropolitan companies?

 

You could cover quite a wide region and time span then.

 

 

 

I'm afraid the River tanks were rather different to the Met's L2 2-6-4Ts. The latter were kits of parts for N class 2-6-0s bought from Woolwich Arsenal ,. which had made them as a post WW1 "make work " project (and by some accounts they didn't do a wonderful job). The Met then had them built up as 2-6-4T tank engines. The LNER inherited all the Met's big tanks in (I think) 1937 after LT handed over all steam operations north of Rickmansworth to the LNER; I believe they ended up in Nottinghamshire, and were scrapped in 1943. There were about half a dozen of the Met 2-6-4Ts

 

Sadly not a viable proposition  (I notice that nobody has ever attempted a conversion from a Bachmann N)

[No Decorum]

I'm afraid the River tanks were rather different to the Met's L2 2-6-4Ts. The latter were kits of parts for N class 2-6-0s bought from Woolwich Arsenal ,. which had made them as a post WW1 "make work " project (and by some accounts they didn't do a wonderful job). The Met then had them built up as 2-6-4T tank engines. The LNER inherited all the Met's big tanks in (I think) 1937 after LT handed over all steam operations north of Rickmansworth to the LNER; I believe they ended up in Nottinghamshire, and were scrapped in 1943. There were about half a dozen of the Met 2-6-4Ts

 

Sadly not a viable proposition  (I notice that nobody has ever attempted a conversion from a Bachmann N)

Oh, you’re probably right, sadly. Too iffy. If someone were to wake up to the Birdcages being snapped up and decide to knock out some Met. coaches (on the principle that there must be a lot of Met. Electric owners out there eager for some) and if those did sell well, then someone might think that the Met. 2-6-4Ts looked attractive enough to offer us. Didn’t the LT Prairies sell well?

 

I think I’d better not have a second glass of the liquid which causes delusions.

[No Decorum]

Further variations later on too, e.g.. 30852 carried a Merchant Navy chimney in its latter years of service.

 

John

Thank you for the translation.

Another cause of the coal not coming forward was the smoothness of the Nellies. The cranks were arranged so that there were eight beats per rotation of the wheels. Apparently, in the search to solve the known shortcomings, one had its cranks rearranged in the conventional manner; to produce four beats. It didn’t seem to make much difference.

 

It’s rather sad, I think. Maunsell tends to be rather under-rated, possibly because his most attention-grabbing design turned out to be flawed.

[Ravenser]

Oh, you’re probably right, sadly. Too iffy. If someone were to wake up to the Birdcages being snapped up and decide to knock out some Met. coaches (on the principle that there must be a lot of Met. Electric owners out there eager for some) and if those did sell well, then someone might think that the Met. 2-6-4Ts looked attractive enough to offer us. Didn’t the LT Prairies sell well?

 

I think I’d better not have a second glass of the liquid which causes delusions.

 

We've only just managed a kit for the 2-6-4Ts from SE Finecast, and John Armstrong (formerly of this forum) scraped up enough interest to do a short-run etched brass kit for the Met 4-4-4Ts a few years ago . Nobody's done a kit for the 0-6-4Ts . That tells a story - the market for big Met tanks is very limited

 

(I did once doodle a few alterations to a CJF plan to faintly represent the Met actually extending the Brill branch to Oxford and upgrading it to an important suburban main line, with a sizeable Oxford terminus and goods interchange with the GW . "Had we but worlds enough, and time..." Then reality kicked in - I haven't got room for such a layout and almost certainly never will (I live in a flat) , building the said big tanks is out of my league , especially if they have to be scratchbuilt - and there are a lot of other things I can do - if I find the time to dig them out of the cupboard

 

What Hornby could make - but won't - is some Met coaches, to go with the Heljan Bo-Bo. Dreadnaughts, Chesham stock, whatever. (Think LT 150) Come to that, so could Heljan - short runs off soft moulds and exotica are their business model

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...It’s rather sad, I think. Maunsell tends to be rather under-rated, possibly because his most attention-grabbing design turned out to be flawed.

 The fact that he couldn't work out where the deficiency on the LN lay and rectify it; especially once he had the evidence from the very effective V, does however support that assessment. His CME contemporaries faced with similar underperformance issues plugged way until they found satisfactory solutions.

[Iltman]

The fact that he couldn't work out where the deficiency on the LN lay and rectify it; especially once he had the evidence from the very effective V, does however support that assessment. His CME contemporaries faced with similar underperformance issues plugged way until they found satisfactory solutions.

One of the interesting might have beens after the problems were highlighted with the LNs was His Garrett design. Mauncell produced a 462 264 design which would have been the largest steam engine in the UK beating the LNERs U1. Now there’s a thought for a new model lol

[pmorgan_cym]

How about a GW Saint, either in Railroad or super detailed form

GW/LMS Variations of tbe 08

How about a GW Saint, either in Railroad or super detailed form

GW/LMS Variations of tbe 08

[brian777999]

These:

 

Where did you get that model of loco 551 ?

[No Decorum]

How about a GW Saint, either in Railroad or super detailed form

GW/LMS Variations of tbe 08

How about a GW Saint, either in Railroad or super detailed form

GW/LMS Variations of tbe 08

Yes but please not a Railroad Saint. Hornby knocked out a sub-Railroad-standard Saint years ago. I gave it a miss. A decent Saint would be very welcome, as would a decent Star.

[No Decorum]

 The fact that he couldn't work out where the deficiency on the LN lay and rectify it; especially once he had the evidence from the very effective V, does however support that assessment. His CME contemporaries faced with similar underperformance issues plugged way until they found satisfactory solutions.

Fair point. You might be thinking about Stanier’s Jubilees, Gresley’s A1s or Churchward’s The Great Bear. Ah, perhaps not The Great Bear.

 

What I had in mind particularly were the Churchward Moguls. Underboilered, a pony truck which didn’t do its job properly and concealed motion which a driver had to scrabble around to oil before every turn of duty. It was the late thirties before Collett thought about tackling them. In contrast, the Maunsell Ns and Us. Decent superheat, a good balance of boiler and cylinders and everything on the outside, where the driver could get at it easily. In contrast to the Great Western attitude, Maunsell told his team, “Make everything get-at-able!”

 

He also took the Arthurs and S15s – good designs with shortcomings – and turned them into winners.

[JCrompton]

Deeley Flatiron. But they'd probably make Big Bertha instead.

[HOTTODDY]

I know I've come to this thread rather late, but what about the LNER D40 class?

 

You could have it in the Scottish liveries, SECR, SR, LNER and (albeit only just) BR. How about that, eh?

How about the GNSR "subbies" Class R, (LNER G10) 0-4-4 tank or the battery version of the MU that ran on the same Deeside railway to Ballater, based on the Derby lightweight unit, which Bachmann still do. I like the Raven A2 idea, especially with an A1 boiler and 8-wheel tender, but I expect if it could be done then the original boiler and a NE standard 6-wheel tender would be preferred.

 

Happy modelling, keep the faith and carry on dreaming!!

 

Tod

[chaz125]

I'm astonished that over the years neither Hornby nor Bachmann have produced Fowler or Stanier 3MT tank locos. There were respectively 70 and 139 prototype locos of these. Also even more surprised no RTR GWR Bulldogs, 141 of these plus 15 GWR Birds. Come on RTR manufacturers!

Edited May 17, 2018 by chaz125

[tomparryharry]

Fair point. You might be thinking about Stanier’s Jubilees, Gresley’s A1s or Churchward’s The Great Bear. Ah, perhaps not The Great Bear.

 

What I had in mind particularly were the Churchward Moguls. Underboilered, a pony truck which didn’t do its job properly and concealed motion which a driver had to scrabble around to oil before every turn of duty. It was the late thirties before Collett thought about tackling them. In contrast, the Maunsell Ns and Us. Decent superheat, a good balance of boiler and cylinders and everything on the outside, where the driver could get at it easily. In contrast to the Great Western attitude, Maunsell told his team, “Make everything get-at-able!”

 

He also took the Arthurs and S15s – good designs with shortcomings – and turned them into winners.

Yes, always a problem with the Churchward moguls. They didn't make that many of them, only about 500 or so. That poor old No4 boiler was a limited production run to about 1,200 examples, covering the moguls, 42/52/72xx tanks, 26xx Aberdare, plus a lot other classes I've temporarily forgotten...

 

Happy modelling!

 

Ian.

[Marcyg]

For me it would be a decent 86, class 91 and a Wessex electric. Even reworked chassis for the 2 locos would be nice, in the same way Hornby have done for their RailRoad steam locos. Would be a chance to upgrade existing models without complete replacement

[NXEA!]

The one model I’m desperate for is an LNER E4 - they already have the tender and boiler for it, and I suspect the J15 chassis is adaptable. And there’s one in the National collection!

 

Something else which would go nicely with the GER models in the Hornby stable are some GE 50ft coaches.

 

I think we’ll see a retooled 8F, Princess Coronation and D49 before too long.

[DavidM]

I think we’ll see a Princess Coronationbefore too long.

 

Something tells me you're right....

[Dunsignalling]

Fair point. You might be thinking about Stanier’s Jubilees, Gresley’s A1s or Churchward’s The Great Bear. Ah, perhaps not The Great Bear.

 

What I had in mind particularly were the Churchward Moguls. Underboilered, a pony truck which didn’t do its job properly and concealed motion which a driver had to scrabble around to oil before every turn of duty. It was the late thirties before Collett thought about tackling them. In contrast, the Maunsell Ns and Us. Decent superheat, a good balance of boiler and cylinders and everything on the outside, where the driver could get at it easily. In contrast to the Great Western attitude, Maunsell told his team, “Make everything get-at-able!”

 

He also took the Arthurs and S15s – good designs with shortcomings – and turned them into winners.

IIRC, the principle of "get-at-able" was instituted by Robert Urie at Eastleigh several years before Maunsell did so at Ashford.......

 

John

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Caley Jumbo or J36 or 37 for Scotland, an MR 1P for the Midland .

 Ding ding ding (I know the 812 isn't a Jumbo, but is anyone going to quibble?)

 

...Hornby producing a Lord Nelson to round-out its Southern theme ...

 Ding.

 

.Something else which would go nicely with the GER models in the Hornby stable are some GE 50ft coaches.

 

 Now look here, the magnificent GNR origin Gresley pacifics have kept Hornby out of the financial mire several times, and still no GNR design stock to go with. All things in order, first pay off old debts: without which no GER models would ever have been seen from this source. ;-)