Hornby - New tooling - LMS Princess class

[robmcg]

13 hours ago, JSpencer said:

 

It is not always true. For example when a loco has three possible tenders that it shares with other loco classes, then Hornby keeps them in the same factory and they share tenders.

 

The Nelson & S15 can share tenders, there are 3 types between them. It would have been worth tooling up the S15 Maunsell flat sided tender twice for use on the early Lord Nelson class.

(Maybe the N15 does as well as the Urie type are identical between the S15 and N15, except for the S15 model using a new running plate, draw bar and having fittings for sound gubbins. I've no idea if the next N15 release still uses the old electrical wiper drawbar and brass pin or if was upgraded to the new DCC sound ready standard of the S15).

 

Another case are the T9 (3 types of tender) and black motor (2 types) sharing tenders as well. The West Country class in original and rebuilt forms seem to share 4 tender types between them also.

 

 

In any event the Duchess 46256 'Sir William Stanier F.R.S.' tender looks pretty similar to a Princess tender, but may well not be in exact dimension.

 

Roller bearings on 46256 for example, so the probability is a new set of tools for the Princess. Factory production slots and locations are of course another reason to have sets of dedicated tools.

 

One thing which would be nice is bevelled 3' 9-spoke front bogie wheels, but then these are already available after-market if you care that much.

 

All in all I await with great pleasure a model up to or exceeding recent standards.

[Brocp]

9 hours ago, robmcg said:

 

In any event the Duchess 46256 'Sir William Stanier F.R.S.' tender looks pretty similar to a Princess tender, but may well not be in exact dimension.

 

Roller bearings on 46256 for example, so the probability is a new set of tools for the Princess. Factory production slots and locations are of course another reason to have sets of dedicated tools.

 

One thing which would be nice is bevelled 3' 9-spoke front bogie wheels, but then these are already available after-market if you care that much.

 

All in all I await with great pleasure a model up to or exceeding recent standards.

The tender is different in that the rivets aren't in the same pattern/lines, no coal pusher, different tender vents and as you rightly say Rob, 6256's tender had roller bearings.

[robmcg]

Lovely new picture on the Hornby Facebook page,   I have added vignette... and sharpened it a tad.

 

 

I think what we have here may be a best ever Hornby model!

[MGR Hooper!]

Hornby have shared images of their first EP sample of their LMS Princess Class locomotive across all their social media channels. Hornby have stated that the model is not completely built so keep that in mind.

 

The LMS Princess is going to be the main feature of the forthcoming TES blog for the month of August 2019. So keep an eye out for it....

 

[Hroth]

Much better than they showed in the last "Engine Shed", I think that this was the image they were going to show then, but someone selected the wrong one....

 

Looks good!

 

[MikeParkin65]

From BRM’s Facebook page :

[johnd]

24 minutes ago, MikeParkin65 said:

From BRM’s Facebook page :

Now that's an interest view of the R&H in the bottom corner! 

[Rob F]

A real shame I just can’t live with fixed trailing truck. The model looks great but that fixed truck with flangeless wheels looks daft going round tight layout corners. Just a foible of mine I suppose......

[Hilux5972]

Don’t have tight layout corners then

[robmcg]

Nice to see this progress; differences in boiler tops, fireboxes, motion brackets and so on...  great to see

 

 

Thanks Mike for the picture.

 

I see the lower left EP example has the distinctive framing in front of the cylinders...

 

 

Edited August 16, 2019 by robmcg
added picture

[1BCamden]

Hornby, don't forget the tender types,

As outlined below, and while obviously a much shorter timeframe, the Stanier styled nine ton, curved sided tender were attached to all members of the class, including 6202.

Noting: (a) none of the class entered traffic with Stanier styled ten ton, curved sided tenders, and (b) the tender frames were essentially the same.

This said, Hornby have a couple of options,

1. do nothing.
2. offer retrofit kits, which contain the actual tender body types, minus the frame. 
3. build out the class over time, liveries, modifications,  tender types, and possibly 6202.

 

General tender summary;

1932 - mid 1935: Derby styled nine ton, straight sided tender:

(9000/1)

1935 - late 1936: Stanier styled nine ton, curved sided tender: (9065/66,9124/25/26/27/28/29/30/31/32/33)

mid 1936 onwards: Stanier styled ten ton, curved sided tender:

(9344/45/53/54/59/60/61/72/73/74/75/76)

1936: Stanier styled ten ton (coal pusher) curved sided tender:

(9359) 

1947: Coronation styled ten ton (coal pusher) curved sided tender:

(9816) 

 

Recommendation;

Continue as per schedule and current budget, but review/revise budget to (a) offer retrofit kits, which contain the actual tender body types, minus the frame, within twelve (12) months of initial release date, while (b)  continuing to build out the class over time, incorporating liveries, modifications,  tender types, and possibly 6202 in later releases.

 

Hornby, don't forget the consumer,

Hornby is the emotional "go to" model railway company in our lives. The Hornby Princess Class was first realised in 1955, and except for a period in the seventies, has been cataloged through to 2011 (about sixty years), in many different variants.

As a boy, if their was a drop of LMS blood in your veins, or your family, you either dreamed, wanted or had at least one example. Unfortunately, in retrospect every example lacked detail, quality and affordability when compared to the RTR industry standard then and now.

But given all that, we still want them to succeed, and Simon and the gang are back, and now with this watershed make or brake consumer informed challenge, the long awaited Hornby Princess Class retooling.

Today all the reference documentation, technology, real life cloud point examples, global manufacturing capability, are available to succeed.

 

So, whats the problem, please don't say (a) budget, or (b) consumer sales forecasting.

This is one of the great iconic faces of Hornby Model Railways, Simon needs to do what ever he need to do to get it right, we can wait, we will never forgive him if he gets it (millimetre, colour, detail) wrong.

Budget, increase it now, 50% address what is currently not right with the new model, and 50% to advertising, its that important.

 

What is currently wrong with the new model, probably;

1. train capacity, the package doesn't weigh enough, and the motor isn't powerful enough to  corfortably handed a load at least ten (10) LMS P3 carriages around a standard third radius layout 
2. the tender has a fixed coal load modelled into it, should be modelled void of coal.
3. the package is not prototypical between the engine and tender, and the solid beam is supplied not graduated or scaled.
4. no power pick ups on the tender
5. the NEM pockets are to low and too prominent
6. the package super detailing pack, does not include figures and footplate tools.
7. the package super detailing pack, does not include all numbering and nameplates to cover the specific variant type.
8. the package colour (livery) does not match the more recent LMS and BR livery P3 carriages.
9. the bogie attachment system is outdated, and demands to much main frame clearance, adopt integrated or sprung attachment method.
10. the decoder and sound speaker are mounted in the tender, both should be mounted in the smoke box.

 

Advertising,

1. get the Hornby marketing team to address the dismal coverage on facebook, instagram, and on the Hornby web site and YouTube channel, or get somebody in who can.
2. retail budgets are driven by forecasting consumer interest, forecast are driven by advertising take up, and pre order activity reflecting consumer interest.
3. Hornby, rethink current hard copy publication strategy, to web based real time investment 25-75 ratio.
4. Story, were is the story.
5. No television, even free to air investment, rethink the YouTube coverage for global exposure, facebook and instagram for local, and partly international coverage.
6. Sort out the Hornby YouTube channel, again really wanting, only 18K subscribers (176videos). Everard Junction 54K subscribers, (205 videos) one enthusiast, with a family, a day career and a mortgage, what are you thinking.

 

Modelling railway is a complex genre, demanding a lifetime investment, in both time, and money, constantly suffering from internal and external criticism. As is Bonsai to the Japanese, nothing short of perfection will do.

 

I want Hornby to succeed with the Princess Class more than I care to admit, so we can get on to the overdue Postal Express vans (haha)

 

Edited August 17, 2019 by 1BCamden

[atom3624]

I would love a model of Turbomotive 6202 - just looks meaner with the double chimney and bigger steam chests (??)

 

Al.

[Rob F]

15 hours ago, Hilux5972 said:

Don’t have tight layout corners then

Thank you, very useful. When I move into my stately home I am sure I will follow your advice.

[Steamport Southport]

11 hours ago, 1BCamden said:

Hornby, don't forget the tender types,

As outlined below, and while obviously a much shorter timeframe, the Stanier styled nine ton, curved sided tender were attached to all members of the class, including 6202.

Noting: (a) none of the class entered traffic with Stanier styled ten ton, curved sided tenders, and (b) the tender frames were essentially the same.

This said, Hornby have a couple of options,

1. do nothing.
2. offer retrofit kits, which contain the actual tender body types, minus the frame. 
3. build out the class over time, liveries, modifications,  tender types, and possibly 6202.

 

General tender summary;

1932 - mid 1935: Derby styled nine ton, straight sided tender:

(9000/1)

1935 - late 1936: Stanier styled nine ton, curved sided tender: (9065/66,9124/25/26/27/28/29/30/31/32/33)

mid 1936 onwards: Stanier styled ten ton, curved sided tender:

(9344/45/53/54/59/60/61/72/73/74/75/76)

1936: Stanier styled ten ton (coal pusher) curved sided tender:

(9359) 

1947: Coronation styled ten ton (coal pusher) curved sided tender:

(9816) 

 

Recommendation;

Continue as per schedule and current budget, but review/revise budget to (a) offer retrofit kits, which contain the actual tender body types, minus the frame, within twelve (12) months of initial release date, while (b)  continuing to build out the class over time, incorporating liveries, modifications,  tender types, and possibly 6202 in later releases.

 

Hornby, don't forget the consumer,

Hornby is the emotional "go to" model railway company in our lives. The Hornby Princess Class was first realised in 1955, and except for a period in the seventies, has been cataloged through to 2011 (about sixty years), in many different variants.

As a boy, if their was a drop of LMS blood in your veins, or your family, you either dreamed, wanted or had at least one example. Unfortunately, in retrospect every example lacked detail, quality and affordability when compared to the RTR industry standard then and now.

But given all that, we still want them to succeed, and Simon and the gang are back, and now with this watershed make or brake consumer informed challenge, the long awaited Hornby Princess Class retooling.

Today all the reference documentation, technology, real life cloud point examples, global manufacturing capability, are available to succeed.

 

So, whats the problem, please don't say (a) budget, or (b) consumer sales forecasting.

This is one of the great iconic faces of Hornby Model Railways, Simon needs to do what ever he need to do to get it right, we can wait, we will never forgive him if he gets it (millimetre, colour, detail) wrong.

Budget, increase it now, 50% address what is currently not right with the new model, and 50% to advertising, its that important.

 

What is currently wrong with the new model, probably;

1. train capacity, the package doesn't weigh enough, and the motor isn't powerful enough to  corfortably handed a load at least ten (10) LMS P3 carriages around a standard third radius layout 
2. the tender has a fixed coal load modelled into it, should be modelled void of coal.
3. the package is not prototypical between the engine and tender, and the solid beam is supplied not graduated or scaled.
4. no power pick ups on the tender
5. the NEM pockets are to low and too prominent
6. the package super detailing pack, does not include figures and footplate tools.
7. the package super detailing pack, does not include all numbering and nameplates to cover the specific variant type.
8. the package colour (livery) does not match the more recent LMS and BR livery P3 carriages.
9. the bogie attachment system is outdated, and demands to much main frame clearance, adopt integrated or sprung attachment method.
10. the decoder and sound speaker are mounted in the tender, both should be mounted in the smoke box.

 

Advertising,

1. get the Hornby marketing team to address the dismal coverage on facebook, instagram, and on the Hornby web site and YouTube channel, or get somebody in who can.
2. retail budgets are driven by forecasting consumer interest, forecast are driven by advertising take up, and pre order activity reflecting consumer interest.
3. Hornby, rethink current hard copy publication strategy, to web based real time investment 25-75 ratio.
4. Story, were is the story.
5. No television, even free to air investment, rethink the YouTube coverage for global exposure, facebook and instagram for local, and partly international coverage.
6. Sort out the Hornby YouTube channel, again really wanting, only 18K subscribers (176videos). Everard Junction 54K subscribers, (205 videos) one enthusiast, with a family, a day career and a mortgage, what are you thinking.

 

Modelling railway is a complex genre, demanding a lifetime investment, in both time, and money, constantly suffering from internal and external criticism. As is Bonsai to the Japanese, nothing short of perfection will do.

 

I want Hornby to succeed with the Princess Class more than I care to admit, so we can get on to the overdue Postal Express vans (haha)

 

 

A few misnomers and assumptions there. Most of them very outdated. I'll highlight a few.

 

The current model (assuming you mean the Duchess as they haven't even made this model yet and the previous version is over 20 years old) doesn't have a fixed coal load and I doubt any model made over the last ten years has. They are removable. The Duchess even has the coal pusher modelled beneath the coal.

 

Weight. It's a decent weight and my SWS can easily pull a train of over 10 metal Comet coaches. (All my LMS mainline coaches are Comet or BSL). Could probably pull much more. It would run away with plastic ones.

 

NEM sockets. They go in the bin as I don't use tension lock, The drawbar is easily altered (some are actually adjustable so they are at a prototypical distance.

 

Bogie wheels are easily changed for Gibsons which just drop in.

 

Fixed trailing truck? No big deal just replace the wheel with a flanged one. They don't really sway around like a scalded cat in reality and only move a few inches. It's a far better solution than having vast amount of daylight where it shouldn't be.

 

If it's then not good enough then Brassmasters make a kit which is probably the ultimate. They even sell a 1936 tender. But all together that's going to be over £400 before you even build it when you include wheels and a decent motor.

 

http://www.brassmasters.co.uk/princess.htm

 

 

 

Jason

[Hroth]

21 hours ago, 1BCamden said:

The Hornby Princess Class was first realised in 1955

 

I'd venture to push that back a few more years.

 

The original body originated with the set that Rovex produced in 1950/52 for Marks and Spencer.

http://www.tri-ang.co.uk/origset.html

 

It became a "proper" Triang locomotive from 1952 onwards with an improved mechanism but an identical bodyshell.

http://www.tri-ang.co.uk/RO Set.html

 

The main visible difference between the R.O example above and the Rovex/early Triang Princesses is that the earlier ones had plunger/roller pickups behind the driving wheels!

 

 

Somewhere, I've a photo I took of my trio of Princesses alongside each other; the Black Princess Elizabeth from my R.O set*, a late 50s green Princess Elizabeth with the "improved" valvegear, and R2225. If I can find it, I'll add it here, I hope the new tooling will result in a  step change thats at least as dramatic as that between the green Lizzy and R2225!

 

* As of the beginning of this year, my 6" coaches haven't developed significant banana tendancies as the ones in the R.O set in the link above!  I'll have to check...

 

 

Edited August 17, 2019 by Hroth

[robmcg]

23 hours ago, 1BCamden said:

Hornby, don't forget the tender types,

 

....

 

 

Quote

I want Hornby to succeed with the Princess Class more than I care to admit, so we can get on to the overdue Postal Express vans (haha)

 

 

 

Thanks for the advice and photos.

 

I have a feeling that Paul Isles and others are doing all they can to accommodate the two or three tender types already planned.

 

So far the EP photos show variations in all sorts of places so they are being very thorough.  I don't expect to see human figures in the accessory pack though. These are so easy to buy,  but not to my taste.  but then I don't really want sound either....   

 

Speaking for myself, I am very grateful that Hornby are still trading at all, given how close they came to liquidation.  To rebuild their business after the demise of Sanda Kan is amazing, and their quality is generally very very good.  I see any model as complex and  demanding as the Princess class as a great achievement, if made to the standard of other current models.

 

In fact I can't wait to see these iconic models. 

 

here is an enhanced edited pic of their earlier version, will remove if asked

 

Edited August 17, 2019 by robmcg

[robmcg]

6 hours ago, Hroth said:

 

I'd venture to push that back a few more years.

 

The original body originated with the set that Rovex produced in 1950/52 for Marks and Spencer.

http://www.tri-ang.co.uk/origset.html

 

It became a "proper" Triang locomotive from 1952 onwards with an improved mechanism but an identical bodyshell.

http://www.tri-ang.co.uk/RO Set.html

 

The main visible difference between the R.O example above and the Rovex/early Triang Princesses is that the earlier ones had plunger/roller pickups behind the driving wheels!

 

 

Somewhere, I've a photo I took of my trio of Princesses alongside each other; the Black Princess Elizabeth from my R.O set*, a late 50s green Princess Elizabeth with the "improved" valvegear, and R2225. If I can find it, I'll add it here, I hope the new tooling will result in a  step change thats at least as dramatic as that between the green Lizzy and R2225!

 

* As of the beginning of this year, my 6" coaches haven't developed significant banana tendancies as the ones in the R.O set in the link above!  I'll have to check...

 

 

You do realise don't you Hroth that the advent of plastic model trains was the beginning of the END, don't you, the slide own the slippery slope into the dark chasm of destitution and perdition...

 

I'll have my Duchess of Atholl thankyou very much....  and green and red Meccano.     pah!

 

When Hornby Dublo went 2-rail I was 9yrs old, and didn't recognise the awfulness...  

[robmcg]

On 17/08/2019 at 10:35, 1BCamden said:

....

 

On 17/08/2019 at 10:35, 1BCamden said:

What is currently wrong with the new model, probably;

1. train capacity, the package doesn't weigh enough, and the motor isn't powerful enough to  corfortably handed a load at least ten (10) LMS P3 carriages around a standard third radius layout 
2. the tender has a fixed coal load modelled into it, should be modelled void of coal.
3. the package is not prototypical between the engine and tender, and the solid beam is supplied not graduated or scaled.
4. no power pick ups on the tender
5. the NEM pockets are to low and too prominent
6. the package super detailing pack, does not include figures and footplate tools.
7. the package super detailing pack, does not include all numbering and nameplates to cover the specific variant type.
8. the package colour (livery) does not match the more recent LMS and BR livery P3 carriages.
9. the bogie attachment system is outdated, and demands to much main frame clearance, adopt integrated or sprung attachment method.
10. the decoder and sound speaker are mounted in the tender, both should be mounted in the smoke box.

 

Advertising,

1. get the Hornby marketing team to address the dismal coverage on facebook, instagram, and on the Hornby web site and YouTube channel, or get somebody in who can.
2. retail budgets are driven by forecasting consumer interest, forecast are driven by advertising take up, and pre order activity reflecting consumer interest.
3. Hornby, rethink current hard copy publication strategy, to web based real time investment 25-75 ratio.
4. Story, were is the story.
5. No television, even free to air investment, rethink the YouTube coverage for global exposure, facebook and instagram for local, and partly international coverage.
6. Sort out the Hornby YouTube channel, again really wanting, only 18K subscribers (176videos). Everard Junction 54K subscribers, (205 videos) one enthusiast, with a family, a day career and a mortgage, what are you thinking.

 

Modelling railway is a complex genre, demanding a lifetime investment, in both time, and money, constantly suffering from internal and external criticism. As is Bonsai to the Japanese, nothing short of perfection will do.

 

I want Hornby to succeed with the Princess Class more than I care to admit, so we can get on to the overdue Postal Express vans (haha)

 

.....

 

 

 

I am a bit bemused.

 

You want to criticise a model for its defects, 'probably'... BEFORE it has been produced?  

 

But "the package doesn't weigh enough, and the motor isn't powerful enough to  comfortably handed a load at least ten (10) LMS P3 carriages around a standard third radius layout" 

 

Who runs 10 coach trains on 3rd radius ... ?  It tends to look a bit silly but can be done, certainly.  Imagination is part of 00 RTR modelling,  Six coaches looks pretty good. It certainly isn't scale radius.  Nor gauge, nor wheel profile.  Nor sound,   in fact many current Hornby express engine WILL haul ten carriages on type three radius ovals, I've done it to make videos of trains passing.

 

As to the marketing suggestions, why not simply write to SK or Paul Isles or the Hornby board?  They are working extremely hard to save a much loved company which has very nearly gone under and is by no means out of the woods yet.

 

Cheers

 

another nice edited 'old tooling' Princess to be going on with, will remove if asked

 

apologies if you've seen this before, but they are great engines! 

 

 

 

[Dunsignalling]

On ‎16‎/‎08‎/‎2019 at 18:35, Rob F said:

A real shame I just can’t live with fixed trailing truck. The model looks great but that fixed truck with flangeless wheels looks daft going round tight layout corners. Just a foible of mine I suppose......

Any pacific, looks daft going round tight corners whether the truck is fixed or not - having a stunted ashpan on a pivoted truck flopping about in half an acre of daylight and sticking out over a quarter-inch from under the cab on bends looks far worse IMHO.

 

The only answer to the lack of space that imposes silly corners is to hide them in tunnels where you can't see it happening and have gentler ones where you can.

 

As for haulage issues, Hornby rebuilt West Countries (once properly run-in) don't display even slight discomfort with less than twelve on. The new Princess Royal shouldn't be any different if Hornby stick with the design principles established on that model. Practical experience also indicates that they negotiate 36" radius curves comfortably with flanged wheelsets in place and I have a second-hand one that's been got at (not by me) to give some side-play and will go round 24" ones. At some point, I'll have to take it and a standard one apart to work out how its done.

 

John 

Edited August 18, 2019 by Dunsignalling

[1BCamden]

16 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

A few misnomers and assumptions there. Most of them very outdated. I'll highlight a few.

 

The current model (assuming you mean the Duchess as they haven't even made this model yet and the previous version is over 20 years old) doesn't have a fixed coal load and I doubt any model made over the last ten years has. They are removable. The Duchess even has the coal pusher modelled beneath the coal.

 

Weight. It's a decent weight and my SWS can easily pull a train of over 10 metal Comet coaches. (All my LMS mainline coaches are Comet or BSL). Could probably pull much more. It would run away with plastic ones.

 

NEM sockets. They go in the bin as I don't use tension lock, The drawbar is easily altered (some are actually adjustable so they are at a prototypical distance.

 

Bogie wheels are easily changed for Gibsons which just drop in.

 

Fixed trailing truck? No big deal just replace the wheel with a flanged one. They don't really sway around like a scalded cat in reality and only move a few inches. It's a far better solution than having vast amount of daylight where it shouldn't be.

 

If it's then not good enough then Brassmasters make a kit which is probably the ultimate. They even sell a 1936 tender. But all together that's going to be over £400 before you even build it when you include wheels and a decent motor.

 

http://www.brassmasters.co.uk/princess.htm

 

 

 

Jason

Hi Jason, thanks for taking the time to consider the points raised,

 

The current model (assuming you mean the Duchess as they haven't even made this model yet and the previous version is over 20 years old) - no I mean the Princess Class, I’m not discussing the Princess Coronation Class, so we can park that one for another time.

 

This includes the fixed coal load, and your Comet/BSL stock weight (lucky you) 

 

NEM sockets, we are talking about the model as being produced, not individual preferences.

 

The drawbar, is not calibrated, and is outdated compared to industry standard, 

 

Bogie wheels again, we are talking about the model as being produced, not individual preferences.

 

Fixed trailing truck? No big deal just replace the wheel with a flanged one, I didn’t dispute this point, as it looks prototypical, but again, we are talking about the model as being produced, not individual preferences.

 

If it's then not good enough then Brassmasters make a kit which is probably the ultimate. They even sell a 1936 tender. But all together that's going to be over £400 before you even build it when you include wheels and a decent motor, and again, we are talking about the model as being produced, not individual preferences.

 

Summary, how good is the model “out of the box” how good is it, for the enthusiast, you and I, the consumer, and importantly for Hornby. Will it deliver on life cycle investment.

 

 

Edited August 18, 2019 by 1BCamden

[1BCamden]

11 hours ago, Hroth said:

 

I'd venture to push that back a few more years.

 

The original body originated with the set that Rovex produced in 1950/52 for Marks and Spencer.

http://www.tri-ang.co.uk/origset.html

 

It became a "proper" Triang locomotive from 1952 onwards with an improved mechanism but an identical bodyshell.

http://www.tri-ang.co.uk/RO Set.html

 

The main visible difference between the R.O example above and the Rovex/early Triang Princesses is that the earlier ones had plunger/roller pickups behind the driving wheels!

 

 

Somewhere, I've a photo I took of my trio of Princesses alongside each other; the Black Princess Elizabeth from my R.O set*, a late 50s green Princess Elizabeth with the "improved" valvegear, and R2225. If I can find it, I'll add it here, I hope the new tooling will result in a  step change thats at least as dramatic as that between the green Lizzy and R2225!

 

* As of the beginning of this year, my 6" coaches haven't developed significant banana tendancies as the ones in the R.O set in the link above!  I'll have to check...

 

 

Hi Hroth,

Yes, quite correct, but I thought sixty year was enough to make my point.

Don’t you just love those spring loaded pick ups, now there is something lost, which could be of benefit.

Step change, absolutely, hence all the banging on about this that and the other.

I know this is going to sound crazy, but I never leave the carriages sitting on their bogies for long periods, seems to have worked, I guess time will tell.

[1BCamden]

5 hours ago, robmcg said:

 

....

 

 

 

 

Thanks for the advice and photos.

 

I have a feeling that Paul Isles and others are doing all they can to accommodate the two or three tender types already planned.

 

So far the EP photos show variations in all sorts of places so they are being very thorough.  I don't expect to see human figures in the accessory pack though. These are so easy to buy,  but not to my taste.  but then I don't really want sound either....   

 

Speaking for myself, I am very grateful that Hornby are still trading at all, given how close they came to liquidation.  To rebuild their business after the demise of Sanda Kan is amazing, and their quality is generally very very good.  I see any model as complex and  demanding as the Princess class as a great achievement, if made to the standard of other current models.

 

In fact I can't wait to see these iconic models. 

 

here is an enhanced edited pic of their earlier version, will remove if asked

 

Hi Robmcg,

Yes, the tenders, it’s problematic, but important, and I suspect not originally a budget driver.

Couldn’t help the footplate crew thing, but for pre war and immediate post war versions they are perfect, as good as modelu3d is, the figures contained in the super detailing pack when viewed closely are great, body weight, cap, and importantly no bib and brace.

Sound, well it needs to be considered in the build, and weight distribution over the main driving wheels will be critical.

I guess like you, I know they are on it, but not to succeed based on their recent history will not be good, product review can be unkind to the bottom line. Agreed, it not impossible, with the on hand tech, and with other companies to reflect on, things such as prototypical drawbar systems as achievable, even if they have to go under licence.

nice jpeg.

[1BCamden]

4 hours ago, robmcg said:

 

 

I am a bit bemused.

 

You want to criticise a model for its defects, 'probably'... BEFORE it has been produced?  

 

But "the package doesn't weigh enough, and the motor isn't powerful enough to  comfortably handed a load at least ten (10) LMS P3 carriages around a standard third radius layout" 

 

Who runs 10 coach trains on 3rd radius ... ?  It tends to look a bit silly but can be done, certainly.  Imagination is part of 00 RTR modelling,  Six coaches looks pretty good. It certainly isn't scale radius.  Nor gauge, nor wheel profile.  Nor sound,   in fact many current Hornby express engine WILL haul ten carriages on type three radius ovals, I've done it to make videos of trains passing.

 

As to the marketing suggestions, why not simply write to SK or Paul Isles or the Hornby board?  They are working extremely hard to save a much loved company which has very nearly gone under and is by no means out of the woods yet.

 

Cheers

 

another nice edited 'old tooling' Princess to be going on with, will remove if asked

 

apologies if you've seen this before, but they are great engines! 

 

Hi Robmcg,

Criticise, no, but fact is these are the probable issues based on the Hornby journey to date, when hoping that the Princess Class out of the box will live up to current consumer and enthusiast expectations.

 

Both you and Jason commented within the thread - Hornby Princess Coronation Class (Duchess) 

Being over 90 pages, and with no sign of slowing, which well describes the positives and negatives of this similar pacific type. I don’t need labour the point regarding weight tending to not being centred correctly, build quality, and the ever popular pony truck discussion to name a couple of points.

 

So when the Hornby Coronation type is compared to the soon to be Princess type, we have to acknowledge the smaller boiler casing (narrower) and the smaller driving wheels on the Princess will not help weight installation and traction, unless Hornby move away from prototypical specification.

 

Weight=traction, motor=capacity,  3rd radius, of course not, but that’s one size up from Hornby pacific types are cataloged. So we get Hornby to revise their spec and catalog as 4th radius, it’s still a challenge. Much has been written within these forums, all acknowledge some form of modification is required. While ROCO FLEISCHMANN, TILLIG and near every american company (including their Bachmann) do not, and up to 2% grades to boot out of the box.

 

Again, I know they are at it, and I know they will read this, and justify why “what is, is” and throw in the “budget” word to close it out.

Hornby is in our blood, and we must succeed in a global market, not just a the local hobby shoppe, where modifying is common place and expected.

 

Fingers crossed, this model will cement Hornby as a global supplier of quality model railways.

 

 

4 hours ago, robmcg said:

 

 

[1BCamden]

6 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

As for haulage issues, Hornby rebuilt West Countries (once properly run-in) don't display even slight discomfort with less than twelve on. The new Princess Royal shouldn't be any different if Hornby stick with the design principles established on that model. Practical experience also indicates that they negotiate 36" radius curves comfortably with flanged wheelsets in place and I have a second-hand one that's been got at (not by me) to give some side-play and will go round 24" ones. At some point, I'll have to take it and a standard one apart to work out how its done.

 

John 

Hi John,

The rebuilt west country, is quite different externally and under the skin, than the Coronation and probable Princess type.

The driving wheels are larger again then those of the Coronation type, plus the nearly solid Bulleid style wheels would be weight plus over the traditional wheels. Under the skin the additional weight block under the decoder, together with the motor positioned well back would all certainly add to improved traction.

Interesting to weigh off both, my guess the west country balance and overall weight would top the Coronation type.

[Dunsignalling]

1 hour ago, 1BCamden said:

Hi John,

The rebuilt west country, is quite different externally and under the skin, than the Coronation and probable Princess type.

The driving wheels are larger again then those of the Coronation type, plus the nearly solid Bulleid style wheels would be weight plus over the traditional wheels. Under the skin the additional weight block under the decoder, together with the motor positioned well back would all certainly add to improved traction.

Interesting to weigh off both, my guess the west country balance and overall weight would top the Coronation type.

The rebuilt WCs are impressive haulers, only bested (in steam outline) by well-run-in Bachmann 9Fs in my experience, I haven't yet used one of the new Duchesses (or the new air-smoothed MN or Lord Nelson which may well be contenders) so don't know their abilities. In common with most larger Hornby locos, the WC's motor sits above the rear drivers with its rear end in the firebox area - I presume the Staniers are similar.

 

However, normal Hornby practice (including current versions of all the various Bulleids) these days places decoder and speaker provision in the tender, maximising available space for weight in the loco. LMS Pacifics are significantly longer than a WC, so should have room for more. The effect of the larger wheels can be counteracted by lowering the gearing.

 

All-in-all, I'd expect at least near-parity to be achievable.

 

John  

Edited August 18, 2019 by Dunsignalling