Jump to content
 

Hornby ‘Layouts Made Easy” packs


Hilux5972
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold

A good idea, and the track and building bundles look good - out what about the poor train packs??? Pack 1 seems to have a random autocoach put in, pack 2 is not too bad - I suppose its possible to have seen an A4 on a train of ex-LMS coachs - but what is the S15 doing in there? Pack 3 is the most random of all, however. LMS Suburban tank pack, a Blue class 71 (with no suitable stock) and a BR pull-push coach pack (with no pp-fitted loco!)

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

The track plans aren't bad, but seem a bit DCC orientated, and the building bundles are excellent, but what on earth is going on with the train packs?  The marketing blurb points out that the selection of stock available is bewildering to newbies but then offers them unsuitable and unlikely combinations stock that either physically could not or were at best highly unlikely to have ever run together.  

 

I suppose there is a market for ready made layouts of this sort, but I would imagine it to be limited for the larger packs.  Anyone who has enough experience to operate such a layout is going to be more than capable of making has own track plan and is probably looking to 'move on' from set track.  OTOH, Hornby have professional marketing types who know more about this sort of thing than i do, and the initiative will cost no more than the packaging if the models and track are in stock anyway; H have little to lose with it.

 

Some rich kids are going to get good xmas pressies this year...

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Johnster said:

Anyone who has enough experience to operate such a layout is going to be more than capable of making has own track plan and is probably looking to 'move on' from set track.  OTOH, Hornby have professional marketing types who know more about this sort of thing than i do, and the initiative will cost no more than the packaging if the models and track are in stock anyway; H have little to lose with it.

 

Some rich kids are going to get good xmas pressies this year...

 

Consider also that there will be those (as hinted in your latter sentence) that have more money to throw around than they may ever have experience - and ultimately that's any manufacturer's 'dream' customer and in many instances all you need in order to sell any product...

 

 

 

 

Edited by YesTor
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's worth remembering that there is no field of human activity in which the capacity to pay for a product, and the desire to buy it, accurately correlate to the ability to use it. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

As these are "Layouts Made Easy", does that not suggest that these are aimed at beginners to the hobby, (especially those with little or no knowledge?) Of course they aren't going to please the average RMWebber, but he is well advanced of the target audience! Simple process: If it's not for you, ignore it. 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Any venture which aims to attract interest in the hobby has to be commended.

 

However, I have to agree with JohnR and The Johnster on their comments regarding the locomotives and rolling stock chosen for the train packs.

Any newcomers to railway modelling with limited prototypical knowledge, may wish to create a reasonably accurate rendition of the real thing in miniature and expect to "start off on the right foot".

The somewhat mismatched items in the train packs hardly strive to achieve this. A feasible assembly of stock, all compatible with each other is what we might have expected, but catering for a broader audience would incur more than just three packs.

But wait! 

Could what seemingly appears, at first hand, to be a hodge podge of items thrown together willy-nilly, possibly be a clever marketing strategy to encourage buyers to expand in more than one direction or era from their initial purchase?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 09/10/2019 at 16:12, Fireline said:

As these are "Layouts Made Easy", does that not suggest that these are aimed at beginners to the hobby, (especially those with little or no knowledge?) Of course they aren't going to please the average RMWebber, but he is well advanced of the target audience! Simple process: If it's not for you, ignore it. 

I think what I don't like about the proposed track plans- as with the plans offered for sectional track generally- is that they seem to assume that beginners only want to run trains round and round a tailchaser till they get bored and I'm not convinced that's a very fruitful route into the hobby. There's no idea of operation even though that is perfectly possible even with sectional track and with layouts based on continuous loops. 

You can contrast this with the beginner's project layout that Editions LocoRevue came up with to kick off their Clés pour le Train Miniature magazine in 2012* 

1794402429_Cls1stprojectdoor204x83mymodbldgssc.jpg.2c1830f9350905932767cb48c532d5f0.jpg

 

It was designed to use a standard interior door blank from the local equivalent of B&Q as an instant baseboard so is very cramped with R1 & R2 curves.  Nevertheless you could just let a train run round and round  but also use the fiddle yard to run up to three trains in a reasonably prototypically way. A far less cramped equivalent could be built using a Britsh standard 6ft x 4ft baseboard.

 

Looking at the latest Hornby offer the total cost for the smallest track pack  a railway and  a civil building pack, and a train pack is going to set you back over £750. and that doesn't include a controller or baseboard.  The Clés layout was estimated to cost a total of 600€ in 2012 and the comparison is interesting because the track and trains were based on Hornby products- a Hornby Jouef train set (which included the controller) and a couple of Hornby track packs- The idea was that you'd complete the layout in a year  spreading the cost over that period The train set and extra track would front load that with an initial outlay of about 300€  but that also meant that you'd have trains running very quickly before going on to add buildings and scenery. A second loco and some more rolling stock would add to the total cost but this feels more like a layout you could enjoy with the kids or grandkids for quite some time. 

 

*This and other initiatives do show that Editions Loco-Revue, which is a family owned company, have given serious thought to the long term future of the hobby- which is the future of their business too. I'm not sure that I'm seeing much of that sort of thinking elsewhere in the trade. 

 

 

 

Edited by Pacific231G
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
3 hours ago, Right Away said:

The somewhat mismatched items in the train packs hardly strive to achieve this. A feasible assembly of stock, all compatible with each other is what we might have expected, but catering for a broader audience would incur more than just three packs.

But wait! 

Could what seemingly appears, at first hand, to be a hodge podge of items thrown together willy-nilly, possibly be a clever marketing strategy to encourage buyers to expand in more than one direction or era from their initial purchase?

 

I wonder about this.

 

Certainly when teams were preparing to take part in the first series of GMRC, the selections of locos, stock etc which teams were able to buy using their budgets seemed a bit like this - stuff that very few people might actually have encountered operating together.

 

Of course, it's always possible that somebody might be able to unearth a photo showing these prototypes actually operating together - perhaps during test running, locomotive exchanges, or something like this - perhaps immediately after nationalisation, or even during the run-down of steam, with some locos and stock being moved around to provide stopgap replacements for the more usual stuff.

 

There might even have been some examples of coaches from inter-company / inter-region workings being used with "local" motive power between runs - or even (previously "top link") express passenger locos being used to haul freight trains.

 

Initially, these mixes do appear slightly "left field" - but I don't pretend to be an expert.

 

 

Saying that, it's always possible that somebody might be trying to encourage a mindset of "anything goes" or "trains can be fun" - even if running a particular consist might call for a more vivid imagination than I possess. OK - this might not be to my personal taste - but it could easily appeal to some people who are just looking to enjoy operating model locos and stock, on a home layout that isn't too difficult to build.

 

If something like this might encourage some people to enter the hobby - and just have some fun - I'd prefer not to "shoot anyone down in flames".

 

Just my personal view - for what (little) it's worth ... .

 

 

Huw,

Edited by Huw Griffiths
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm inclined to think that the train packs are much more likely to reflect what Hornby have had cluttering up their warehouse for rather a long time than anything more sophisticated. Basically the same principle that saw the mystery Spangle (remember them?) in every packet being the deeply unappetising Old English flavour.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

@Pacific231G what does it matter if they begin with a tail chasing circuit? Hornby are trying to get people to begin modelling. They aren’t going to say “I think I might have my first look at model railways, making and end to end shelf layout that has 12 short sidings and an Inglenook shunting puzzle”! Once they get into the hobby, If they are interested enough they will begin to explore and research more and will discover that the hobby is more than just roundy roundy. If it gets people into modelling Quickly and easily that Can only be a good thing. 

  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah. I do think we tend to over analyse things on here sometimes. :laugh:

 

The models themselves are mainly ones that have been heavily discounted for a while. You might find a decent bargain though.

 

But did everyone start off when they were a youngster only modelling a certain railway in a certain year? I didn't. It was things I liked and I still do that in a way. Besides in the late 1970s and early 1980s there wasn't really much choice. When I was ten it didn't bother me that I was running GWR and LMS with red Westerns as that was what I was seeing in real life.

 

 

 

Jason

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Pacific231G said:

The idea was that you'd complete the layout in a year  spreading the cost over that period

 

Kinda defeats the object of an immediately up-and-running family playtime though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They tried that here with that Hatchette thing.

 

Far too big*. Far too expensive. And most of us only bought the first issue for the cheap copy of a Bachmann coach. :yes:

 

You could have done the same buying a train set and bits from your local model shop for a fraction of the price. Some issues you were paying £7 or so for a packet of scatter material.

 

 

*It would have worked out at something like 12 foot by 8 foot. Not really suitable for most UK homes. Especially since there wasn't an access hole.

 

 

 

Jason

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Ok, I'm gonna stick my head above the parapet, happy to be shot at but probably less happy to be drawn further into the discussion!

 

The 6x4 type layout, whatever size it actually is, a single board with a tailchaser track plan, is a 1930s Hornby Dublo concept; middle class homes were bigger in those days. and had more rooms.  It was a phenomenal marketing success, and still has an iconic status in the public imagination, the classic train set.  In 1930s terms, bearing in mind that 00 was a response to homes already becoming smaller and marketed to pipe-smoking fathers and their rosy cheeked sons on the train set box art.  An RTR/RTP range from a catalogue in the train set box, which contained everything you needed to get a train running on xmas morning.

 

The layout was packed away by lunch time as the table was needed for xmas dinner, and some decisions made as to where it would go, typically attic, box room, or garage, hinged to allow the car access.  Father would sort out a baseboard, and almost as soon as the shops opened after the holiday bought more track and some points.  The basic concept was valid until the early 60s, but by that time new housing was being built without coal fires and with smaller spaces, and the concept became fundamentally outdated and obsolete.  It had served HD, and later Rovex/Triang, well, though, and neither ever abandoned it.

 

It may be difficult for modern modellers to realise how great a gap there was between the 'train set' and 'proper modelling' in those days.  They may have heard of the 1950s pioneers, the Peter Dennys and Frank Dyers, who scratchbuilt pretty much everything and whose output was beyond the capability of most modellers, but it was inspirational.  Both promoted an approach that eschewed the '6x4' and built around the edges of rooms, and both were firmly rooted in a location and period, and reflected a single company's practice.  We were learning.

 

The reaction to smaller rooms in the 60s was smaller layouts, and the appearance of the fiddle yard to BLT on a shelf-like baseboard along a wall or two of a bedroom, still very much with us.  Tailchasers became much bigger, however, and tended to be club built exhibition layouts.  They were very good as rule, too, but in their way promoted to newcomers at shows that this was possible at home; it wasn't.  Nor was it advisable unless the home modeller had a staff of regulars to run it properly.  I respectfully suggest that the home tailchaser was by now not only an obsolete busted flush but must have put many potential modellers off when they realised the compromises necessary.  My teenage attempt to build a shelf type layout in an uninsulated attic which was my only option was very discouraging; I learned a lot about building kits and modifying/improving RTR but the layout tore itself to pieces with expansion and contraction.

 

00 was clearly too large for anything except a BLT in the homes of the day, but many modellers still wanted scale length main line trains running at scale speeds.  N, Z, and T have pushed the boundaries of what is possible, but have their own issues; 00 is still the most popular UK scale by a very large margin.  The 80s, influenced by the likes of Iain Rice, introduced the 'micro layout', again a solution suitable for home use that is still with us but where are the main line trains?

 

Hornby Dublo went out of business, the name being taken by Lines Bros who had absorbed Rovex to market it as Triang, which became Triang Hornby and eventually what we now know as Hornby.  This company had already done well out of the '6x4' concept and was rooted in 'low fi' budget model railways.  It continued to market tailchaser train sets, and still does.  It also began to produce 'track packs' and layout mats to aid the expansion development of these train sets, along with track plan booklets that promoted the acquisition of as many items in the catalogue as possible, and very pertinent to this thread's discussion.   'Serious' modellers largely ignored them, and used Peco track and kit built stock.

 

Cue the arrival of competition that attracted these so called 'serious' modellers' attention; Airfix and Mainline, for all their faults game changing at the time and the foundation of the modern RTR trade.  'Train set' modellers (I intend no insult) now had realistic locos and stock available to them and it was possible to construct a passable model railway out of the box.  I'll mention Lima in passing, more like the Triang Hornby lo fi approach but hardly game changers like the Airfix auto train and large prairie/B set which put the classic GW BLT in the reach of what were now being called RTR modellers to escape the train set label, or the Mainline J72 and 4MT.  The Airfix 31 and Mainline Peak showed the way for modern image modellers; we now had a generation that did not remember steam in daily BR use.

 

The new players did not engage in the track mat/track expansion pack game, leaving Hornby wedded to lo fi models and what I considered an obsolete format unsuitable for modern homes; I'm not denying it introduced many to the hobby, but must have dissuaded many more.  This business model had served them well for many years, and it would have been difficult for them to persuade their backers and shareholders that the writing was on the wall even if they could have seen it.

 

Time passed, Mainline morphed into Bachmann and improved, the gap between 'proper' and 'RTR' modelling closed, the whitemetal/brass kit business was more or less wiped out, and it hit the fan for Hornby.  They responded, belatedly, by upping their game to equate current RTR standards, but even now have the train set DNA firmly embedded.  This holds back development, and is given credence by the train pack announcement, clearly a not very well disguised effort to clear shelves of surplus stock cynically aimed at those who know no better and are happy with a J15 and Airfix derivate auto trailer.  I think it's a mistake and sends out the wrong signal.

 

They presumably know their business, and Simon Kohler is a canny enough operator, what the Irish call a 'cute hoor', but the business world is littered with the corpses of firms that presumably knew their business and if I'd invested in Hornby I'd be concerned about the attitude that this reveals.  I have praised much of their current output and the way it was announced, and hope that they will return to the profitability they deserve and the hobby needs, but this is IMHO a retrograde step that could and should have been better managed; the train packs should at least consist of feasible combinations of stock.  Blue 71s and Maunsells don't cut the mustard!

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
Just now, The Johnster said:

Ok, I'm gonna stick my head above the parapet, happy to be shot at but probably less happy to be drawn further into the discussion!

 

The 6x4 type layout, whatever size it actually is, a single board with a tailchaser track plan, is a 1930s Hornby Dublo concept; middle class homes were bigger in those days. and had more rooms.  It was a phenomenal marketing success, and still has an iconic status in the public imagination, the classic train set.  In 1930s terms, bearing in mind that 00 was a response to homes already becoming smaller and marketed to pipe-smoking fathers and their rosy cheeked sons on the train set box art.  An RTR/RTP range from a catalogue in the train set box, which contained everything you needed to get a train running on xmas morning.

 

The layout was packed away by lunch time as the table was needed for xmas dinner, and some decisions made as to where it would go, typically attic, box room, or garage, hinged to allow the car access.  Father would sort out a baseboard, and almost as soon as the shops opened after the holiday bought more track and some points.  The basic concept was valid until the early 60s, but by that time new housing was being built without coal fires and with smaller spaces, and the concept became fundamentally outdated and obsolete.  It had served HD, and later Rovex/Triang, well, though, and neither ever abandoned it.

 

It may be difficult for modern modellers to realise how great a gap there was between the 'train set' and 'proper modelling' in those days.  They may have heard of the 1950s pioneers, the Peter Dennys and Frank Dyers, who scratchbuilt pretty much everything and whose output was beyond the capability of most modellers, but it was inspirational.  Both promoted an approach that eschewed the '6x4' and built around the edges of rooms, and both were firmly rooted in a location and period, and reflected a single company's practice.  We were learning.

 

The reaction to smaller rooms in the 60s was smaller layouts, and the appearance of the fiddle yard to BLT on a shelf-like baseboard along a wall or two of a bedroom, still very much with us.  Tailchasers became much bigger, however, and tended to be club built exhibition layouts.  They were very good as rule, too, but in their way promoted to newcomers at shows that this was possible at home; it wasn't.  Nor was it advisable unless the home modeller had a staff of regulars to run it properly.  I respectfully suggest that the home tailchaser was by now not only an obsolete busted flush but must have put many potential modellers off when they realised the compromises necessary.  My teenage attempt to build a shelf type layout in an uninsulated attic which was my only option was very discouraging; I learned a lot about building kits and modifying/improving RTR but the layout tore itself to pieces with expansion and contraction.

 

00 was clearly too large for anything except a BLT in the homes of the day, but many modellers still wanted scale length main line trains running at scale speeds.  N, Z, and T have pushed the boundaries of what is possible, but have their own issues; 00 is still the most popular UK scale by a very large margin.  The 80s, influenced by the likes of Iain Rice, introduced the 'micro layout', again a solution suitable for home use that is still with us but where are the main line trains so many want?  

 

The 6x4 is a difficult lump to handle in the restricted space of a home, restricts your modelling, and is worse than useless. an expensive and offputting dead end unacceptable in a modern home!  Just my opinion of course, as are most things I say.

 

Hornby Dublo went out of business killed by rising costs, lamented by a body of opinion that considered underscale lengths and flangeless centre drivers acceptable and die casting superior per se, the name being taken by Lines Bros who had absorbed Rovex to market it as Triang, which became Triang Hornby and eventually what we now know as Hornby.  This company had already done well out of the '6x4' concept and was rooted in 'low fi' budget model railways.  It continued to market tailchaser train sets, and still does.  It also began to produce 'track packs' and layout mats to aid the expansion development of these train sets, along with track plan booklets that promoted the acquisition of as many items in the catalogue as possible, and very pertinent to this thread's discussion.   'Serious' modellers largely ignored them, and used Peco track and kit built locos and stock.

 

Cue the arrival of competition that attracted these so called 'serious' modellers' attention; Airfix and Mainline, for all their faults game changing at the time and the foundation of the modern RTR trade.  'Train set' modellers (I intend no insult) now had realistic locos and stock available to them and it was possible to construct a passable model railway out of the box.  I'll mention Lima in passing, more like the Triang Hornby budget lo fi approach but hardly game changers like the Airfix auto train and large prairie/B set which put the classic GW BLT in the reach of what were now being called RTR modellers to escape the train set label, or the Mainline J72 and 4MT.  The Airfix 31 and Mainline Peak showed the way for modern image modellers; we now had a generation that did not remember steam in daily BR use.

 

The new players did not engage in the track mat/track expansion pack game, leaving Hornby wedded to lo fi models and what I considered an obsolete format unsuitable for modern homes; I'm not denying it introduced many to the hobby, but must have dissuaded many more.  This business model had served them well for many years, and it would have been difficult for them to persuade their backers and shareholders that the writing was on the wall even if they could have seen it.

 

Time passed, Mainline morphed into Bachmann and improved, the gap between 'proper' and 'RTR' modelling closed, the whitemetal/brass kit business was more or less wiped out, and it hit the fan for Hornby.  They responded, belatedly, by upping their game to equate current RTR standards, but even now have the train set DNA firmly embedded.  This holds back development, and is given credence by the train pack announcement, clearly a not very well disguised effort to clear shelves of surplus stock cynically aimed at those who know no better and are happy with a J15 and Airfix derivate auto trailer.  I think it's a mistake and sends out the wrong signal.  

 

They presumably know their business, and Simon Kohler is a canny enough operator, what the Irish call a 'cute hoor', but the business world is littered with the corpses of firms that presumably knew their business and if I'd invested in Hornby I'd be concerned about the attitude that this reveals.  I have praised much of their current output and the way it was announced, and hope that they will return to the profitability they deserve and the hobby needs, but this is IMHO a retrograde step that could and should have been better managed; the train packs should at least consist of feasible combinations of stock.  Blue 71s and Maunsells don't cut the mustard!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Contrast this with Hattons who have found something that most of us can agree is a clever product development-the generic 4&6 wheel coaches.  

 

They are showing savvy to opportunities and customers whereas these mishmash Hornby deals look like the only thought that went into them was the price and stock level back in the warehouse

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Hilux5972 said:

@Pacific231G what does it matter if they begin with a tail chasing circuit? Hornby are trying to get people to begin modelling. They aren’t going to say “I think I might have my first look at model railways, making and end to end shelf layout that has 12 short sidings and an Inglenook shunting puzzle”! Once they get into the hobby, If they are interested enough they will begin to explore and research more and will discover that the hobby is more than just roundy roundy. If it gets people into modelling Quickly and easily that Can only be a good thing. 

Hi Hilux

With The Clés layout La Porte (the door) they did begin with a tail chasing circuit but including a station and a hidden yard  in the plan enabled the builder to do far more with it than that as soon as they got bored with tail chasing. That was what I liked about this plan though I definitely think it could be improved on with a larger baseboard. it wouldnt though have satisfied the desire for a double track Locodrome on which to indulge in train racing (but you wouldn't get that on a door in any case) 

3 hours ago, truffy said:

 

Kinda defeats the object of an immediately up-and-running family playtime though.

Hi Nigel

Although the whole build, including buildings and scenery, was supposed to take a year,  the track would be laid and trains running as quickly as with any other sectional track plan. 

2 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

They tried that here with that Hatchette thing.

Far too big*. Far too expensive. And most of us only bought the first issue for the cheap copy of a Bachmann coach. :yes:

You could have done the same buying a train set and bits from your local model shop for a fraction of the price. Some issues you were paying £7 or so for a packet of scatter material.

*It would have worked out at something like 12 foot by 8 foot. Not really suitable for most UK homes. Especially since there wasn't an access hole.

Jason

Hi Jason

Hachette tried it in France and Italy as well as here. They ran the French and Italian versions of My Model Railway Village in 2012 a bit earlier than here and at about the same time as Loco-Revue were running their first year of the Clés magazine;  that made for an interestingly direct comparison. I agreed completely with all the criticism of Hachette here most of which were the same as those that appeared in the French forums.  Buying a Hornby train set, presumably  from the local model shop, and adding  to it was exactly how the Clés project worked.

 

With the Hachette partwork you wouldn't have seen a train running until you'd spent a fortune on it whereas with Clés you could play with the train set as soon as you had it while starting to lay the track on the door.  The magazine also included advice to beginners on things like what to buy and what not to buy second hand and included centrefolds with card building kits printed on them.

The big difference, it seemed to me, was that Hachette simply wanted you to buy as many editions of the partwork as possible with no further interest in your railway modelling. Loco-Revue definitely do want to help people to get into the hobby because that's their future as a publishing business . I actually think that Sydney Pritchard was equally far sighted when he bought Ralway Modeller from Ian Allan in 1950. That too had an editorial policy that encouraged the building of layouts, including small achievable layouts, to a far greater extent than did Model Railway Constructor and Model Railway News.

Edited by Pacific231G
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/10/2019 at 12:08, Steamport Southport said:

The models themselves are mainly ones that have been heavily discounted for a while. You might find a decent bargain though.

I rather suspect this is the real motive - a way to offload non-selling stock, and hopefully create some new customers while they're at it. This explains why the train packs included are marketed as singular items, and why there has been no attempt to provide descriptions of the contents.

Link to post
Share on other sites

. To be fair, incongruous train packs from Triang are nothing new. Wasn't there a late 60s offering of Hymek (vac brake only) with Freightliner Wagons (air brake only)? Or the even stranger LT Freight set of the late 70s, with red Pannier and string of completely unrelated and largely fictional Wagons? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just seems like a rehash of what went before - the track extensions/building packs idea.  I am not sure of the level of inquisitiveness or interest that the (as its been mentioned already) GMRC has garnered in younger audiences but my gut feeling is figures would be low.   Take those figure then make a deduction from those that would possibly go on to love the hobby and what are you really left with?   I suspect low numbers but that's just me saying that.  Its almost like the 2012 Olympics tat all over again.  Times are very different now but they are supposed to know their business so good luck to them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...