Hornby Announce a Re-tooled Class 91 for 2020

[MGR Hooper!]

Quick question regarding 91111 "For the Fallen", I've seen pictures of it online with a black cab roof. Gloss black incase anyone is wondering if I was confused with it being dirty. Did one of the operators repaint the cab roof white? I seem to recall it coming out with a black cab roof initially.

[Jack Mc]

VTEC began painting the cab roof on 91s white for something to do with the heat in the cab if I remember correctly, so 111 will have just been part of this process. Quite a few of the 91s have it, it just gets covered by the dirt on the roof. Edit: Having had a quick look through photos, it seems the only 91 (that is in VTEC/Special Livery) to not have a white cab roof is 110

 

Jack

Edited March 20, 2020 by Jack Mc
Extra information

[ruggedpeak]

You can design your own livery now

 

https://www.Hornby.com/uk-en/Hornby-kids-zone?utm_campaign=2628474_Hornby - Kids Zone - Week 51 2019%2F2020&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Hornby PLC&_%24ja=tsid%3A71284&dm_i=2DJZ,1KC56,231H6T,5ALD9,1

 

[MGR Hooper!]

11 hours ago, ruggedpeak said:

You can design your own livery now

 

https://www.Hornby.com/uk-en/Hornby-kids-zone?utm_campaign=2628474_Hornby - Kids Zone - Week 51 2019%2F2020&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Hornby PLC&_%24ja=tsid%3A71284&dm_i=2DJZ,1KC56,231H6T,5ALD9,1

 

 

Sounds fun...how many of us "grown up children" will have a go?

[atom3624]

'Grown Up' is a relative thing ... and I don't relate to it!!

 

Al.

[TomScrut]

20 hours ago, ruggedpeak said:

You can design your own livery now

 

https://www.Hornby.com/uk-en/Hornby-kids-zone?utm_campaign=2628474_Hornby - Kids Zone - Week 51 2019%2F2020&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Hornby PLC&_%24ja=tsid%3A71284&dm_i=2DJZ,1KC56,231H6T,5ALD9,1

 

 

Indoctrination package on the way to the printer.....

[LMS_LNER_SR_GWR_fan2004]

On 21/03/2020 at 03:47, MGR Hooper! said:

 

Sounds fun...how many of us "grown up children" will have a go?

Already had a go: 

[TomScrut]

1 hour ago, LMS_LNER_SR_GWR_fan2004 said:

Already had a go: 

 

In fairness that looks really cool!

 

I do wonder why GC are using 90s with the mk4s, surely some 91s would have done for that. A 91 in that GC livery would look good I think

[LMS_LNER_SR_GWR_fan2004]

12 minutes ago, TomScrut said:

 

In fairness that looks really cool!

 

I do wonder why GC are using 90s with the mk4s, surely some 91s would have done for that. A 91 in that GC livery would look good I think

I agree it does! I think it was because of the class 90s having better acceleration to the 91s though I’m not too sure. As for the Grand Central livery on a 91, that was another one I decided to do too:

[TomScrut]

1 minute ago, LMS_LNER_SR_GWR_fan2004 said:

I agree it does! I think it was because of the class 90s having better acceleration to the 91s though I’m not too sure. As for the Grand Central livery on a 91, that was another one I decided to do too:

 

Nice one!

 

Thinking about it, the 91s wouldn't have been allowed to do 125mph anyway AFAIK so yes the acceleration of the 90 would benefit more than it does on the ECML. On the ECML I think the acceleration only matches the superior top speed runs with a lot of stops?

[LMS_LNER_SR_GWR_fan2004]

On 05/04/2020 at 14:48, TomScrut said:

 

Nice one!

 

Thinking about it, the 91s wouldn't have been allowed to do 125mph anyway AFAIK so yes the acceleration of the 90 would benefit more than it does on the ECML. On the ECML I think the acceleration only matches the superior top speed runs with a lot of stops?

Yeah I think that was the case on the ECML as the 90 definitely has better acceleration compared to a 91.

[TomScrut]

53 minutes ago, LMS_LNER_SR_GWR_fan2004 said:

Yeah I think that was the case on the ECML as the 90 definitely has better acceleration compared to a 91.

 

Yes, so I think they tended to use 90s on Leeds runs with lots of stops to enable time to be kept IIRC.

[LMS_LNER_SR_GWR_fan2004]

2 hours ago, TomScrut said:

 

Yes, so I think they tended to use 90s on Leeds runs with lots of stops to enable time to be kept IIRC.

Yep that's true. Every 90 I saw was heading to Leeds. I also redesigned the Freightliner livery on my 91 drawing:

[LMS_LNER_SR_GWR_fan2004]

Just now, LMS_LNER_SR_GWR_fan2004 said:

Yep that's true. Every 90 I saw was heading to Leeds. I also redesigned the Freightliner livery on my 91 drawing:

I also noticed that if these are the official drawings, then we may have a spring-loaded metal pantograph! It has a wire running down similar to the Bachmann 90 so that is a possibility!

[LMS_LNER_SR_GWR_fan2004]

On 05/04/2020 at 14:44, LMS_LNER_SR_GWR_fan2004 said:

I agree it does! I think it was because of the class 90s having better acceleration to the 91s though I’m not too sure. As for the Grand Central livery on a 91, that was another one I decided to do too:

Redesigned this one too:

 

[TomScrut]

2 hours ago, LMS_LNER_SR_GWR_fan2004 said:

Redesigned this one too:

 

 

Would be good if GC took some 91/mk4s for ECML use at some point. Surely they'd be better than the 180s? Does Sunderland have overheads all the way to it?

[MGR Hooper!]

11 hours ago, LMS_LNER_SR_GWR_fan2004 said:

I also noticed that if these are the official drawings, then we may have a spring-loaded metal pantograph! It has a wire running down similar to the Bachmann 90 so that is a possibility!

Excellent spot, if you look at the CAD renderings on the website and the ones I shared on the previous page, you quite clearly see that wire (second lower arm). If that's the case, it will make a lot of people happy, Even if it isn't a DCC controlled one, if it's sprung, people will be happy.

Personally I don't like an unrealistic second lower arm....but anyway.

 

Excellent work BTW. I was doing a GC and FL one too, however since you did the Powerhaul one, I'll scrap mine and do the FL grey
 

Cheers!

Edited April 7, 2020 by MGR Hooper!

[LMS_LNER_SR_GWR_fan2004]

3 hours ago, MGR Hooper! said:

Excellent spot, if you look at the CAD renderings on the website and the ones I shared on the previous page, you quite clearly see that wire (second lower arm). If that's the case, it will make a lot of people happy, Even if it isn't a DCC controlled one, if it's sprung, people will be happy.

Personally I don't like an unrealistic second lower arm....but anyway.

 

Excellent work BTW. I was doing a GC and FL one too, however since you did the Powerhaul one, I'll scrap mine and do the FL grey
 

Cheers!

I really hope  this is true, in my opinion I don't mind the second arm. Anything is better than the plastic ones on the 87. 

 

Ooh Freightliner Grey would look nice, maybe even pushing it to some RfD liveries too  I was also attempting a Stagecoach livery a well (being as VTEC was 49% Stagecoach) so I need to make that too.  

 

All the best, Matthew

[LMS_LNER_SR_GWR_fan2004]

9 hours ago, TomScrut said:

 

Would be good if GC took some 91/mk4s for ECML use at some point. Surely they'd be better than the 180s? Does Sunderland have overheads all the way to it?

I don't think Sunderland has overheads all the way to it. However there is a lot of room in the 91s internally so maybe a bi-mode 91 perhaps? 

[Pete the Elaner]

37 minutes ago, LMS_LNER_SR_GWR_fan2004 said:

I really hope  this is true, in my opinion I don't mind the second arm. Anything is better than the plastic ones on the 87. 

 

Although the 87 one is plastic, flimsy & weak, it is has a spring pushing it onto the OLE. It is just made to self-dismantle rather than have ts components break apart when it gets caught. Is the one in the CAD rendering representative of what we should expect on the 91 or is it an accurate scale drawing of the real thing? I expect it is the latter.

The 87's pan is Hornby's 4th attempt at a BW in 20 years & the 2nd (introduced on the 92) was a feeble, plastic scale representation of the real thing. The 1st was a huge metal beast on the 90, 91 then 86. The 3rd was a plastic moulding representing a lowered one, available on the 91 in some sets.

I would be very surprised if they tried it a 5th time so close to their 4th effort.

 

I really wish they would pleasantly surprise us all by giving the 91 a really good looking pan made from metal, but I genuinely believe this is unlikely.

Edited April 7, 2020 by Pete the Elaner
typo

[cravensdmufan]

On 20/03/2020 at 04:50, MGR Hooper! said:

Additional artwork images. This time the one that goes on the boxes.

 

 

 

 

The executive light grey shade looks spot on in this graphic.

 

I really, really hope Hornby get it right at last.  Which will bode well for the forthcoming APT (and hopefully an executive livery 87 ….please Hornby!).

[TomScrut]

25 minutes ago, Pete the Elaner said:

I would be very surprised if they tried it a 5th time so close to their 4th effort.

 

On the other hand given they are also doing the APT (and therefore two will need it, the APT had BW pantos didn't it?) and the Bachmann 90 has moved the standard line forwards (with Accurascales 92 to follow) coming in with a weak and flimsy unpowered plastic one doesn't look good, at least a decent metal one would only be one step behind. Although saying that they are also sticking to 8 pin so it doesn't look like they are that interested in progress anyway (in terms of lighting etc, regardless of a powered panto).

[Pete the Elaner]

1 hour ago, TomScrut said:

 

On the other hand given they are also doing the APT (and therefore two will need it, the APT had BW pantos didn't it?) and the Bachmann 90 has moved the standard line forwards (with Accurascales 92 to follow) coming in with a weak and flimsy unpowered plastic one doesn't look good, at least a decent metal one would only be one step behind. Although saying that they are also sticking to 8 pin so it doesn't look like they are that interested in progress anyway (in terms of lighting etc, regardless of a powered panto).

I believe a BW pan was fitted to the APT part-way though its life (but the 2 power cars were fitted together drawing all their power from 1 pan), so the model will need one.

Whether Hornby feel the need to tool something new or stick with the one introduced on the 87 is anybody's guess.

[MGR Hooper!]

4 hours ago, Pete the Elaner said:

Is the one in the CAD rendering representative of what we should expect on the 91 or is it an accurate scale drawing of the real thing? I expect it is the latter.
 

 

The images on Hornby's website are renderings of Hornby's own CAD model that has been textured to look like a model, as artists impression if I can call it that.

 

It is certainly not an accurate scale drawing of the real thing. They photograph the CAD model in a "parallel projection" view and texture it using Photoshop and/or any other powerful photo/model editing tool.

[MGR Hooper!]

4 hours ago, Pete the Elaner said:

Although the 87 one is plastic, flimsy & weak, it is has a spring pushing it onto the OLE. It is just made to self-dismantle rather than have ts components break apart when it gets caught. Is the one in the CAD rendering representative of what we should expect on the 91 or is it an accurate scale drawing of the real thing? I expect it is the latter.
 

The 87's pan is Hornby's 4th attempt at a BW in 20 years & the 2nd (introduced on the 92) was a feeble, plastic scale representation of the real thing. The 1st was a huge metal beast on the 90, 91 then 86. The 3rd was a plastic moulding representing a lowered one, available on the 91 in some sets.

I would be very surprised if they tried it a 5th time so close to their 4th effort.
 

 

The re-tooled Class 87 pantograph doesn't have any spring on it. It has notches for the arms and goes up in small increments. The only BW pantographs Hornby made that were spring loaded was their initial one (as used on the Class 86/90/91) and then the scale representation one used on their Class 92s which end up having a curved upper arm because of the strength of the springs and the clips holding it down.

 

The ex-Lima Class 87 had a re-tooled pantograph and that also was poseable and had no spring in it.

 

I believe with the re-tooled Class 87, it's Hornby's 5th attempt at a BW pantograph.

- Class 86/90/91 with chunky metal pantograph
- Class 91 with moulded lowered pantograph

- Class 92 with sprung loaded pantograph
- Class 87 (ex-Lima) with poseable pantograph
- Class 87 (re-tooled by Hornby) with an poseable (accurate highly detailed replica) plastic pantograph

If Hornby are re-doing the pantograph for the Class 91, it's certainly not unlikely. Overall the have an accurate pantograph to start with. There's very little modification needed to the CAD to have it converted to a sprung loaded one. Modifications needed would be hooks to allow the wire (second lower arm) and for the spring.

Edited April 7, 2020 by MGR Hooper!