2021 hopes

[Pmorgancym]

5 hours ago, gc4946 said:

My final speculations before Hornby's announcement:

 

HST in Midland blue livery

TfW driving trailer and class 67

Last run of Mk4s in TfW livery before retirement of the tooling

Last run of Pacers in Northern and TfW liveries before retirement of the tooling

 

and finally, as Hornby often produce oddball locos, either a Turbomotive or LNER V4

 

 

 

TfW 153

[drgj]

I never had a name for steam locos when I went on railway trips in the 70s but others did call them kettles but the only ones we saw were those on the Marine Lake Railway in Rhyl. I used to use the nicknames for diesels such as Duff and Burner (class 31).  Most of the drivers had driven steam locos.

 

On the Hornby front I would like a lined maroon ex LMS suburban coach.

 

Dave

[MattA]

I can dream of Southern Railway Qs and Us, and an LNER K4.

[MikeHunter]

I’d love to see an updated 2P and a 4F to modern standards. Something new for the LMS like a Fowler or Stanier 2-6-2 tank, and the Royal Scot coaches available in LMS crimson lake as part of their main range. A push pull set would also be amazing, and an LMS fish van.

[1andrew1]

47 minutes ago, TomScrut said:

I expect that penetrating the market might be difficult, especially given the thoughts of some people (wrongly in some cases, rightly in others) about Hornby being inferior to the alternatives (probably most famously Bachmann) would probably make it harder in N where the market I expect will be more serious model railway enthusiast and less "I want to buy my child a train set" which regardless of us lot on here is probably a big chunk of Hornby's financial interest.

Hornby's last N-gauge train was under the Arnold brand so they could use this again if they wanted to. But they probably don't want to encourage UK outline modellers  to move to a  scale where they would have low market share.

Edited January 4, 2021 by 1andrew1

[Pmorgancym]

1 hour ago, rob D2 said:

Very true,  but I wonder if the Hornby drip feed super slow supply has missed the boat entirely for the merlin scheme - you have to be pretty old to remember it ( like me ) and it lasted for about a nano second, so I can’t really see them doing it .

Don't under estimate the pokemon "gotta catch em" all mentality 

[dogbox321]

4 hours ago, TomScrut said:

 

90% of the plastic but not 90% of the moulds. Whilst bigger moulds are more expensive there are a lot of smaller detail parts that can't just be forgotten when talking about this. TBH though I'd not be buying one if it came out so I don't really care. I just don't think it would be back to square one.

 

 

If the market is there (which I'd say it is based on the fact it is seen as being viable in N, and they go for about £150 apiece on eBay) why would they just sit there not doing any more? Just sounds weird to me.

 

 

 

Hi Tom, TBH these wagons were not made for modellers.  It was a political tool for Drax and to promote their "renewable energy" (in quote marks because it depends on how you view renewable).  Ultimately, the reason some were offered to the public/modellers was to pay for/contribute to the cost of the tooling.  Hence the cost of £83 each, and I think 10% of the price went to a charity.

 

Drax had no intentions of entering the model market, and they were never really produced for modellers, it was just a way to fund them!  Drax even used Hattons as a distributor.

 

Best Wishes,

 

Chris.

[TomScrut]

57 minutes ago, dogbox321 said:

Hi Tom, TBH these wagons were not made for modellers.  It was a political tool for Drax and to promote their "renewable energy" (in quote marks because it depends on how you view renewable).  Ultimately, the reason some were offered to the public/modellers was to pay for/contribute to the cost of the tooling.  Hence the cost of £83 each, and I think 10% of the price went to a charity.

 

Drax had no intentions of entering the model market, and they were never really produced for modellers, it was just a way to fund them!  Drax even used Hattons as a distributor.

 

Maybe not. But then why stop others doing it in OO if there's no interest on their part? Just take the licensing fee and be happy you're getting something (money and a small bit of publicity from the wagons themselves) for nothing. And all it takes on Draxs part is a change in a key staff member for the thought to come of why not do some more?

 

My gut feel is that this Revolution doing it in N has maybe started something in OO but maybe that's just optimism. They'll have had to have spoken to Drax about it.

[The Stationmaster]

3 hours ago, RichardT said:

 

And...?  I model in N, so I already see Hornby as completely irrelevant to me.  Does that matter to Hornby?

 

I wish they weren’t irrelevant - never mind all the froth about them

reviving TT, why are they ignoring a large existing UK market in another scale that’s right on their doorstep? - but the reality is that, for the moment, they don’t want my money.  I assume they have identified a profitable niche in mass market 00 steam loco models, leaving highly detailed limited run diesel models to small newcomer firms.  
 

(And, by the way, any chance that we could all drop the childish “kettles” and similar epithets re steam locos?)

best

Richard T 

But is it good commercial sense to jump into a relatively small (compared with 00) market which is already dominated by two major players for British outline models?   Surely it makes more sense, if you can pull it off, to make your own market and go out on a limb - whether it's on the table top or not - and build yourself a market area you could perhaps dominate and where you start with a relatively clear field?  

 

You might then ask yourself what such a market might be. and that's where the clever bit comes in because so many areas have already been cornered but a few remain out there.  'Steam Punk' might perhaps have been considered a similar idea in terms of creating a new market and it remains to be seen if it will be successful (although I think perhaps it won't - but that is just a personal view).    I think 0012 might be a relatively open goal and perhaps better for r-t-r than dealing with the even narrower gauge of 009 but again that is a strictly personal view.

[InterCitySpud]

3 hours ago, RichardT said:

(And, by the way, any chance that we could all drop the childish “kettles” and similar epithets re steam locos?)

I think everybody here actually love all trains.

 

[The Johnster]

7 hours ago, InterCitySpud said:

8 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

 

I'm sure most manufacturers meet in dark rooms to discuss the same matters regularly

If they do, the people who are the current iteration of the Monopolies Commission whose name I can't remember at the moment would be interested in the details!

7 hours ago, InterCitySpud said:

This was obviously during the boom times for British railways and when almost every village had a station

Boom times for modelling, but hardly for the railways themselves who operated this system at a loss and subsidised it with main line revenue.  It is attractive to modellers because all the staitions had all the facilities as railways were 'common carriers' by the terms laid down in their authorising Acts, but it was a great burden to them.

5 hours ago, stewartingram said:

l SK coming up with the statement that if they make the tools for a loco type, then those tools stay with that loco. If another loco is designed, that has, for example, the same (prototype) tender design, then their model would have new tooling for that tender

I think all the RTR producers (I use this description because they don't manufacture and at the same time are not really commissioners, the manufacture is subcontracted in China) do this.  Each model is regarded as a stand alone project with it's own sub-management and development team, and this is reflected in the tooling, because they are made to order in batches in China.  This means that if, for example, a batch of A4s are ordered with corridor tenders, the exact number of corridor tenders are built for them in China and then the factory that built them moves on to the next booked contract.  So, if you then order a batch of A3s for which the same corridor tender is required, there is no factory available at the time the locos are being built to use the A4 tender tooling, so you have to make another tooling for the A3 tenders.  You may, of course, use the same design and CAD specifications, but equally you may take this as an opportunity  to improve the tooling in the interests of greater detail or more efficient and cost effective production.

2 hours ago, GreenGiraffe22 said:

Yes, I don't quite understand why diesel & electric modellers are so derogatory towards steam engines...?

Probably because they think, perhaps with some justification, that the producer's resources are being diverted to steam at the expense of possible D & E projects in a situation where resources and Chinese factory slots are not limitless.  The producers do not think like this, and will undertake any project that they think will make money for the people who are their real customers, not us but the shareholders, irrespective of outline or period.  We may suggest ideas in froth/wishlist topics like this one, but we do not have a full understanding of the marketing and production engineering issues or the overhead costs involved, and the producers, rightly enough, consider that their business and none of ours. 

 

So, if you think that model x would sell like hot cakes you may well be right, or you may think this simply because you are very keen to buy one; this thread has examples of 'I'll pay any price'.  But the producer has to factor in not just the projected sales but the production costs and the availability of factory slots from their subcontractors.  No good making a model that fles off the shelves and could have been sold for twice the price if you don't make an acceptable profit from it; that way likes bankrupture*, followed by us wondering what went wrong!  At the same time it's no good pricing a model beyond  what the volume market will bear; it will end up being a loss leader and discounted to clear shelves, another road to bankrupture.  Loss leaders as a contrived marketing tool are fine, but not when they are unintended!

 

 

*it may not be a word, but I like it and am applying Rule 1.  I reckon it's perfectly cromulent.

[Mel_H]

I'll add my suggestions. Not a wish list, or what I'd like to see (you don't want to know!), but what I predict for tomorrow's announcement for new tooling. Let's see how close I get:

 

STEAM

SR Merchant Navy (rebuilt) - retool. [Reason: The current one is quite old. Hornby has re-tooled its LMS Pacifics, so has a track record for this type of thing]

LNER Streamlined B17 4-6-0

LMR Lion 0-4-2

 

MODERN TRACTION

Mk4 coaches (re-tool). The Cl 91 is due soon, and someone I know has just started to super-detail their rake!

Class 89 {a long shot}

Pacer {a very long shot}

 

COACHES

LNER coronation coaches - Beavertail included

 

Will I get 5 out of 7 correct...?

 

[GreenGiraffe22]

16 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

 

So, if you think that model x would sell like hot cakes 

 

That "would sell like hot cakes " assumption is one of my biggest bug bears on this forum, along with 

"X model is a no brainer"

And 

"The vast majority of modellers/adults over X age/ young people ..." Etc

[The Johnster]

2 hours ago, TomScrut said:

they don’t want my money

O yes they do, so long as they can make a profit out of it.

2 hours ago, TomScrut said:

Hornby being inferior to the alternatives (probably most famously Bachmann)

This was a reasonable assumption for many years and H are still paying for what I see as the mistakes of that period, but their newly tooled output from the last decade or so has been excellent and well able to stand comparison with the competition.  In a way, it is an attitude rooted in the Triang days when Hornby Dublo was percieved a superior because it wasn't plastic.  The valve gear was better but overall the models were underized and crude from both manufacturers.  Hornby have traditionally been committed to the train set, and while I deplore the resultant 6x4 or 8x4 layouts that result as crude tailchasers, they presumably know where their bread is buttered.  I say 'presumably' because they have had their troubles and some of them may have been rooted in this concept. and they still retain a number of very outdated models in the range under the Railroad excuse, but perhaps preventing the release of improved versions.  Smokey Joe could be made into a serious model,, but is still selling at a level that makes this unlikely.

2 hours ago, TomScrut said:

 

The funny thing I think is how if a "duff" goes out on the mainline now the amount of froth it gets from the spotting community, which has given an ironic twist to it's name

Spotters' prejudices, and I've been guilty of a few myself, are different to ours.

9 minutes ago, InterCitySpud said:

I think everybody here actually love all trains.

 

I don't love Pacers, but I prefer them to buses.

[scottrains29]

15 hours ago, 60800 said:

One suggestion which I haven't seen is a Mk2F RFB

I really hope Hornby announce this tomorrow. It's desperately needed.

 

When Hornby brought out the Virgin mk2e coaches (SO and BSO) the RFB was missing, making it impossible to create an accurate rake! 

 

This year they brought out the Virgin mk2f (SO, BSO and FO) yet still no RFB! I doubt Hornby realise the FO and BSO coaches were never actually in a rake together. I think they have now produced 4 Virgin mk2 (new tooling) BSO coaches yet no RFB to run with them.

 

Bizarrely, when Hornby last produced the Virgin FO using the old Airfix mk2d tooling, they actually only painted the 1st class yellow stripe at one end as if it was an RFB! I hope they don't try to do that this time, but instead actually tool the RFB.

 

Bachmann announced they are making all 4 Virgin mk2f types, giving assurance to modellers that they can complete an accurate rake. I wish Hornby would try this approach.

 

[fiftyfour fiftyfour]

3 hours ago, rob D2 said:

Very true,  but I wonder if the Hornby drip feed super slow supply has missed the boat entirely for the merlin scheme - you have to be pretty old to remember it ( like me ) and it lasted for about a nano second, so I can’t really see them doing it .

Well over three years from the first appearance in September'96 until the last ones were vinyled over in late '99, which is an age in modern terms. People will queue up to buy Virgin East Coast branded 91's and they existed for half that time!

 

[Dunsignalling]

Thing is, though, models don't have to generate huge demand to be profitable, just sell out from the manufacturer within the budgeted timescale at not less than the wholesale price he needs to make his budgeted return. 

 

This is one reason for small production runs. It's not to do with making the the best profit that could have been made if it were possible to exactly predict demand, but hitting the target, not incurring  the cost of storing unsold stock and not eating into the overall return by having to dump a load at big discounts.  

 

Once out of the manufacturers hands, he just moves on to the next one. It matters not what retailers ask/get for them or whether speculators fleece those who missed out on "straight" purchases through indecision.

 

Some production levels are scarily low, I know not where the poster got his info but I've seen it mentioned that the recent Johnson 0-4-4Ts from Bachmann numbered just 2,000. Not of each version, in total! They are hard to find just a month after release which suggests it may be true. Just glad I pre-ordered (though only a few weeks before release).

 

The name of the game nowadays is making reliable levels of return, quickly, not risking feast or famine. The way to ensure that every time is to estimate what you think the market will just about stand, and make a couple hundred less.  Uncomfortable for some on our side of the fence, but healthily predictable for the industry.... 

 

John

 

 

Edited January 4, 2021 by Dunsignalling

[Invicta]

2 hours ago, MikeHunter said:

I’d love to see an updated 2P and a 4F to modern standards. Something new for the LMS like a Fowler or Stanier 2-6-2 tank, and the Royal Scot coaches available in LMS crimson lake as part of their main range. A push pull set would also be amazing, and an LMS fish van.

 

A state-of-the-art 2P would be very welcome, although I wonder about the 4F given the existence of a good alternative from Bachmann. The Fowler/Stanier 2-6-2Ts are one of the few remaining gaps in the LMS 'standards' offered by the manufacturers, so sooner or later, someone's bound to bite surely!

 

A push-pull set is maybe one of the biggest gaps- although I wonder if there's more chance of that appearing in a blue box than a red one, as a logical follow-up to Bachmann's Midland 0-4-4T release (though I think I've said that after pretty much every London Midland tank engine release since the Ivatt 2-6-2T!)

 

Fish vans would definitely be nice to have- and totally out of left-field, a retooled modern-standard version of the Palethorpes sausage van (and associated LMS Insulated Milk van) strikes me as the kind of thing Hornby might spring on us rather than a more obvious and predictable bit of LMS rolling stock

[DK123GWR]

43 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

I think 0012 might be a relatively open goal and perhaps better for r-t-r than dealing with the even narrower gauge of 009 but again that is a strictly personal view.

How about 0028 for those who want to build a proper railway? 

In all seriousness, the potential market for 0028 is probably limited to a handful of modellers who have a very keen interest in the GWR (unless you've been to Didcot you'll never have seen a working Brunel broad gauge loco). I would imagine most people interested in modelling broad gauge would also want finescale track, which isn't something Hornby have produced in the past. On the other hand, everybody keeps predicting 'that thing nobody saw coming'.

[TomScrut]

27 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

This was a reasonable assumption for many years and H are still paying for what I see as the mistakes of that period, but their newly tooled output from the last decade or so has been excellent and well able to stand comparison with the competition. 

 

I agree, but I do think that some of the views still exist. Not so much on here but a question came up of "Hornby or Bachmann, what's best?" on a Facebook group, quite a few went back with "Bachmann" with no qualification. I went back with "what do you want? 4MT, A4 and a few others you'd want Hornby, if you want a class 66, 37, 20 then Bachmann assuming you'll pay the price for it"

 

31 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

Spotters' prejudices, and I've been guilty of a few myself, are different to ours.

 

Definitely, but it's just an example of how these nicknames can sound malicious whereas in fact they are probably affectionate now.

[60800]

51 minutes ago, Mel_H said:

I'll add my suggestions. Not a wish list, or what I'd like to see (you don't want to know!), but what I predict for tomorrow's announcement for new tooling. Let's see how close I get:

 

STEAM

SR Merchant Navy (rebuilt) - retool. [Reason: The current one is quite old. Hornby has re-tooled its LMS Pacifics, so has a track record for this type of thing]

LNER Streamlined B17 4-6-0

LMR Lion 0-4-2

 

MODERN TRACTION

Mk4 coaches (re-tool). The Cl 91 is due soon, and someone I know has just started to super-detail their rake!

Class 89 {a long shot}

Pacer {a very long shot}

 

COACHES

LNER coronation coaches - Beavertail included

 

Will I get 5 out of 7 correct...?

 

 

If Hornby follows their track record with unusual steam locos into the modern era, I can see an 89 being very likely, especially with Rails sitting on theirs and having the spat with Hornby in the same year.

 

I fully expect to see;

 

Rebuilt MN

 

BR MK4 stock 

 

Class 89

 

Anything else is a bonus, although I can see Big Bertha or the Turbomotive being done. I don't expect to see any more P2 variants until 2007 is running and that's when Hornby will put the money in to modify the tooling for 2007 and subsequently the Bugatti variants. 

 

Wildcard? Great Northern in rebuilt form. I'd sell a kidney for that thing in RTR.... In blue as 4470 obviously.

 

Cheers,

 60800 

 

[GordonC]

2 hours ago, dogbox321 said:

 

Hi Tom, TBH these wagons were not made for modellers.  It was a political tool for Drax and to promote their "renewable energy" (in quote marks because it depends on how you view renewable).  Ultimately, the reason some were offered to the public/modellers was to pay for/contribute to the cost of the tooling.  Hence the cost of £83 each, and I think 10% of the price went to a charity.

 

Drax had no intentions of entering the model market, and they were never really produced for modellers, it was just a way to fund them!  Drax even used Hattons as a distributor.

 

Best Wishes,

 

Chris.

 

If I remember right, 50% of them were used by Drax as corporate freebies while the remaining 50% were sold. So presumably the £83 cost was basically paying for 2 wagons to cover the costs of the freebies.

 

I'd be surprised if Drax turned down the publicity from allowing their tooling to be used again if there's no financial risk to them.

 

[Dunsignalling]

1 hour ago, scottrains29 said:

I really hope Hornby announce this tomorrow. It's desperately needed.

 

When Hornby brought out the Virgin mk2e coaches (SO and BSO) the RFB was missing, making it impossible to create an accurate rake! 

 

This year they brought out the Virgin mk2f (SO, BSO and FO) yet still no RFB! I doubt Hornby realise the FO and BSO coaches were never actually in a rake together. I think they have now produced 4 Virgin mk2 (new tooling) BSO coaches yet no RFB to run with them.

 

Bizarrely, when Hornby last produced the Virgin FO using the old Airfix mk2d tooling, they actually only painted the 1st class yellow stripe at one end as if it was an RFB! I hope they don't try to do that this time, but instead actually tool the RFB.

 

Bachmann announced they are making all 4 Virgin mk2f types, giving assurance to modellers that they can complete an accurate rake. I wish Hornby would try this approach.

 

This, I suspect, is why Hornby concentrate on steam! They know where to look for the reference material they need to develop models. TBH, if Bachmann are making exactly what you want, why do you even bother what Hornby do?

 

I'm usually in the opposite position, being into BR Southern Region steam (ex-LSWR area). I long ago concluded that, were I to completely ignore Bachmann for a couple of years, I'd be unlikely to miss anything of vital interest. I do anticipate buying a good few of the forthcoming Bulleid coaches over the next couple of years but can almost guarantee, there'll only be one or two locos (at most) unless there's a big policy shift on their part! Hornby, I need to keep an eye on at all times, and I fervently hope that continues tomorrow! 

 

"Modern" stuff (my definition being Sectorisation and onwards) seldom remains unaltered for long, and many modellers replicate the changes from what they consider a safe distance!

 

By the time the info gathered by those who most know and care becomes readily available to the trade, much of the potential demand  for models may have transferred forward by a franchise (or two).

 

Bachmann have clearly decided it's an area they are comfortable working in; Hornby are (at least for now) somewhat luke-warm about it and I really do think it's as simple as that.

 

John

 

 

 

Edited January 4, 2021 by Dunsignalling

[Pandora]

I'm predicting

1) a reintroduction of "Magnadhesion",  in a new format,  a steel strip laid underneath the track and superneo magnets on the chassis or motor bogie  , the magnetic attraction between the two components giving extra haulage powers to lightweight locomotives

2) a class 86 based on the tooling for the class 87

3) Rebuilt Crosti boiler 2-10-0 8F

Edited January 4, 2021 by Pandora

[The Johnster]

1 hour ago, Invicta said:

 

A state-of-the-art 2P would be very welcome, although I wonder about the 4F given the existence of a good alternative from Bachmann. The Fowler/Stanier 2-6-2Ts are one of the few remaining gaps in the LMS 'standards' offered by the manufacturers, so sooner or later, someone's bound to bite surely!

 

A push-pull set is maybe one of the biggest gaps- although I wonder if there's more chance of that appearing in a blue box than a red one, as a logical follow-up to Bachmann's Midland 0-4-4T release (though I think I've said that after pretty much every London Midland tank engine release since the Ivatt 2-6-2T!)

 

Fish vans would definitely be nice to have- and totally out of left-field, a retooled modern-standard version of the Palethorpes sausage van (and associated LMS Insulated Milk van) strikes me as the kind of thing Hornby might spring on us rather than a more obvious and predictable bit of LMS rolling stock

 

Nothing I'd argue with there; these were large numbers of them spread over a wide geographic area, and Palethorpes have always been a popular choice.  A correct 6-wheeled milk van is long overdue; at least the BZ is available as a kit from Comet and as a 3D body print from Shapeways (Rue d'Etropal's site IIRC).

 

 

1 hour ago, DK123GWR said:

How about 0028 for those who want to build a proper railway? 

This would have the attraction, for anyone who produced it, of an 'enclosed' proprietary system on which you could impose your own standards, possibly even being able to license products from 3rd parties.  Proprietary track, baulk, sleepered, and mixed gauge, and you could get away with a fairly basic loco range, say, Firefly, a Rover, and a Corsair to start with, all locos that lasted a good time in service.  In about 1973 I spoke to a retired Severn Tunnel driver in the BRSA club there who had begun his career on Corsairs shunting Temple Meads Goods, which at the time felt like talking to history!