wainwright1 Posted April 5, 2021 Share Posted April 5, 2021 (edited) Just to add to the drift. I believe that the Fruit D that Dapol currently produce was a new tool that they produced a few years ago. I would have thought that they corrected the dimensional inaccuracies at the time ? Hornby produced three wagons reputedly of Gloucester prototypes, presumably to a RCH specification: 3 plank drop side, 4 plank and 6 plank. These had a Gloucester style chassis, albeit somewhat crude in the under gear. They have now introduced a much more realistic chassis for these wagons, but it is not in a Gloucester style. Just remembered. Bachmann produced the salt van and mounted in on the totally inappropriate modern roller bearing chassis from the china clay wagons. Because it was the right length ? All the best Ray Edited April 5, 2021 by wainwright1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted April 5, 2021 Share Posted April 5, 2021 11 minutes ago, wainwright1 said: I believe that the Fruit D that Dapol currently produce was a new tool that they produced a few years ago. I would have thought that they corrected the dimensional inaccuracies at the time ? Unfortunately not. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted April 5, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 5, 2021 (edited) 4 hours ago, wainwright1 said: Just to add to the drift. I believe that the Fruit D that Dapol currently produce was a new tool that they produced a few years ago. I would have thought that they corrected the dimensional inaccuracies at the time ? All the best Ray No. Just a new, and very detailed, underframe with NEM coupler mounts. The body is unchanged. John (still off-topic) Edited April 5, 2021 by Dunsignalling 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium boxbrownie Posted April 5, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 5, 2021 On 16/03/2021 at 11:01, PhilJ W said: As I see it Hornby are going to produce a model of Lion and Rapido are going to produce a model of the Titfield Thunderbolt. No doubt each model will have its pros and cons and when and if they both become available purchasers can make their own minds up to which model to choose by their own criteria. I do get the impression that there is a 'lets bash Hornby' element similar in a way that British Leyland was bashed and we all know what happened to BL. What we have here are two models of the same prototype aimed at different audiences which is far better than no models at all. Absolutely this......I see Hornby doing a natural progression of the “Rocket” era and producing Locos and coaches/wagons, where as Rapido are doing a series of special packs for the Titfield Thunderbolt film anniversary, TBH there is not much cross over if they both keep to the particular themes. Hornby it does appear got wind of Rapido’s launch and did (what’s becoming all to common) a knee jerk reaction to what Hornby saw as a competitor treading on their toes, as if they had exclusive rights to what’s in the planning stage, either theirs or everyone else’s! I have absolutely no interest in the very early era stuff so would have given Lion a miss regardless, as I have with Rocket......but the Titfield Thunderbolt is an entirely different matter, I will be buying the sets as I have great memories of the film and I will enjoy seeing it on my layout occasionally. 1 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Johnster Posted April 5, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 5, 2021 I’ve been propounding (don’t worry, I’ll wipe it up afterwards) for some time the idea that early/era1 modelling has a lot going for it once the small mechs needed have been made reliable, and the W4 Peckett & Andrew Barclay 0-4-0s show that they have. Absurdly pretty locos, colourful liveries, simple signalling, and realistic length trains in much less space than the bogie stock eras. Hornby have dabbled with Rockets before, and may well be on to something here. My opinion FWIW, exactly what you paid for it, is that there is probably more potential in a slightly later period, say 1840-60, when what were almost standard locos appeared on many different railways; Jennies, Sharpies, Burys, Stephenson Long Boilers and so on. 3 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium RichardT Posted April 5, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 5, 2021 4 minutes ago, boxbrownie said: Absolutely this......I see Hornby doing a natural progression of the “Rocket” era and producing Locos and coaches/wagons, where as Rapido are doing a series of special packs for the Titfield Thunderbolt film anniversary, TBH there is not much cross over if they both keep to the particular themes. Hornby it does appear got wind of Rapido’s launch and did (what’s becoming all to common) a knee jerk reaction to what Hornby saw as a competitor treading on their toes, as if they had exclusive rights to what’s in the planning stage, either theirs or everyone else’s! Yes, Hornby were doing a natural progression from Rocket. But Hornby were obviously incentivised to do this by producing Lion, rather than (say) a Stephenson "Planet", because they were less interested in supporting "Era 1 modelling" than in maximising sales to collectors. Lion has the advantage that it could be sold to collectors both in its 1930s restored state to match the 1930s Rocket replica they'd already produced* and as Thunderbolt. Hornby thus enquired about licensing the Titfield Thunderbolt from Studiocanal and were knocked back because Studiocanal had already licensed it elsewhere, which is the first time I suspect that Hornby realised that they had a rival. Studiocanal probably wouldn't have told Hornby who had beaten them to the license, and how long ago, so all Hornby knew was that "someone" was also in the game. Faced with a large potential loss of sales Hornby had to try to pre-empt the rival by announcing sooner - possibly hoping that the rival was Bachmann, or a retailer/commissioner, who Hornby would stand a chance of beating to market. Hornby's problem now is that they can't produce a Titfield Thunderbolt, but Rapido can produce both Lion and Thunderbolt. Also, the rival is Rapido, not Bachmann etc., and Rapido have a reputation for quality and detail. And finally, Rapido have announced a Titfield Thunderbolt range which is more attractive to collectors. Interesting times. RT *I've seen nothing to suggest that Hornby intend to produce either Rocket or Lion in accurate early/mid 19th century guise, and the Rocket carriages are models of vehicles from the imagination of Ernest Lemon of the LMS, so they all belong on layouts set in the 1930s and later, not "Era 1". 2 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium RichardT Posted April 5, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 5, 2021 19 minutes ago, The Johnster said: My opinion FWIW, exactly what you paid for it, is that there is probably more potential in a slightly later period, say 1840-60, when what were almost standard locos appeared on many different railways; Jennies, Sharpies, Burys, Stephenson Long Boilers and so on. Absolutely! RT 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hroth Posted April 5, 2021 Share Posted April 5, 2021 16 minutes ago, The Johnster said: simple signalling A bloke in a top hat beside the track, either standing to attention or with his arm out would suffice to start with, as time goes by, he might gain some flags or a disk&crossbar device to operate. The only problem would be with modellers of more modern eras thinking he indicated where an uncoupling magnet might be situated... 2 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obi-Jiff Kenobi Posted April 5, 2021 Share Posted April 5, 2021 20 minutes ago, Hroth said: A bloke in a top hat beside the track, either standing to attention or with his arm out would suffice to start with, as time goes by, he might gain some flags or a disk&crossbar device to operate. Didn’t they all have to be named Bobby? 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Compound2632 Posted April 5, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 5, 2021 4 hours ago, wainwright1 said: Hornby produced three wagons reputedly of Gloucester prototypes, presumably to a RCH specification: 3 plank drop side, 4 plank and 6 plank. These had a Gloucester style chassis, albeit somewhat crude in the under gear. They have now introduced a much more realistic chassis for these wagons, but it is not in a Gloucester style. 3 hours ago, Dunsignalling said: No. Just a new, and very detailed, underframe with NEM coupler mounts. The body is unchanged. By no means more realistic. Oil axleboxes are unlikely on an RCH 1887 specification wagon at any stage in its life. And the Morton brakes - not the most probable way of giving such a wagon both-side brakes, at least for the 6-plank wagon; an independent set of brake gear was the usual cheap fix and of course the only way to do it on a mineral wagon with bottom doors. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted April 5, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 5, 2021 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Compound2632 said: By no means more realistic. Oil axleboxes are unlikely on an RCH 1887 specification wagon at any stage in its life. And the Morton brakes - not the most probable way of giving such a wagon both-side brakes, at least for the 6-plank wagon; an independent set of brake gear was the usual cheap fix and of course the only way to do it on a mineral wagon with bottom doors. Sorry for any confusion; my comment related to the Dapol PasFruit D. Edited April 5, 2021 by Dunsignalling 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Compound2632 Posted April 5, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 5, 2021 7 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said: Sorry for any confusion; my comment related to the Dapol PasFruit D. Ah, well. My remarks apply very definitely to the Hornby 1887-esque wagons. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penrhos1920 Posted April 5, 2021 Share Posted April 5, 2021 6 hours ago, Compound2632 said: I couldn't find a match on @Penrhos1920's website. But he doesn't distinguish second class compartments - I suppose the diagram book he's used is post-1912? Hang on, hang on. There was actually only ONE, yes only ONE GWR all second non-corridor clerestory design. C19 which is shown on that page. Where a coach had second class compartments I do make sure that they do get mentioned. Most GWR coaches with 2nd class compartments were actually composites. 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Compound2632 Posted April 5, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 5, 2021 3 minutes ago, Penrhos1920 said: Hang on, hang on. There was actually only ONE, yes only ONE GWR all second non-corridor clerestory design. C19 which is shown on that page. Where a coach had second class compartments I do make sure that they do get mentioned. Most GWR coaches with 2nd class compartments were actually composites. I confess that I had subsequently found that diagram (referenced at http://www.gwr.org.uk/protriang.html). Apologies for doubting you! I note that C19 was 50'; the Triang clerestories scale out at around 46'6", so an 8-compartment carriage made by splicing two of the 7-compartment "seconds" would come out rather over-length at around 53'. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penrhos1920 Posted April 5, 2021 Share Posted April 5, 2021 5 hours ago, Edwardian said: I recall placing the Triang against the 4mm scale drawings in Part I of Russell. However, rather than dig out one of these coach bodies and repeating the exercise, here is a path already beaten Triang Clerestories I'm afraid that Russ rather confuses me here. The brake third is actually very close to diagram D7 in design. It's just 2' shorter than a D7 and the difference is the length on the van area. This has been discussed elsewhere, but I can't find it quickly. The all "second" coach is pure fiction. Russ gets confused himself as the C20 was a corridor coach and so out of the running and I don;t know why he's mentioned. 4 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted April 5, 2021 Share Posted April 5, 2021 Thanks - I probably was a bit confused, but then it was over twenty years ago! (I really can't think why I thought a C20 could be a candidate.) Some of the conversion possibilities for the brake third are stretching credibility a little, but I'm sure I've seen a Clifton Downs pair (D27/E58) bashed out of the Triangs, so I guess quite a lot is possible depending on the amount of cutting and shutting. Page now updated. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium PhilJ W Posted April 5, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 5, 2021 4 hours ago, Obi-Jiff Kenobi said: Didn’t they all have to be named Bobby? The term comes because the original signalmen were officially railway policemen. 1 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSpencer Posted April 5, 2021 Share Posted April 5, 2021 6 hours ago, RichardT said: Hornby's problem now is that they can't produce a Titfield Thunderbolt, but Rapido can produce both Lion and Thunderbolt. Also, the rival is Rapido, not Bachmann etc., and Rapido have a reputation for quality and detail. And finally, Rapido have announced a Titfield Thunderbolt range which is more attractive to collectors. Hornby's problem is (now that we know the Rapido model will be compatible with Hornby L&M stock) making theirs DCC sound compatible. An area they are not really good in on small locos (but they could surprise us here). Rapido's problem is that the Hornby model will be out long before theirs, probably cheaper too. This loco is not like a class 37 where you might fancy adding another - albeit improved - model to the fleet. It's an old one off suitable to special occasions. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted April 6, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 6, 2021 13 hours ago, JSpencer said: Hornby's problem is (now that we know the Rapido model will be compatible with Hornby L&M stock) making theirs DCC sound compatible. An area they are not really good in on small locos (but they could surprise us here). Rapido's problem is that the Hornby model will be out long before theirs, probably cheaper too. This loco is not like a class 37 where you might fancy adding another - albeit improved - model to the fleet. It's an old one off suitable to special occasions. At the moment Rapido are clearly a long way ahead of Hornby - they have the CAD up and running and being worked on from what is clearly already a very advanced state of development. Hornby have so far shown nothing and even if they drop everything else to concentrate their design resources on 'Lion' they are behind and will need a lot of research work to catch up with the situation Rapido are already in. Hornby can probably do it and beat Rapido to the shops but it will inevitably be at the expense of something else because even a large company like Hornby can't spend its resource time and money more than once. Obviously Hornby will have a market for their model for the simple reason that they are a well known brand with a high level of UK market awareness/reputation. But for all that because they were slow off the mark with their approach to Studio Canal they have lost an excellent marketing opportunity which, odd though it might seem, still gets occasional tv coverage when the film is re-shown. So the important Titifield nostalgia part of the market is denied to them for this model plus an opportunity to re-run previous 'Titfield' based models they have offered. Hornby will no doubt still make money out of their 'Lion' (they'd be daft to do it if it isn't still estimated as profitable) but they aren't going to make as much money as they might have done. So perhaps the lesson here for Hornby is that they need to not only get their marketing right but they also need to be as nimble as others in the marketplace who are competing for a share of what we spend. Rapido UK is a newcomer in terms of its organisation and people but it got its Tiitfield project off the ground, and licencing agreed, in double quick time no doubt helped by very short internal lines of communication and decision making. Maybe that is where a lesson lies? 1 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hroth Posted April 6, 2021 Share Posted April 6, 2021 Where Hornby is concerned, there's no point in showing CADs or 3d visualisations. We may catch a glimpse of an engineering prototype in the background of a shot of something else in an Engine Shed later in the year, but I don't expect to see anything properly until a painted sample is available. There's no point in showing sensitive data at the present! 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSpencer Posted April 6, 2021 Share Posted April 6, 2021 (edited) 35 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said: At the moment Rapido are clearly a long way ahead of Hornby - they have the CAD up and running and being worked on from what is clearly already a very advanced state of development. Hornby have so far shown nothing and even if they drop everything else to concentrate their design resources on 'Lion' they are behind and will need a lot of research work to catch up with the situation Rapido are already in. Hornby can probably do it and beat Rapido to the shops but it will inevitably be at the expense of something else because even a large company like Hornby can't spend its resource time and money more than once. Indeed I saw a statement today saying Rapido for March 2022. I thought previously it was 2023. Edited April 6, 2021 by JSpencer 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted April 6, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 6, 2021 40 minutes ago, JSpencer said: Indeed I saw a statement today saying Rapido for March 2022. I thought previously it was 2023. 2022 marks the 70th anniversary of the film being released, so I'd think that was always intended. John 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul.Uni Posted April 6, 2021 Share Posted April 6, 2021 1 hour ago, JSpencer said: Indeed I saw a statement today saying Rapido for March 2022. I thought previously it was 2023. 11 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said: 2022 marks the 70th anniversary of the film being released, so I'd think that was always intended. John From the Rapido newsletter: 'Some models will be ready in 2022 and the rest will come out in time for the 70th anniversary in March 2023.' 3 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted April 6, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 6, 2021 25 minutes ago, Paul.Uni said: From the Rapido newsletter: 'Some models will be ready in 2022 and the rest will come out in time for the 70th anniversary in March 2023.' Thanks. It seems the film was made in 1952, but not released until '53. John 1 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwardian Posted April 6, 2021 Share Posted April 6, 2021 2 hours ago, Hroth said: Where Hornby is concerned, there's no point in showing CADs or 3d visualisations. We may catch a glimpse of an engineering prototype in the background of a shot of something else in an Engine Shed later in the year, but I don't expect to see anything properly until a painted sample is available. There's no point in showing sensitive data at the present! The alternative explanation is that there really isn't anything to show at the moment. 1 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now