Jump to content
 

The Engine Shed


Multiple identity account
 Share

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, Vistisen said:

Of course they might be saving something for Warley.

 

Unlikely given current management prefers the "good old days" of a big single announcement once a year in the Christmas/New Years timeframe.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, MGR Hooper! said:

 

Do you really expect every monthly addition to have something to WOW the thousands of us?

 

It's a platform to share updates on various models announced at the beginning of the year. That's exactly what they're doing. Maybe they're not throwing in a few clues etc. anymore...but that doesn't take away the purpose for TES which is to share monthly updates at Hornby HQ.

 

IMO the clues for forthcoming products, was interesting, but all it did was take away the extra excitement we normally looked forward to before they made their annual annual announcement. Because we knew what was coming, it was never as exciting anymore.

No, there doesn't need to be something to'WOW' everyone, but a blog with a bit of insight into what is actually going on on the ground would be better I think than what is there currently. Insight into the decisions/compromises they have to make when producing a particular model either in terms of what is needed in making it run well (where they need to put the motor, balancing it, providing space for a decoder etc), the decisions which lead to only being able to produce certain variations, how tooling allows for these variations.... all of these things would interest me, and as there is a continuous stream of new models being designed, these sort of decisions will always be being made. I suppose I'm interested in the careful thought that goes into turning a 3d scan into a design for a model.

 

I think these sort of insights are what caught everyone's attention and created a buzz around Hornby's products, not just here on rmweb but all over the hobby. Since it has turned into just another place to share pictures, it has lost the excitement it once had. At one time I could be pretty certain there would be a fair amount of information to read through as well as accompanying photos. Now it is mostly just a set of pictures with captions (not entirely, but often the longest bits of text are the introduction and conclusion at the end). I personally feel that is what Facebook, Instagram etc are for.

 

Also it is worth adding that whilst the engine shed was in its prime, I ended up buying many models I might not have otherwise bought because seeing the development of the model had made me take a real interest in it, and often I was impressed by the work and thought that had gone into it. I don't think it is a coincidence that in the last year I think I have only bought one item from Hornby, but in some recent years have probably ended up spending a four figure sums on their models. 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I guess the reality is that there isn't always "hot news" to share.

 

Like many people above I thought it was particularly under-whelming, but hey I guess it cant always be talking in detail about the latest project if there isn't one coming through. It would seem in their rush to get the Terriers to market the Prairie tank has continued to slip back. An update on when it is now likely to arrive might have been good.

 

 

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

I suppose for me it was more interesting when a bigger portion was following the development of something. But on the other hand there may not always be a project nearly complete to talk about. Likewise the RMweb is probably just a small number of Hornby followers on FaceB. Like anyone, I read it to extract the bits I want to know and ignore the rest.

 

As a tool though, the latest edition does have me thinking about buying the TTS Harry Potter loco. And I'm even thinking about the carriages and station buildings though I doubt I would ever have the space to build a Harry Potter layout.

Agree with comments above about the lack of Harry Potter noises on the TTS chip (maybe skip the music though, there are other wizardry noises to choose from).

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JSpencer said:

Agree with comments above about the lack of Harry Potter noises on the TTS chip (maybe skip the music though, there are other wizardry noises to choose from).

 

Perhaps Hornby could consider a Potter version of the TTS Vent Van, with a suitable livery (Wand supplies? Magical Books? Broomsticks in transit?) and appropriate sounds, it would give HP enthusiasts a little extra to enjoy!

 

I've an old HP trainset I picked up from a charity shop for 20 quid, so I don't have a need for the new issue, but I might buy an HP Sound Van.  :jester:

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Wickham Green said:

Didn't realise Hornby were working on a 'D' - as well as ................

 

There has been a rumour going around a while. If true, it really is something neither party can afford. Being an SECR fan, I really love the D class but I don't need 2 companies making them. And I don't need several examples in SECR liveries for my layout. 1 is fine, a couple are nice. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
4 hours ago, Wickham Green said:

Didn't realise Hornby were working on a 'D' - as well as ................

I think more a case of 'net natter' rather than a real rumour (but when does 'net natter' become a rumour?).  While Hornby does have an NRM licence I can hardly imagine somebody there giving the go ahead to two separate companies  to measure the engine etc especially when it was a very obvious candidate for the NRM's own brand of 'National Collection In Miniature'.

 

So perhaps the Hornby 'D rumour' was more a question of somebody's wishful thinking?

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

I think more a case of 'net natter' rather than a real rumour (but when does 'net natter' become a rumour?).  While Hornby does have an NRM licence I can hardly imagine somebody there giving the go ahead to two separate companies  to measure the engine etc especially when it was a very obvious candidate for the NRM's own brand of 'National Collection In Miniature'.

 

So perhaps the Hornby 'D rumour' was more a question of somebody's wishful thinking?

 

If true, we will see in January at the latest. There was equally a rumour for a Wainwright E class too which would be complimentary. 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
3 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

While Hornby does have an NRM licence I can hardly imagine somebody there giving the go ahead to two separate companies  to measure the engine etc especially when it was a very obvious candidate for the NRM's own brand of 'National Collection In Miniature'.

 

 

In another thread discussing anti-competitive practices some time go I got told off saying pretty much the same thing Mike.

 

As you yourself pointed out just because one manufacturer has scanned a loco doesn't mean a rival cannot be working on he same project but using  just drawings/ photos instead - or indeed measurements of the loco done a decade ago which never got used at the time.

 

 

Edited by phil-b259
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, phil-b259 said:

As you yourself pointed out just because one manufacturer has scanned a loco doesn't mean a rival cannot be working on he same project but using  just drawings/ photos instead - or indeed measurements of the loco done a decade ago which never got used at the time.

 

 

There's no reason a second manufacturer shouldn't scan the same loco .......... IF the first has managed to keep their scan secret.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
4 hours ago, adb968008 said:

The class 71 was made by two companies working from the same prototype. It’s an NRM Loco.

Yes but in that case the circumstances were very different and somebody having been turned down by the NRM went via a back door elsewhere to access the loco (which of course was not at an NRM site).

  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, adb968008 said:

The class 71 was made by two companies working from the same prototype. It’s an NRM Loco.

 

While the demise of the one company involved has a variety of reasons, it's probably a reasonable guess that duplicating a niche loco resulted in a financial result that was less than ideal and a likely contributor to the struggles faced until the plug was eventually pulled on that company.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
14 hours ago, mdvle said:

 

While the demise of the one company involved has a variety of reasons, it's probably a reasonable guess that duplicating a niche loco resulted in a financial result that was less than ideal and a likely contributor to the struggles faced until the plug was eventually pulled on that company.

Not least because their version seemed to lack performance, which is surely the most basic thing to get right in a model locomotive, and limited sales. 

  • Agree 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Ian J. said:

Is the dome on the Black Five on the wrong way round?

 

This happened a few years ago too with a Hornby late-crest Black Five, someone on here described how they popped it out of the body and then put the dome back the right way round! Not great though.

 

cheers,

 

Keith

 

Edited by tractionman
typo
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Would I be correct in posting that this month’s edition is closer to the standard we had come to expect from it and that maybe Hornby have taken due note of rumblings of discontent expressed here concerning recent lacklustre editions and no-shows ? At any rate,this one’s showing a return to form with views of the R&D’s visit to Ripley.

    
   Nice one gents.

 


 

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

  • RMweb Gold
2 hours ago, Ian Hargrave said:

Would I be correct in posting that this month’s edition is closer to the standard we had come to expect from it and that maybe Hornby have taken due note of rumblings of discontent expressed here concerning recent lacklustre editions and no-shows ? At any rate,this one’s showing a return to form with views of the R&D’s visit to Ripley.

    
   Nice one gents.

 


 

Not really.  Yes there is some improvement but we're still a long way from the 'hints in the background' and consequent analysis and froth interest that generated which was as important a part of The Engine Shed as the official reveals.  although it is definitely a good bit more 'adult' than the low it had sunk to not so long back.  Maybe Hornby is getting the message about moving forward to the way the market now works instead of its recent 'back to the '70s' approach?

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
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...