Hornby and their 'Electrics'....a change of direction?

[Talltim]

But the current one is a Railroad quality model now

[steveb860]

 

. Even a 20 year old in 1988 would only be 47 now, not yet in the age bracket which has the time, space and spending power to be the biggest target market for the manufacturers.10 years or so's time is the time to release.

 

I am 47 this week. I have no mortgage left to pay. My kid has flown the nest. For once I am ahead of the game.  

[jjb1970]

I may be in a minority here, but I'd like to see what Hornby could do if they tooled a diesel or electric Railroad model. Their new tooling Railroad steamers have worked pretty well in offering basic but decent models with sweet running qualities at attractive prices. If they were to do a new 91 as a Railroad model and get the basic shape right, a good mechanism and good finish (similar to what they achieved with the Hall, P2 etc) and offer it at a low price I think it could sell very well.

[Guest 40-something]

I think that there's a fallacy at work here, that revised, more detailed rtr models (in this case a 91) will make for a better layout; that they will be a magic bullet, increasing ones finescale credentials by the mere act of flexing the credit card. If your new and upgraded purchase romps along your layout in the company of mismatched stock, out of period road vehicles, buildings showing fingerprints and glue marks then however lovely the individual loco, carriage or wagon is, it won't improve the look of the whole.  Wombats point about synergy takes us halfway there, but to do justice to a top rank rtr model (or collection of models) the rest of your layout, the bit you build and can't buy, needs to be of a similarly high standard. It's the old adage about chain and week links; a layout will only look as good as its most pants parts.

 

In the specific case of the 91 I was most impressed by this model from the hands of George Dent. It shows what's possible from the current model; it convinces me far more than any model straight out of the box, however current, fine and upgraded it might be. I do wonder if the time spent lobbying for new models might be more productively spent honing skills and making models.

 

Edited to include link I forgot to do earlier.

My bold above..

 

I completely agree, and I think that defines a railway modeller rather than someone who likes model railways.  I cut my teeth on detailing old Hornby/Lima/Mainline models and was always pleased when I created something different from anyone else.  I still use the skills honed back in the 80's these days.  Even if a model looks like it may not need much done, very simple tweaks can change the look of it, and again I get the happy feeling that my model is different from other folks models.

 

Hi,

 

Have you priced all of the items and equipment, adhesives etc required to produce the upgraded george dent 91?   It is a cracking renovation. But, then add to that Express Models lighting for the loco and its not at all cheap.   Plus, a lot of guys want to 'hone' their skills elsewhere and not hacking away at an expensive model.   The risk of screwing it up and having a awful conversion attempt chugging around your perfect layout wont do anyone any favours.

 

Also, some guys (not me), just like to display their models, not run them.  Or even run them on a club layout.   Sadly, not everyone has the time, money, skills to revise an outdated model to finer standards.  

 

The point about buildings with glue marks and finger prints.... is that directly relevant to having a lovely, accurate, modern tooled loco whizzing around your layout?.... for some modellers the finger printed, glue marked houses at the side of the line might be all they are capable of.   Not everyone is a fine craftsman.  Not every one is of an age where they have the eye sight, nimbleness and dexterity in their hands to produce excellent scenic displays or neatly converted locos. I do however take your point that crappy scenics and glue everywhere doesnt do the RTR model to high standards any justice.

 

In my view, having modern tooled up to date Electrics available to buy RTR is long over due, for years the 'steamies' among the modelling community have been spoiled with their highly detailed locos.   These are truly beautiful and stunning to have, but what about the modern image modeller?...for this hobby to survive we need to start catering more for the modeller who grew up with diesel and electric, not in the steam era.  As with due respect to those who grew up with steam - you are not the future of the hobby.   We need to get younger modellers in to the hobby and therefore new models of locos that ran in the 2000's (and still do run) is where we need to be heading.   Therefore the class 90,91,92 etc are good examples to start with.

 

Again my bold...

 

If you have to go out an buy in all the bits and pieces, yes it can add up, but it'll still be a good bit cheaper than buying a newly tooled 91.  With the 71's being priced at £150, say a retooled 91 was released, it'd take a couple of years to get to the market, what would the price be then?  £170?  £200?  Whereas you could buy an existing 91, buy all the bits you need and still have plenty left to buy a DVT and a stack of MK IV's.  

 

But buy all those bits and pieces and the majority of them will do plenty more items of rolling stock.  The most expensive thing mentioned in George's conversion are the Ultrascale wheels, but these are not essential.  As for Express Models lighting kits, the individual components of these lighting kits cost less than buttons.  True you have to build it yourself, and there you'll learn another skill.

 

I'd much rather spend a few evenings pottering away creating something than taking yet another model out of a box and placing on the track.  To me railway modelling is not about running trains, its about creating the ones I used to see.

[Vistisen]

Hope you don't get offended by this, but I'm going to explain this plain and simple and very straightforward.

 

When a topic (poll) is conducted to see who wants a Class 91, why would you include an option for those who don't want one? Those who don't want one can simply avoid the topic. If someone has a problem with something that they have no interest in then what does that say?

 

Do you have a similar problem every year when polls are conducted? You obviously just don't vote for something you don't want. Similarly in the "Class 91 Poll" just don't vote. It's for people who like the Class 91 only and it's to see who is ok with the current offering and who wants a new one.

 

If you want something produced that you like feel free to start a poll of contact the likes of Dapol, Hornby, Heljan, Bachmann etc. to suggest it.

 

Any wonder your head got bitten off.....you have issues with silly things.

 

I'm not offended , I have learned that logic is not always enough when debating in public forums, So you are welcome to your opinion, as I am to mine. But as someone who produces statistics as part of my job i can tell you that no Hornby marketings man will be impressed by the validity of this poll. I would get this thrown back in my face by my customers if it was my output to them

[Trains4U]

And you know damned well that if you actually DO go and super detail a 91 yourself, Hornby or Bachmann will announce a new one five minutes after you finish it.

 

You know its true.

 

It's the only way its going to happen....

[Dunsignalling]

/

In fact I would suggest it's more down to Hornbys Southern bias ( not to the exclusion of all else , before anyone complains) ,

Any Southern bias in electric traction vs Eastern Region can easily be explained by the relative numbers of prototype EMU classes on the two regions. Where electric locos are concerned, Hornby have covered ER classes 86/90/91 - all to the standards ruling at the time they were released as was the ex-Lima Class 73. The Class 71 - the first southern pure electric loco to be covered, is not yet out and will presumably be to the standards ruling at the time of release. Any decision on upgrading the 25Kv types will presumably be influenced by the popularity of the previous versions and/or the announcement of models from competitors. Note the number of upgrades the A4 and A3 have received over the years.   

 

As for any overall bias, compare Hornby steam locomotive models to post-2000 standards:

 

LNER: P2, A4, A3, B1, B17, J15, K1, L1, O1 = 9.

 

SR: MN (rebuilt), WC, WC (rebuilt), M7, N15, Q1, T9, V, 700 =  9

 

I've left out several older models which no longer cut the mustard, LNER, B12, D49, J52, J83, J94, N2 = 7.

 

Southern, Terrier, E2  = 2. The tooling for the latter was destroyed to make Thomas so it arguably doesn't count.

 

Overall, the SR will draw almost level with the MN, S15 and 0415 against the D16, and slightly ahead if one only counts the "good stuff" but it is quite possible that further, as yet unannounced, LNER types may be in preparation.

 

John

[Andy Hayter]

 

 

  I am not saying everyone models the era of their youth, but the vast majority do.

 

 

 

 

Sorry to be a stick in the mud and burst this bubble, but to say that the vast majority model the railways of their youth does not stack up against the data.

 

WE had some data a couple of years ago showing the ear that modellers here modelled and their age.  In order to get the number of modellers in each age range to match the eras being modelled, the very best result was that 37% of the poll respondents were modelling another period.  Note the very best, the reality is that the percentage is likely to be much more than this statistic fitting of the data. 

 

So if you say the majority model the railways of their youth, then I cannot disagree.  If you say the vast majority then I have to object to the use of the word vast.

 

Simply thinking about it will show that there must be substantial numbers who model outside of the period of their formative years.

I think it inconceivable that there will be anyone here who remembers pre-grouping, let alone from their formative years.  Yet there are quite a number of modellers of the pre-grouping era.   Look at the speed with which the few pre-grouping models have sold out - 9J, C Class etc..

The same is probably true for many regarding the grouping era.  You would have to be at least 75years old for the oft quoted mantra to apply.  I am sure there will be some but not the 20% that responded to the poll. 

Similarly there was quite a sizable number who model the current scene.  A few I am sure will be lucky children/teenagers with parents with large disposable income but I would suggest the majority  are older modellers who like to model what they see today.

 

So please, while making the case, please do not over-egg the agreement with what are clearly exaggerations.

 

Incidentally I would be pleased with a greater range of AC electrics, so I am not arguing against the principle. 

[Ozexpatriate]

It is a general rule of thumb that the vast majority of modellers model the era of their formative years.

Sorry to be a stick in the mud and burst this bubble, but to say that the vast majority model the railways of their youth does not stack up against the data.

(My emphasis) 

 

I concur. It is demonstrably not true with some simple maths.

 

Based on survey data, nor is there any linear proportionality between modellers age and period modelled.

 

The steam to diesel transition period is the most popular. It is true that lots of people remember it and had have an understandable fondness for the period but arguably it is also the period with the most variety and opportunity to represent both the 'old' railway and the 'new' railway.

 

According to data, the late 80s happens to be one of the least proportionately modelled periods relative to data on people responding to online modelling surveys.

(Data is from surveys in 2012.)

 

Of course it is still popular with some, but survey data simply does not track the 'remembering your youth as motivation for modelled era' concept.

 

Andy Y had talked about doing a new survey, but this seems to be on hold. I don't expect radical changes were we to do a new survey.

[Dunsignalling]

Sorry to be a stick in the mud and burst this bubble, but to say that the vast majority model the railways of their youth does not stack up against the data.

 

WE had some data a couple of years ago showing the ear that modellers here modelled and their age.  In order to get the number of modellers in each age range to match the eras being modelled, the very best result was that 37% of the poll respondents were modelling another period.  Note the very best, the reality is that the percentage is likely to be much more than this statistic fitting of the data. 

 

So if you say the majority model the railways of their youth, then I cannot disagree.  If you say the vast majority then I have to object to the use of the word vast.

 

Simply thinking about it will show that there must be substantial numbers who model outside of the period of their formative years.

I think it inconceivable that there will be anyone here who remembers pre-grouping, let alone from their formative years.  Yet there are quite a number of modellers of the pre-grouping era.   Look at the speed with which the few pre-grouping models have sold out - 9J, C Class etc..

The same is probably true for many regarding the grouping era.  You would have to be at least 75years old for the oft quoted mantra to apply.  I am sure there will be some but not the 20% that responded to the poll. 

Similarly there was quite a sizable number who model the current scene.  A few I am sure will be lucky children/teenagers with parents with large disposable income but I would suggest the majority  are older modellers who like to model what they see today.

 

So please, while making the case, please do not over-egg the agreement with what are clearly exaggerations.

 

Incidentally I would be pleased with a greater range of AC electrics, so I am not arguing against the principle. 

If 37% of respondents model other than the era of their formative years and you deduct the substantial number who model earlier times as well as a hefty portion who model what they remember as young adults (e.g. BR blue, Sectorization etc.), that probably doesn't leave too many older modellers following the current scene and they may be counterbalanced by younger modellers interested in the past.

 

However you cut it, if you assume that ten years (say from age 8 to 18) is about as big a time frame you can cover with any hope of reasonable overall authenticity, that cohort's interests are spread (albeit unevenly) between the 17 or so decades of railway history that fall outside their formative years whereas 63% evidently do model what they grew up around (whenever that was).

 

63% vs 37% might not qualify as "vast" but it's not far off it and any politician would sell his granny for that share of a vote!

 

John

[wombatofludham]

I'm not so sure we can make assumptions about the number of people modelling an era relative to the age of their youth based on an online survey.  My personal experience is that in addition to myself I know five other active modellers, one of whom models Rail blue circa 1975 (when he was 12), three others model Sectorisation (when they would have been in their early teens) and one models transition era steam/diesel (when he was in his teens).  As for me, I'm planning an LMS layout (when I was -30) and a West Coast electric layout covering 1966-2006 (when I was 3-43) and of course have Kings Oak which is modelled on the era when I worked at Centro in my late 30s.  So, every modeller I know models an era based on their youth.  I'm the odd one out. 

 

Of course only myself and one other are active on modelling internet forums.  So, on the basis I assume I don't have a particularly weird or eccentric social circle, I'm not sure how representative any online survey can be.

[Ozexpatriate]

I'm not sure how representative any online survey can be.

Certainly imperfect, but better than extrapolating our own preferences into an assumed norm.  Data is better than guesswork.

 

The problem with our gut instincts is that we, being of sound minds, perceive that we each meet the standard that we are reasonable people and assume that most other reasonable people will be like-minded in our preferences.

 

It is certainly true that lots of people model what they remember when they were young* and that this is quite likely the mode of the response for each age group. But a plurality is different from a majority.

 

* Which I think is great by the way.

 

My preferred period is the grouping period but I was not born until much much later.  

 

I don't assume that everyone is like me, but that perhaps 14% of British outline enthusiasts model the grouping period as their primary interest feels about right, even though my gut wants to tell me that number should be bigger. (Who wouldn't want to model the grouping period? ) Most of my fellow grouping period modellers don't remember it either. It's not mathematically possible.

 

Were I modelling what I remember well, I'd model the Brisbane southside in the transition between diesel and electric working. A model of a representative diesel from that time was just released. I'm tempted as a side project, but won't give up on the GWR at this point.

[reevesthecat]

I am sure we have done the AC electric debate before somewhere. I think it's telling that while Hornby were quick to jump on the Bachmann bandwagon with the 3rd rail units they haven't followed with the AC electrics. This suggests to me that they have a lack of faith in the area. The only saving grace is we are getting to the point where the manufacturers are looking around asking what's left to do? Incidentally has anyone asked Simon Kohler on his thoughts via his blog about this subject he may be able to shed some light?

Mark

[griffgriff]

Do we have another wish list car crash on our hands. Please feel free to lobby Hornby (or anyone else) but no one has yet to mention the lack of decent catenenary. Probably the reason why overhead electrics do no sell. If you want to model (and not just play trains) OHE means hard work. (Should I mention the initials JSW?)

 

The manufacturers have seen some poor returns on their speculations over the years and in the current financial climate I can only expect them to be timid. Let's see how the 90 sells then after that we might have a better idea about the appetite we modelled have for things overhead electric (25kv)

[WDP4D]

Incidentally has anyone asked Simon Kohler on his thoughts via his blog about this subject he may be able to shed some light?

Mark

 

Yes I did a couple of weeks ago. Was told it wasn't enough to include in a blog.....

[Andy Hayter]

Dunsignalling

 

I think you have missed the point.

The 37% of modellers who have to model outside of the period of their formative years is an absolute minimum.  This is the number that is required to make the age statistic fit the same pattern as the era modelled statistic.

 

So, if in addition we have a pre-tops BR diesel (wo)man, who likes steam and models the post nationalisation era, then there must be another modeller whose choice goes in the other direction.  These modellers cannot be estimated from the stats as provided.  Hence I say the 37%is an absolute minimum.  The truth is that the numbers are quite likely to be much nearer to 50:50 - the numbers as provided do not allow any estimation of that, and the only estimate you could make is to look at exhibition layouts and layouts in the mags to get a very crude idea.

 

 

 

 

 

As for the "I know x modellers who fit/don't fit ....." arguments;  I am afraid that that does not constitute any statistical significance.  When I was in the UK I belonged to a club whose membership largely followed the LNER.  More that 80% of the membership had LNER models that they brought along and ran and displayed on the club layout.  Of those only 1 was old enough to have seen the LNER.   On that basis I could wrongly assume that 80% modellers chose the LNER and 5% modellers modelled the period of their formative years - both patently nonsense.   The simple fact is that we tend to group around like minded folk and therefore get a distorted view of what the world is like.

 

 

EDIT:  The BR Diesel to post nationalisation may not be the best example and in fact a better example would be in the reverse direction.

[Fireline]

Another thing to consider when bombarding people with requests for items is their schedule. Simon Kohler has previously confirmed that the Hornby ranges for a given year are set several years in advance. If you request something, the only way it would appear the following year is by coincidence. You are looking at three to four years ahead before things would be open to change. This is what makes me laugh when people accuse Hornby (and other companies) of releasing items only because another firm have announced it. (Remember the Blue Pullman, anyone?). The design process alone would mean that companies cannot react instantly to announcements. I suspect that is also why DJ Models have not produced anything yet. They were very up front with what they were doing, but announced them before the design stage. These things take time.

 

So, by all means, petition for new items to be built, but (like trains in real life), expect delays!!!!

[Dunsignalling]

Dunsignalling

 

I think you have missed the point.

The 37% of modellers who have to model outside of the period of their formative years is an absolute minimum.  This is the number that is required to make the age statistic fit the same pattern as the era modelled statistic.

 

So, if in addition we have a pre-tops BR diesel (wo)man, who likes steam and models the post nationalisation era, then there must be another modeller whose choice goes in the other direction.  {1]

 

 

 

EDIT:  The BR Diesel to post nationalisation may not be the best example and in fact a better example would be in the reverse direction. [2]

The graph posted above suggests that your assertion [1] is incorrect but that [2] as per your edit is near the mark. (numbers inserted by me)

 

Assuming some movement into eras later than modellers' own, it is clear that fewer than half of those whose formative years fall later than the time of BR Blue (pre-TOPS) model theirs and that there are insufficient "incomers" to make up the shortfall.

 

The figures for BR Late crest and BR blue (pre-TOPS) are fairly close to balancing, though we can't establish from the graph how many of those in the red column come directly from the corresponding blue column or the numbers moving out of "their" era in these periods. The excess of blue over red shows that there is clearly an element of that, but we cannot gauge from the way the poll results have been presented, how much more is being disguised by incomers.

 

So, we see a clear bias of movement into, rather than out of, early eras (before 1956) and the converse for later ones (from TOPS blue onward) with approximate balance in the middle.

 

For me, it indicates (or, at worst, strongly suggests) that transfers of allegiance to earlier periods heavily outweigh those to later ones though it unfortunately cannot reveal how many eras "movers" have leap-frogged to get to where they are now. 

 

John

[GordonC]

Which part of my text mentioned a class 90 or MK2f coaches, I was not using any specific models - it was purely a what if scenario of a single years releases being for one era/region with WCML electrics being that example.

 

If you're using WCML electrics as an example then those would be the only 'related' models that I can think of which have been announced which we are waiting for. But the delay between 'announcement' and actually appearing in the shops is not uniform for one model to another. So even if they were announced at the same time there may be a significant difference in when buyers would actually have to find the money

[phil gollin]

.

 

I think the discussion is getting rather circular.

 

However,    one thing I would note is that many people model the mini-transitions, i.e. grouping into early BR green, early BR green into late BR green (my own "era"), late BR green into BR Blue and of course,  BR Blue into sectors ......    It allows more variety.

[Fireline]

.

 

I think the discussion is getting rather circular.

 

However,    one thing I would note is that many people model the mini-transitions, i.e. grouping into early BR green, early BR green into late BR green (my own "era"), late BR green into BR Blue and of course,  BR Blue into sectors ......    It allows more variety.

 

Then there are those of us that model preservation, thus allowing for an "anything goes" policy....

[298]

I think that there's a fallacy at work here, that revised, more detailed rtr models (in this case a 91) will make for a better layout; that they will be a magic bullet, increasing ones finescale credentials by the mere act of flexing the credit card. If your new and upgraded purchase romps along your layout in the company of mismatched stock, out of period road vehicles, buildings showing fingerprints and glue marks then however lovely the individual loco, carriage or wagon is, it won't improve the look of the whole.  Wombats point about synergy takes us halfway there, but to do justice to a top rank rtr model (or collection of models) the rest of your layout, the bit you build and can't buy, needs to be of a similarly high standard. It's the old adage about chain and week links; a layout will only look as good as its most pants parts.

 

In the specific case of the 91 I was most impressed by this model from the hands of George Dent. It shows what's possible from the current model; it convinces me far more than any model straight out of the box, however current, fine and upgraded it might be. I do wonder if the time spent lobbying for new models might be more productively spent honing skills and making models.

 

Edited to include link I forgot to do earlier.

The most sense I've read in a long time.

 

Speaking as an ex-UK OHLE modeller (who now models various US & Cuban electrified lines), the Bachmann 85 release was like having a door slammed in my face, as I realised I'd have to upgrade several dozen existing fleet members to the same standard. Not impossible, but unfortunately my modelling interests had wandered elsewhere.

 

I thought back then and still believe now and in the future that modelling OHLE will always be a modellers and prototype observers past time, you simply can't go and buy a respectable looking British based commercial "plonk and play" catenary system as it will always have the limitations as shown by Sommerfeldt (etc). The Dapol masts might have been welcomed when first released but have proven that the only way to model anything but a single electrified line using out of the box components is if that box contains a man with a soldering iron who will come and build it for you.

[Talltim]

You forgot the ellipsis

[Dunsignalling]

Then there are those of us that model preservation, thus allowing for an "anything goes" policy....

Doesn't that come under the heading of "current", listed as post-Privatization in the survey? 

 

John

[Vistisen]

Doesn't that come under the heading of "current", listed as post-Privatization in the survey? 

 

John

Actually no The Bluebell Railway has been around for over 50 years, so you could do an era Blue Pre TOPS and still do the 'preserved' steam stuff