Jump to content
 

Q6


NHY 581
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just one question.... what were the 2 completely different vans?

 

Isn't this the LMS CCT? http://www.Hornby.com/uk-en/lms-4-wheel-cct-van.html

And this the FISH VAN? http://www.Hornby.com/uk-en/br-blue-spot-fish-van-e87085.html

No.

 

We were shown this

 

post-1303-0-99416500-1448745172.jpg

 

A pre-war CCT, with windows, flush sides and ends, and recessed doors.

Completely different diagram.

 

And this

 

post-1303-0-89876700-1448745210.jpg

 

A diagram 801, with external bracing and BR pattern brakegear.

Not the produced LNER 214/BR 800, with it's floor showing!

 

Mike

Edited by durham light infantry
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

On the Engine Shed release that covers this release, they show a still from a video taken in April 2015 according to Hornby, of the Q6 and title the still as a stereo copy, which is a 3D print, however further on in the release they show the Q6 in decoration samples with LNER and late BR liveries, which are clearly photos of decorated models from the tooling, so I would say the model is well advanced and nearly ready for production. Almost certainly Hornby started work on this 12-18 months before the April 2015 video, as by then they would have had to complete research and produce the Cads for the 3D print to be produced. I think it highly likely, but unfortunate, that they were working on this model just before DJ. Nobody's fault,unfortunately a result of competition and the picking of high placed poll prototypes.

That sounds about right.  There were rumours around 18 months to 2 years ago that Hornby were working on the Q6 and it was also hinted that the reason Bachmann said sometime back that they wouldn't do it was because they had heard that Hornby already had it well underway.  Announced and illustrated at decorated stage today suggests it has been in the making for around at least 2 years.

 

Its announcement therefore not only comes as no surprise to me but also the fact that it has only been announced now rather than previously.  Thus far apart from the Class 71 - about which I know absolutely nothing - there haven't been any locos announced this year by Hornby which weren't the subject of either strong rumours or nods and winks long before they were announced by anybody else.  That said, and while knowing little about the Q6 in detail terms, I do expect the Hattons 'King' to out do the Hornby one on detail in a number of respects.

 

In a crowded marketplace with an ever shrinking pool of 'desired' (by modellers) locos I'm afraid soem duplication is going to be unavoidable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And the late crest loco has electrification flashes factory fitted (at last) !!!!

 

Nice loco. Hope they put plenty of weight in it for haulage.

 

Edited to add. I know they worked around Leeds / Normanton, but how far south did these locos get in their everyday lives ? Did they get to Sheffield / Chesterfield , North Notts  areas at all ?

 

Brit15

The Selby-allocated engines regularly worked down to the North Notts. coalfields, being serviced at Annesley. Several pix exist of them on that shed in the 1950's. My reason for having one...or two!

 

Cheers from Oz,

Peter C.

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

And the late crest loco has electrification flashes factory fitted (at last) !!!!

 

Nice loco. Hope they put plenty of weight in it for haulage.

 

Edited to add. I know they worked around Leeds / Normanton, but how far south did these locos get in their everyday lives ? Did they get to Sheffield / Chesterfield , North Notts  areas at all ?

 

Brit15

 

From the photos I've seen, most notably in the Bellcode series of books on the West Riding, they were mainly used on local trip workings in the area south and east of Leeds.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the photos I've seen, most notably in the Bellcode series of books on the West Riding, they were mainly used on local trip workings in the area south and east of Leeds.

Worked over Woodhead to Mottram yard pre electrification, so you may be able to get away with an O4 banking one too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very pleased with this news indeed. Personally not bothered about the duplication issue, if the DJM one is as good or better I'll be getting one of theirs as well. Can't have too many of these beasts.

 

A design masterpiece - simple, rugged and efficient in operation, as well as being one of the most aesthetically pleasing prototypes I can think of. I wonder how many people with little interest in the LNER will end with an example?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

. Can't have too many of these beasts.

 

 Can't have too many of these beasts.

 

 

Couldn't agree more.My two,one Dave Alexander and one Chivers,will be pleased I am sure to have the Hornby model for company! Here is the Chivers.

post-3663-0-61202800-1448787978.jpg

post-3663-0-88965000-1448788052.jpg

  • Like 13
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest G567281

It looks as if Hornby have opted for the plate type buffer beam and the original tender. If so, this will provide some variation to the DJM model.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest G567281

. Can't have too many of these beasts.

 

 

 

Couldn't agree more.My two,one Dave Alexander and one Chivers,will be pleased I am sure to have the Hornby model for company! Here is the Chivers.

Very nice piece of modelling - thanks for sharing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron, great photos. I do like the NER signal box.

 

I can't help but agree with you regarding Q6's. I would like to think that we will have a few versions as they appear to be plain loco's but there are a number variations in the class. Tenders have various coal rails including cut down 3, 4 rails. The. There is th D vs oval cut outs in the tender frames. The one thing that is difficult for Hornby is the tender rails in plastic do seem to be heavy compared an etched version. I would like etched but I could understand if Hornby went for plastic due to cost implications.

 

Anyhow time will tell

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

These were imposing and good looking locomotives and the Hornby model looks like a cracker. I am sorely tempted but will probably give it a miss as I went down the road of buying stuff I liked before and ended up with a fleet of model trains that whilst full of lovely models which I loved might have been described as scatter brained and devoid of any sort of common thread. I probably will go for the B12 as I have fond memories of the old Triang Hornby model as a child and they were a very elegant machine but I think it'll stop there. Great news for NE fans though.

 

On the 3 pole vs. 5 pole motor, that is a non issue for me and there are enough 3 pole motored models that run as well as well as 5 pole versions that it makes no difference to my buying choice (I've never seen this used to beat Bachmann up and their models generally run extremely well). On the duplication stuff, it is difficult to know either if somebody has copied somebody else and if they did who copied who. There seems to be a readiness in some quarters to jump to conclusions about Hornby but I think it is less a case of nefarious and sharp practice than unfortunate co-incidence and a quite correct absence of market collusion. I'd prefer there wasn't duplication as it'd free up development slots for more stuff not done elsewhere but the market is what it is.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron, great photos. I do like the NER signal box.

 

I can't help but agree with you regarding Q6's. I would like to think that we will have a few versions as they appear to be plain loco's but there are a number variations in the class. Tenders have various coal rails including cut down 3, 4 rails. The. There is th D vs oval cut outs in the tender frames. The one thing that is difficult for Hornby is the tender rails in plastic do seem to be heavy compared an etched version. I would like etched but I could understand if Hornby went for plastic due to cost implications.

 

Anyhow time will tell

Thanks Doug.I do agree about the coal rails Having almost finished a PDK B16/1which of course has etched rails. It's a loco I have wanted for some time resisting the DJH kit and waiting seemingly forever for the London Road kit to appear! As Tony Wright has said the PDK kit is good but not without some shortcomings

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is splendid news for those who have been so persistent in arguing the case for the Q6. Hopefully, all them Geordies,Mackems and other adherents of NER stuff will buy this in the quantities required for commercial success. My motives in wishing the Q6 well are partly ulterior. If - if - this announcement has been influenced by wish-list polling,and the sales do well, it offers some encouragement to those of us who wish to see some attention being given to Scottish pre-grouping types. But,as I have commented before, we first have to agree on which particular loco. we want as a first step. Continuing to spraying our votes around a whole host of desirable classes will only lead to disappointment.  So,is it the J36 or the 812 class??

 

 

DR

Link to post
Share on other sites

So,is it the J36 or the 812 class??

 

After the last debate a few years ago the Caledonian 439 class was one that floated to the top. I think Caledonian blue livery is almost a necessity, though a Reid Atlantic is the one I'd love to see. 

 

Oops. Better not start a wish list off here though chaps.

Edited by Dick Turpin
Link to post
Share on other sites

If I were DJM I'd get back at Hornby with a Q1

The only loco built for racing in Britain - that should make it sell! That and its clerestory cab roof.

Another good looking NER engine, this one built in Getusahead :jester:

dh

Rather than the Q1 (LNER D18), I'd like to see a Class M/M1 (LNER D17/1). These engines performed well in the "Race to the North" in 1895 and there's the preserved example at Shildon for scanning - possibly under the Locomotion Models series of the National Collection in miniature.

 

Like others, I'm disappointed for DJM - is it reasonable to assume the DJM Q6 will proceed? I don't know, but will be watching carefully on here.

 

I'm afraid my hopes for a RTR Q6 in N Gauge have probably just bitten the dust!

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...