Hornby Class 423 4-VEP

[frobisher]

I thin what SAC was getting at is that if they managed to get the 225's looking spot on now whenever they made them 10-20 years ago, I had a class 91 when I was about five so that's nearly 20 years ago.

 

Except the 91/DVT and MK4s are not "spot on". Try and tell me that the valances attached to the bogies don't jump out and grab you by the throat? The 225 looks toylike. Yes, it has a profile that suits moulded detail like the Pendalino and the 395, but those two aren't anything like as heavily compromised and are produced to a much higher standard (even in the Railroad 395...) than the 225.

 

Then why on earth have they managed to made a number of mistakes on the 4-VEP? Especially with the ability to laser 'scan' the bodywork and build a 3D model on a computer - if they were using works drawings then that's different. But I seriously wonder why they didn't just ask SWT to borrow 'Gordon Pettit' and scan that?

 

Because laser scanning isn't cheap and is really only ncessary where you don't have good works drawings in the first place or a notoriously difficult prototype (Western...). At the end of the day you still need an experience CAD artist to interpret and refine the captured data.

 

Oh, and the bogie issue would still have bit them on the bum (it's a common component throughout the train for which you'd not be making indivdual mouldings - the handedness has caught manufacturers out several times already).

[Matloughe]

For someone who doesn't model the 'modern image' and being five years old at the time my Intercity Executive 225 set (Cl90 + 2 Mk III's + Cl91) looked pretty spot on to me - I don't think mine even had valances.

 

As you say Laser Scanning is expensive - yes I agree; however at £140 a pop for a 4-Car train I am sure the economies of scale would have worked out in their favour in the end. If Dapol (I think - might be Bachmann) can Laser Scan a Class 205 (Not sure if the scan still forms the basis of the model - I remember reading in the press at the time) for a model then why can't Hornby? Also it would have shown them that the bogies are 'Handed' And with the correct scans it wouldn't have been to difficult to modify the CAD image to produce a CIG/BIG. A 4-VEP I feel was a poor choice of subject, it appeared in less liveries - loathed by passengers thanks to its hard benchlike seating, cold & draughty. (Brrr)

 

But I am merely a consumer at the end of the day. And not going to argue over the relative issues - I will buy a Hornby VEP but as I said before its no high on my list.

 

Cheers,

~ Gary

[Legend]

Doesn't it come back to the Schizophrenic nature of Hornby ie one foot in the toy and one foot in the modellers market? The IC225 and Pendolino were pretty good for the toy market. They are built to a certain price point, necessary to sell in trainsets. For that reason they have molded detail and standard limby motors with traction tyres. In some cases that standard is pretty good and will also satisfy the more serious railway modeller, although I do seem to recall there being some debate with derailments on the Pendolino and whether the motor was strong enough to cope with 8/9 car trains.

 

The problem then is that the VEP is for the enthusiast/modeller market yet it looks like it was built to trainset market specs. For that reason you have a Limby motor and solid corridor positions. I really find this last point indefensible. I mean who could have considered this adaquate for an enthusiasts model? You would have thought someone would have questioned this at the design stage. I think its just too tempting for Hornby to take shortcuts and cut the specification of the model because of their trainset background. Why bother with a specific drive train for the VEP when they can get away with their standard Limby power unit. Its probably just too tempting at the project costing committee stage to go for the low cost/high margin option. This is where trainset confusion sets in. What is good enough for the trainset market isn't for the more discerning enthusiast. I think there are still functions in Hornby who don't get that.

 

Bachmann being a model company first and formost don't have that conflict.

 

Which brings us back to Mr Martin. Could it be that Hornby now realise that they can't achieve their margin expectations on these highly detailed models while keeping prices low enough for market acceptance(ie in line with Bachmann) That could lead to slightly lower spec models for the mass market or to them diversifying into what they perceive to be higher margin markets, Olympic taxis, keyrings etc.

[Ceptic]

l wouldn't give up on Hornby, altogether. As others have said, lt does take them a little time to tweak, decades in some cases.

 

The major re-working of Stanier pacifics, Cl. 5, A4, A3, Castle, Schools, the N15 (what a beauty), the tender variations, motors in locos, etc.,.. spring to mind.

Even the MN has had some minor work done. (l do wish they'd improve the shape of that firebox and the tenders' tumblehome, though. The BoB's and WC's tenders' being 'spot on').

 

With such a large range of products to keep their eye on, Hornby drop themselves, and the ball, 'in it',... from time to time.

Maybe the guys doing the measuring / scanning, QC, QA, FI, etc,,..are the same fellas who worked on the Gresley corridors ?. Maybe, they should have gone to 'Specsavers' ?.

Or, maybe, the VEP was another mundane Friday afternoon 'Rush job' ?.

 

lf everything in life were perfect,..Wouldn't life be....well... boring ?.

 

Here's to another ten years. Cheers

Edited September 26, 2011 by Ceptic

[S.A.C Martin]

 

So seem to be the 4VEP reviews...

 

Yes, and I can only think there's something else at work there. In one publication the 4VEP has the same overall score as the Beattie Well Tank. I find that rather unbelievable given the sheer amount of work to make the 4VEP "right".

[S.A.C Martin]

 

Except the 91/DVT and MK4s are not "spot on". Try and tell me that the valances attached to the bogies don't jump out and grab you by the throat? The 225 looks toylike.

 

Yes, it's simplified, and yes it looks to some extent toylike - but are the buffers on the right way round, are the pantographs in the correct position, and do the bogies face the right way? I used it as an example because much of the design ethos in the all-moulded ideal appears to have been similar to that with the 4VEP.

 

 

Yes, it has a profile that suits moulded detail like the Pendalino and the 395, but those two aren't anything like as heavily compromised and are produced to a much higher standard (even in the Railroad 395...) than the 225.

 

I agree. Perhaps I should have concentrated on the 395 and Pendolino in my argument in the first place.

 

Because laser scanning isn't cheap and is really only ncessary where you don't have good works drawings in the first place or a notoriously difficult prototype (Western...). At the end of the day you still need an experience CAD artist to interpret and refine the captured data.

 

No disagreement with you there Frobisher. I think the Dapol Western thread has proved that beyond doubt (but in a very agreeably positive way for the best possible outcome).

 

Oh, and the bogie issue would still have bit them on the bum (it's a common component throughout the train for which you'd not be making indivdual mouldings - the handedness has caught manufacturers out several times already).

 

Except that's not strictly true. There are four different bogie types in the 4VEP; the first type are the trailing bogies which have been designed to take the separately fitted guard rails, 3rd rail shoes and steps. It has been designed incorrectly and needed, effectively, cutting and shutting to get it right.

 

The second type are the B5 bogies which are similar to the trailing bogies but are designed without the holes to plug in the extra fitted detail, as that on the trailing bogies.

 

Then there are the bogies on the powered coach which should be identical, but on close examination are actually different mouldings altogether: one designed to take the Limby motor arrangement, the other has identical external detail but is designed for the pickups only inside.

 

So that is four different bogie moulds utilized throughout the train, three of which are correct to prototype (but at the factory may have been put in the wrong way round, an easy fix however), and a fourth mould which has been incorrectly designed from the outset.

 

Such clear extensive work to get all the different types on the train without shortcuts should be praised, and I agree with the poster (Welly?) that Hornby have done an excellent job with the B5 bogies. But the trailing bogies are wrong - there's no two ways about it, and this is an inaccuracy which can only be fixed by replacing them altogether or careful cut and shutting as I did earlier in the thread.

Edited September 26, 2011 by S.A.C Martin

[spamcan61]

 

With such a large range of products to keep their eye on, Hornby drop themselves, and the ball, 'in it',... from time to time.

Maybe the guys doing the measuring / scanning, QC, are the same fellas who worked on the Gresley corridors ?. Maybe, they should have gone to 'Specsavers' ?.

Or, maybe, the VEP was another mundane Friday afternoon 'Rush job' ?.

 

lf everything was perfect,..Wouldn't life be boring ?.

 

Here's to another ten years. Cheers

 

A good comparison in that both the VEP solid corridor partitions and the Gresley coach profile were deliberate design decisions.

[Trevellan]

A 4-VEP I feel was a poor choice of subject, it appeared in less liveries - loathed by passengers thanks to its hard benchlike seating, cold & draughty. (Brrr)

 

I disagree Gary. On that score I believe Hornby got it absolutely right. The sheer ubiquity of the VEPs make them suitable for almost any SR layout from 1967 to 2004. In terms of liveries I think of at least five and there are opportunities to issue different number variations and weathered options. It could have become a solid core product for Hornby for many years. I only hope that it's Bachmann who will eventually produce HAPs, CIGs and TCs to the standard of their CEPs and EPBs.

 

As to the real-life customer dimension, I found the VEPs, CEPs and CIGs to be as comfortable as their Mk3-based counterparts and in their final years I actively sought them out if there was a choice. Still, each to their own!

Edited September 26, 2011 by Trevellan

[Gwiwer]

Love 'em or hate 'em there were more Veps built (194) than Cigs (138) or Ceps (112) and as they typically worked singly or in pairs rather than in threes (or pairs either side of a Big or Bep) they worked more services to more places than the other types by some considerable margin.

 

They were for a generation or more the ubiquitous "semi-fast" unit of the BR Southern Region and were seen (and used) by passengers from Margate to Bournemouth. As such we have a unit which represents a widely-seen and well-known type, probably more so than the Cig / Big units which were more restricted in their operation to the Brighton and Portsmouth routes for much of their lives.

[frobisher]

As you say Laser Scanning is expensive - yes I agree; however at £140 a pop for a 4-Car train I am sure the economies of scale would have worked out in their favour in the end. If Dapol (I think - might be Bachmann) can Laser Scan a

Class 205 (Not sure if the scan still forms the basis of the model - I remember reading in the press at the time) for a model then why can't Hornby?

 

As I understand it, Dapol managed to scan several different potential models in the the same short time period, most of which didn't have good works drawings. It kind of made sense to do it that way. The 4VEP is not something that you should need to scan however as there are plenty of good drawings out there. The "problems" arose at the point the CAD was put together and at least one of them (the position of the gangway door) was clearly a tooling choice that had been made inadvisably and would have happened even if you'd scanned the beastie in all probability.

 

Also it would have shown them that the bogies are 'Handed' And with the correct scans it wouldn't have been to difficult to modify the CAD image to produce a CIG/BIG.

 

It's unlikely that a full scan would have been done of all bogies - you would however do thorough scans of representative bogies which requires the feet on the ground to know that there may be an issue here. The handedness should have been picked up by checking reference photos though. Laser scanning isn't a magical panacea all by itself - just look at the steps Dapol are going through with their Western (including for corrections of errors put in by the CAD artists when interpreting the raw scan data...).

 

The CAD they have is just as applicable to modification to produce a CIG as a scanned one would be in any case, and would require separate tooling so perhaps if they did they could sort out the issues at that point.

Edited September 26, 2011 by frobisher

[frobisher]

Such clear extensive work to get all the different types on the train without shortcuts should be praised, and I agree with the poster (Welly?) that Hornby have done an excellent job with the B5 bogies. But the trailing bogies are wrong - there's no two ways about it, and this is an inaccuracy which can only be fixed by replacing them altogether or careful cut and shutting as I did earlier in the thread.

 

The trailing bogies are also B5s, and I'd put good money that they shared CAD work with the non-shoefitted bogies. Someone dropped the ball here, no two ways about it though.

[S.A.C Martin]

 

The trailing bogies are also B5s, and I'd put good money that they shared CAD work with the non-shoefitted bogies. Someone dropped the ball here, no two ways about it though.

 

I wouldn't disagree: it is as if, looking at them from purely a layman's perspective, the one set (the non shoe fitted set) had been developed up to a point, with the second set (the shoe fitted set) continuing the development from that point on. It is a pity as the detail on the bogies is exquisitely moulded. The more I add the weathering powders down the train, the more I see that everything under the bodies is very well designed and moulded.

 

It is a right shame really that those specific details are wrong. Modelling wise, it detracts from the very good work below the body.

Edited September 26, 2011 by S.A.C Martin

[Uk_Steve]

i still think there is a market for a fully running and maybe a more detailed "corrected issues"

4 vep in due course in various liveries

 

 

all i want is a working train and no hassle 4 vep, Im not asking for much i dont think?

I am sure i am not alone on this statement i would buy again in a heartbeat if 1

come up with nearly all issues corrected in due course from Hornby.

 

So Hornby this is 1 customer which will buy your train if all sorted however if Bachmann

did the same i think you may of lost the market in the future on these trains

 

its really down to Hornby as a company what they are going to do i think in this situation

 

all the best from Steve

Edited September 26, 2011 by Uk_Steve

[frobisher]

i still think there is a market for a fully running and more detailed "corrected issues"

4 vep in due course in various liveries

 

Yup

 

Just a thought, and probably in the realms of an "easy fix" for Hornby on the non window compartments issue. They're already doing a printing operation on that component to put the partition colour on it, so why not just mould the whole thing clear, and print the windows and colour the seats? New printing masks have to be cheaper than a retool/new tooling - okay would probably stick the price up a little, but certainly not to the extent that mucking about with the moulds would?

 

They could then put the interior signage on the compartment windows...

[Matloughe]

 

I disagree Gary. On that score I believe Hornby got it absolutely right. The sheer ubiquity of the VEPs make them suitable for almost any SR layout from 1967 to 2004. In terms of liveries I think of at least five and there are opportunities to issue different number variations and weathered options. It could have become a solid core product for Hornby for many years. I only hope that it's Bachmann who will eventually produce HAPs, CIGs and TCs to the standard of their CEPs and EPBs.

 

As to the real-life customer dimension, I found the VEPs, CEPs and CIGs to be as comfortable as their Mk3-based counterparts and in their final years I actively sought them out if there was a choice. Still, each to their own!

I honestly say I never considered it that way Trevellan, I knew there were more VEP's then CIG's or BIG's - but you are right for at least a generation they were the semi-fast train of choice. I must say I always found CIG's as more comfortable perhaps it was just the seats had that slight bit of extra space all in all it was indeed a long time ago now - perhaps I need to defog my rose tinted glasses I use to look at the past.

 

 

The "problems" arose at the point the CAD was put together and at least one of them (the position of the gangway door) was clearly a tooling choice that had been made inadvisably and would have happened even if you'd scanned the beastie in all probability.

 

Very true Frobisher - perhaps I feel more then a little let down by Hornby and that is what is influencing my decision here. I was looking forwards to a VEP but after it being priced out of my budget range (for the moment) and latterly seeing the issues others have raised perhaps that is why I am against it and am 'Hornby-bashing' as it were; the bogie problem I could live with infact my T9 still has its tender chassis the wrong way round - I never bothered to do anything about; it its just the front end doesn't do it for me (on the VEP) I am afraid - the pencil mod & window surrounds go a long way to improving things however.

 

I do look forward to some HAPs if it happens but that is for another thread.

 

Cheers,

~ Gary

Edited September 26, 2011 by Matloughe

[S.A.C Martin]

 

Yup

 

Just a thought, and probably in the realms of an "easy fix" for Hornby on the non window compartments issue. They're already doing a printing operation on that component to put the partition colour on it, so why not just mould the whole thing clear, and print the windows and colour the seats? New printing masks have to be cheaper than a retool/new tooling - okay would probably stick the price up a little, but certainly not to the extent that mucking about with the moulds would?

 

They could then put the interior signage on the compartment windows...

 

I really, really like this idea. How about it Hornby?

[Uk_Steve]

 

I really, really like this idea. How about it Hornby?

 

being a Private Investor on the London Stock Exchange

i have today pointed out the 4 vep issues on a forum board which has some Hornby Shareholders

 

I think its wise to point this out to them because lets face it if there is a problem they need to know

and they have more clout on Hornby to get the situation sorted and i do think its a better route

then lets say myself sending a e-mail to Hornby

 

 

lets hope they get it sorted 1 way or another because if i was a Hornby Shareholder i wouldnt want

a few mistakes like this going on unnotice on my investment

 

all the best from Steve

[griffgriff]

Liveries.

 

Just a starter I'm sure.

 

Blue (with a variety of yellow ends?)

Blue and Grey

Blue and Grey with Network flashes

NWSE

South West Trains

Connex

Southern

 

(and mix them up with 3VEP and VOP variations)

 

I'd say that there's a pretty broad spectrum

[S.A.C Martin]

Did some of them get Jaffa livery too?

[griffgriff]

Only MLV's CEP's and CIG's on the Southern AFAIK

 

... and not too many of them either.

[Red Fox]

Yes, and I can only think there's something else at work there. In one publication the 4VEP has the same overall score as the Beattie Well Tank. I find that rather unbelievable given the sheer amount of work to make the 4VEP "right".

 

How critical can you be in a review when the manufacturer has paid for a full page advert for the product in the magazine?

[brightspark]

It is also obvious that after the initial agonies, people are deriving real satisfaction from righting the Hornby wrongs. A model that has had some input from the owner invariably gains affection a perfect model out-of-the-box cannot quite match. That's not a good reason for Hornby to have loused it up in so many ways, but it sugars the pill a little.

 

A couple of years ago or so, I was chatting with the late Alistair Rolf when the subject was rasied about Hornby et al were going to enter the '3rd rail' market. His view was that other kit manufacturers were just going to withdraw from the market. Checking earlier forums about the antisipated launch confirms this view. Alistair however was relishing the new stuff. He reasoned that first of all it would introduce a new generation of modellers to the 3rd rail, but more importantly he knew that the manufacturers would get it wrong and was planning on modification kits.

 

So on behalf of Alistair "I told you so". Happy modelling.

[John M Upton]

Liveries.

 

Just a starter I'm sure.

 

Blue (with a variety of yellow ends?)

Blue and Grey

Blue and Grey with Network flashes

NWSE

South West Trains

Connex

Southern

 

NSE light blue with angled ends (plus the different area logos on the MBSO)

Plain 'undercoat' white - some with thin blue Connex skirt/buffer beams/sole bars, others just plain)

Gatwick '4-VEG' variation of Blue/Grey (Really hoping for either a Ltd Edition of this or transfers from Fox for this one)

NSE with Connex 'Balaclava' half black front ends

 

 

The one thing that really bothers me is that at least one Magazine Review stated that the trailer cars of the VEP model had pick-ups for the lighting and it clearly doesn't which makes me start to question just how thorough some of these reviews really are if they failed to spot even that simple omission. Were some of these reviews given a quick write up in the heat of the excitement of the review model's arrival to make the copy deadline per chance? If so that is quite simply lazy and sloppy journalism.

[Gwiwer]

And when someone produces Cig / Big models will they please remember that the NDMBS on the first series (7031-41 / 7301-36) were on leaf spring bogies? Might be a pitfall to avoid there if they are going to use coil sprung bogies based on the Vep model

[303013]

 

NSE light blue with angled ends (plus the different area logos on the MBSO)

Plain 'undercoat' white - some with thin blue Connex skirt/buffer beams/sole bars, others just plain)

Gatwick '4-VEG' variation of Blue/Grey (Really hoping for either a Ltd Edition of this or transfers from Fox for this one)

NSE with Connex 'Balaclava' half black front ends

 

So, what about the original blue livery as carried by 3417 Gordon Petit, is that really Monastral Blue, or is it an earlier version??

 

You forgot the Ex Connex variation with the yellow end extended up the sides of the cab front to denote the first class end, and also the final Govia Southern Green livery as carried by at least one VEP, 3514.