What locomotives and rolling stock should be produced first?

[mdvle]

11 hours ago, Jeff Smith said:

I think not, judging by the number of posts in the Hornby thread there is considerable interest!

 

RMweb is merely a small fraction of the hobby so attempting to judge interest based on RMweb is difficult.

 

But the key point is that Hornby's online sales are a small fraction of their total sales (someone on RMweb in the past came up with a percentage of Hornby's annual report) - they still in OO heavily rely on those retailers they treat so badly to sell their product.

 

So given their questionable ability to sell product direct in any volume it will be interesting to see whether they can sell TT:120 direct only in sufficient sales numbers to make it viable for Hornby - or whether those train set market customers they seem to be aiming at will simply continue to buy OO from their local physical shops or Amazon/eBay/etc.

[Hobby]

21 minutes ago, mdvle said:

 

Unlikely.

 

Would they cancel their announced product for that reason - yes.

 

But withdraw entirely from TT:120 - no.

 

To me the withdrawl from TT:120 entirely is because Hornby is through the large size of their announcement making it clear - much like products like the Terrier - that Hornby believes that TT:120 is "Hornby" and that they won't welcome anyone else into that market.

 

 

Actually quite easy.

 

Heljan announced their 31 4 months ago (June 14th).  Hornby's 31 is a vague phase III future release - say 2nd half of 2023.  So well over a year to bring to market with the research already done thanks to the existing OO 31.

 

And note much like the Titfield Thunderbolt all we have are some livery drawings in a catalog...

 

So yes it could have been deliberate.

 

In effect we have the same conversation going on two threads! I'd throw this into the equation as well, re Heljan, Hornby cannot stop anyone else going into the market and we've had plenty of duplications in the past. Heljan could have looked at the Hornby launch as free publicity for TT120 and for any stock they may produce, in fact, even better than that, as only Heljan and Peco would be in the shops that gives them another sales edge, as any Hornby customers going into a shop to pick up Peco and other stuff like scenic materials would see the Heljan stock.

 

But no, they've simply pulled out, that seems to make sense to some people but I still don't see the logic.

[Taigatrommel]

And now this is just duplicating the Hornby launch thread...!

[andythenorth]

19 minutes ago, Taigatrommel said:

And now this is just duplicating the Hornby launch thread...!

 

And the Heljan TT:120 thread...and apparently the Accurascale TT:120 thread (no, they won't be doing TT) 😀

 

High thread count.  Must be a sign of quality?

 

Glad I'm not a mod, wouldn't have the patience for all this 🙂  I guess it aids CPMs though?

[locomad2]

I've modelled in similar scales in the past, have still a few old triang tt 3mm-foot models, it's a lovely scale N too small,  OO takes too much space.

 

Like old TT and OO what I like to see is a good reliable steam  0-6-0 chassis, like the triang OO chassis with XO4 motor or the Hornby Dublo R1, so can put a wide range of Kit bashed model bodies on,   a few 3D printed bodies on or even a DIY plastic injection body (doing similar in OOn9). So can have a southern E5, Q class,  Jinty, Pannier Tank etc etc etc

[NCB]

Heljan of course are free to re=enterTT120 any time they wish...

[MartinRS]

On 16/10/2022 at 00:22, mdvle said:

The problem is that it is too bold.

 

I have to disagree ! If TT:120 is going to make headway then it needs a major manufacturer to produce locos, rolling stock and track.

 

I'm not suggesting there should have been more locos or rolling stock, though a 16t mineral wagon would have been an asset to the range. (Perhaps the target demographic have never seen a partially fitted coal train, buffers clattering as a red signal orders the driver to stop?). My main complaint about the launch is the limited liveries the rolling stock carries. I can understand why we have only a few locomotives on offer now. I'm not suggesting Hornby should have tooled-up for other prototypes, but why don't we have a green 08 on offer ? I'm sure other modellers think the same about other locos. Choose your own, and the livery of your favourite company !

[Guest WM183]

With regards to what to make... BR standard wagons, Mk1 coaches, some early diesel and BR standard steam. Lots of folks model BR in the steam or early diesel years, when most if not all of this stuff would see use.

[andythenorth]

So how about if we crowd-funded a BR welded-pattern 21t MDO/MDV?

 

I don't know the diagram numbers, but examples from Paul's site: https://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/brmdv

 

Rationale

• relatively common, long-lived wagon, suitable for BR green and blue eras, and somewhat into Railfreight era
• the Hornby 21t mineral looks to be the scaled down OO model, which is an older riveted design, so it's a fair bet Hornby won't also produce the welded version.
• but another type of mineral wagon would complement Hornby's offering and offer variety in train formations
• Accurascale are unlikely to enter TT:120, so it's unlikely that their outstanding OO MDO/MDV would be scaled down
• relatively simple liveries, but enough variations to drive sales
• makes sense as single wagons or block trains
• potential for rebodied versions on the same chassis
• the 16t mineral is more common, but is likely to be swept up by a major manufacturer as it's such a perennial (although I wouldn't rule it out as a candidate)
• the HTV hopper would be an appealing alternative, but Hornby have the chassis for it in OO (but haven't produced the HTV yet despite producing the cut down Tope version), it's just a bit too risky IMHO

 

Things I don't know

I don't know what the market expectations are for detail; apart from Accurascale's insanely good price/value point, most OO wagon releases are currently being driven by very very detailed wagons at circa £40 RRP.  This is good, but I'm as happy buying Oxford Rail tankers at rather lower price for rather less detail.  I have some Roco TT:120 German stock and there is a lot of detail, but some of it is simplified, and they're £30+ each.

 

I don't know anything useful about CAD, production, importing, distribution etc.  I know a little bit about marketing and finance, and I know how to find out about things like tax and paperwork.  I've also run customer service, and packing operations (on a small scale).

I don't know the realistic costs of tooling and production. My assumption is that a boxy wagon is a simpler mould with lower tooling complexity.  I'm also assuming that lower levels of separate detail parts reduces assembly costs.

 

I've been out of the hobby for years and don't really know anyone in the trade, apart from @Corbs -  but that's addressable.

 

I haven't researched if the 21t mineral chassis is useful / reusable for other wagons, departmental conversions etc, even if it's "close enough" rather than identical diagram. 

 

I'm not particularly well-versed in detailed detail, diagram differences, rebuilding etc, but I've done a lot of research producing pixel art for 600+ UK wagons as game art https://grf.farm/iron-horse/2.62.0/html/trains.html#RAIL-wagons - I've got a fair understanding of BR wagon stock, and a good sense of what looks right.

 

I have a full-time job running a company, so I wouldn't be able to make this happen solo.  I'm not proposing setting up as a sole trader, this would need to be either

• a small group forming who know what they're doing, and legally it would need to be via limited company
• or in partnership with one of the existing smaller RTR manufacturers 

I don't know if it flies, but eh, nothing happens without starting somewhere.

Edited October 19, 2022 by andythenorth

[hmrspaul]

43 minutes ago, andythenorth said:

So how about if we crowd-funded a BR welded-pattern 21t MDO/MDV?

 

 

I haven't researched if the 21t mineral chassis is useful / reusable for other wagons, departmental conversions etc, even if it's "close enough" rather than identical diagram. 

 

 

 

The MDO and MDV have different bodies - the MDV has top doors unlike the MDO and, of course, a  very different brake rigging. The MDV frame is OK for a COIL A and COIL B but not much else. 

 

Yes, the MDO frame is a reasonably standard 12ft wheelbase 21ft 6in, over headstocks wagon and there are many of these - just look at what Parkside did in 7mm and they can include pre-nat designs as well, Tank wagons etc. 

 

I'm not following any of this in detail. I've always thought there should be two scales and not three - what we call TT and what we call S and it is a pity that the hobby is commonly split across three scales. I haven't followed what this 120 is about. 

 

Paul

[andythenorth]

8 minutes ago, hmrspaul said:

 

The MDO and MDV have different bodies - the MDV has top doors unlike the MDO and, of course, a  very different brake rigging. The MDV frame is OK for a COIL A and COIL B but not much else. 

 

Yes, the MDO frame is a reasonably standard 12ft wheelbase 21ft 6in, over headstocks wagon and there are many of these - just look at what Parkside did in 7mm and they can include pre-nat designs as well, Tank wagons etc. 

Thanks Paul, useful as always.  I have said this before, but I'll say it again - thanks for all the legwork and camper van time you put in, it's a remarkable resource you've created.  I have looked before but have not spotted a way to make a donation e.g. Paypal button or Patreon or similar - do you have such a thing?

Edited October 19, 2022 by andythenorth

[MartinRS]

1 hour ago, andythenorth said:

So how about if we crowd-funded a BR welded-pattern 21t MDO/MDV?

 

I don't know the diagram numbers, but examples from Paul's site: https://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/brmdv

 

Rationale

• relatively common, long-lived wagon, suitable for BR green and blue eras, and somewhat into Railfreight era
• the Hornby 21t mineral looks to be the scaled down OO model, which is an older riveted design, so it's a fair bet Hornby won't also produce the welded version.
• but another type of mineral wagon would complement Hornby's offering and offer variety in train formations
• Accurascale are unlikely to enter TT:120, so it's unlikely that their outstanding OO MDO/MDV would be scaled down
• relatively simple liveries, but enough variations to drive sales
• makes sense as single wagons or block trains
• potential for rebodied versions on the same chassis
• the 16t mineral is more common, but is likely to be swept up by a major manufacturer as it's such a perennial (although I wouldn't rule it out as a candidate)
• the HTV hopper would be an appealing alternative, but Hornby have the chassis for it in OO (but haven't produced the HTV yet despite producing the cut down Tope version), it's just a bit too risky IMHO

 

Things I don't know

I don't know what the market expectations are for detail; apart from Accurascale's insanely good price/value point, most OO wagon releases are currently being driven by very very detailed wagons at circa £40 RRP.  This is good, but I'm as happy buying Oxford Rail tankers at rather lower price for rather less detail.  I have some Roco TT:120 German stock and there is a lot of detail, but some of it is simplified, and they're £30+ each.

 

I don't know anything useful about CAD, production, importing, distribution etc.  I know a little bit about marketing and finance, and I know how to find out about things like tax and paperwork.  I've also run customer service, and packing operations (on a small scale).

I don't know the realistic costs of tooling and production. My assumption is that a boxy wagon is a simpler mould with lower tooling complexity.  I'm also assuming that lower levels of separate detail parts reduces assembly costs.

 

I've been out of the hobby for years and don't really know anyone in the trade, apart from @Corbs -  but that's addressable.

 

I haven't researched if the 21t mineral chassis is useful / reusable for other wagons, departmental conversions etc, even if it's "close enough" rather than identical diagram. 

 

I'm not particularly well-versed in detailed detail, diagram differences, rebuilding etc, but I've done a lot of research producing pixel art for 600+ UK wagons as game art https://grf.farm/iron-horse/2.62.0/html/trains.html#RAIL-wagons - I've got a fair understanding of BR wagon stock, and a good sense of what looks right.

 

I have a full-time job running a company, so I wouldn't be able to make this happen solo.  I'm not proposing setting up as a sole trader, this would need to be either

• a small group forming who know what they're doing, and legally it would need to be via limited company
• or in partnership with one of the existing smaller RTR manufacturers 

I don't know if it flies, but eh, nothing happens without starting somewhere.

 

The very first page of the Hornby announce TT:120 thread on RMweb lists a 21T mineral wagon (eras 4-6) (different numbers available), second from the bottom of the rolling stock list. I'm sure it was also listed on the Hornby site on the launch date but without a photograph. I can't find it now !?

[andythenorth]

41 minutes ago, MartinRS said:

 

The very first page of the Hornby announce TT:120 thread on RMweb lists a 21T mineral wagon (eras 4-6) (different numbers available), second from the bottom of the rolling stock list. I'm sure it was also listed on the Hornby site on the launch date but without a photograph. I can't find it now !?

 

It's listed on the Hornby TT:120 store (screenshot below). 🙂  Assuming the image isn't just vague concept art, the intent is to use the OO tooling scaled down (the photo is probably the OO version with TT couplers photoshopped on). 

 

I have quite a few of the OO version, it's quite an unremarkable tooling, and in MDV guise, it's far from accurate as far as I can understand, but it's cheap and happy and that's why I own a rake. 😉 And at £14.50 the equivalent TT:120 version is an attractive price that will support buying enough for longer trains.  I will be buying some.

 

My suggestion of a similar-ish welded version is a deliberate choice:

• for people who want to do 'long trains in the landscape', it's variety, BR mineral trains did sometimes have a block appearance, but often were a varied collection of wagon designs and sizes
• for people who want to build a shunting plank, a wagon repair depot, a coal yard, a colliery, a scrap yard or a steel works, a wagon monoculture isn't appealing

It's unknown how Hornby would react to ventures like this, but

• my gut feeling is it's best to go open and transparent early, and find out if Hornby are going to move against an idea, rather than trying to develop CAD and tooling in secrecy in the hope they find out too late
• I don't think Hornby will want to commit capital and time and marketing support to generating new SKUs that are "like a current wagon we already sell, but slightly different", there's almost no evidence of them doing this in OO
• we know that Hornby operate on a scorched earth basis in some areas, but I don't yet have any personal axe to grind about Hornby either; I buy their stuff when the price is right.  But nor am I naive and expecting them to be new best friends with anyone entering the market
• ultimately Hornby will be the best judge of whether they are making an ecosystem play (rising-tide-floats-all-boats) or trying to drive all and every competitor out of UK RTR TT:120
• ultimately if they drive out individuals or small groups trying to develop RTR UK TT:120, we can vote with our wallets - it's going to be a niche scale initially, there will be core early adopters who are advocates of the scale, high spenders, and interested in developing niche RTR projects - if Hornby intentionally alienate us we can exit back to OO or N and they can merrily sell trainsets 🤑
• currently I've dropped a grand sterling into TT:120 pre-orders with Hornby, but until TT:120 launched, that money  would have gone to Revolution, Accurascale, Cavalex, Rapido etc for OO stock, not Hornby, decisions like this are of course easily reversed (I am aware of the optics of statements like this when there's a cost of living crisis, but a lot of the spend keeping the hobby alive is driven by people who do have the disposable income that sadly not everyone currently has)
• TBH I don't mind a bit of a competition, and I don't have payroll to make 😉

 

Edited October 19, 2022 by andythenorth

[TonyMay]

I think you've identified the need for more wagons, but not how to get them.  Based on their OO range, I expect Hornby will produce a handful of generic wagons, and some brightly coloured PO wagons, but the overall offering will be rather disappointing.

 

It's the wagon kit manufacturers who should be looking at downscaling existing wagon kits.  They are not very hard to assemble.  And they're not very expensive, so they can be used to practice skills like painting and weathering. If you mess it up, it's no big deal.  Better a wagon kit than a £200 RTR locomotive. 

 

[hmrspaul]

If that Hornby model is produced like that then I think TT120 should be doomed. It is awful. Although I recognise that Bachmann, Hornby and Dapol all continue to sell some dreadful models by and large  2, 4 and 7mm have all moved on considerably. But, back in the 1960s the Triang TT range was a noticeable improvement on their OO offer. The freight rolling stock was all recognisable prototypes, reasonably to scale. And some of what they did such as the very useful steel Medfit remain overlooked in 4mm and 7mm (I believe). 

 

Paul

[Steamport Southport]

8 hours ago, TonyMay said:

I think you've identified the need for more wagons, but not how to get them.  Based on their OO range, I expect Hornby will produce a handful of generic wagons, and some brightly coloured PO wagons, but the overall offering will be rather disappointing.

 

It's the wagon kit manufacturers who should be looking at downscaling existing wagon kits.  They are not very hard to assemble.  And they're not very expensive, so they can be used to practice skills like painting and weathering. If you mess it up, it's no big deal.  Better a wagon kit than a £200 RTR locomotive. 

 

 

None of the recent wagons have been generic though and they are as good as anything the new boys have made.

 

Look at the brake vans for example.

 

And it's things like this that are going to be shrink rayed not the ancient things from year dot.

 

 

 

Jason

[PeterStiles]

55 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

not the ancient things from year dot.

because in the year dot they did their CAD using clay tablets and cuniform, and you can't easily turn that into a 3d model. yet....

[Flying Pig]

38 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

And it's things like this that are going to be shrink rayed not the ancient things from year dot.

 

1 hour ago, hmrspaul said:

If that Hornby model is produced like that then I think TT120 should be doomed. It is awful.

 

The 21t mineral in 00 is an Airfix tooling from at least as long ago as 1980 with whatever tweaks it has had over the years (largely wheels and couplings I expect). What seems to be the actual TT model appears here (scroll down): 

 

https://www.world-of-railways.co.uk/news/Hornby-tt-model-prototypes-examined/

[andythenorth]

51 minutes ago, Flying Pig said:

What seems to be the actual TT model appears here (scroll down): 

 

https://www.world-of-railways.co.uk/news/Hornby-tt-model-prototypes-examined/

 

Oh neat thanks 🙂 I had seen the locomotive engineering prototypes, but missed the wagons.  😉

 

That's a welded type 21t mineral, which means my initial idea of what to produce needs rethought.  Fine by me 🙂

 

Looking at what we can see of the 21t mineral prototype, that's also pretty good value for £15.  Appealing. 👍

[hmrspaul]

2 hours ago, Flying Pig said:

 

 

The 21t mineral in 00 is an Airfix tooling from at least as long ago as 1980 with whatever tweaks it has had over the years (largely wheels and couplings I expect). What seems to be the actual TT model appears here (scroll down): 

 

https://www.world-of-railways.co.uk/news/Hornby-tt-model-prototypes-examined/

Thanks, yes that looks like a welded MDO. And the other stock looks nice as well. It is a pity that Hornby appear to be misleading with some of their advanced advertising. 

 

Paul

[PeterStiles]

8 minutes ago, hmrspaul said:

misleading

I'm not sure their intent is to mislead, just to show a picture of something like what they intend, the same way Bachmann show n gauge models in their catalogue they don't have an oo model to photo... although Bachmann do tell you that...

Hornby  also frequently use cgi renders for future models.

[Hobby]

If those are misleading what were the T-H catalogues of the 60s, then! Most of them were just coloured drawings from what I remember  especially of the new releases! 

[Flying Pig]

1 hour ago, hmrspaul said:

Thanks, yes that looks like a welded MDO. And the other stock looks nice as well. It is a pity that Hornby appear to be misleading with some of their advanced advertising. 

 

 

 

Ok, that would be an unfitted MDO that needs a brake van in most circumstances.  What was the TOPs code for a Toad B in revenue service again?

[Dava]

On 19/08/2022 at 16:15, John Towers said:

USA tank steam locos were used a lot in Eastern Europe as they were built in Yugoslavia for several years, and Eastern Europe is good TT country.

USATC S100 0-6-0 tanks were widely used in European countries post 1944, see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/USATC_S100_Class as well as Southern Railway and BR(S).
 

It would be a good go-anywhere loco. The Poland Ferrum locos and Juoslav class 60 were basically the same design. So it would be an attractive multi market loco. 
The Roco class 80  could be a chassis donor but they are unobtainable. 
 

Dava

 

[hmrspaul]

2 hours ago, Flying Pig said:

 

 

Ok, that would be an unfitted MDO that needs a brake van in most circumstances.  What was the TOPs code for a Toad B in revenue service again?

CAO  CAP  CAV   Caboose

 

I Doubt very much that any Toad B remained in revenue service when TOPS was introduced. 

 

Paul

Edited October 21, 2022 by hmrspaul