Hornby announce TT:120

[frobisher]

Just now, natterjack said:

Heljan offerings appear to have been no more than a fishing expedition.

 

That's a little unfair; They'd certainly put a significant amount of R&D cost into the exercise given what they'd shown. But they were gazundered significantly by Hornby.  The Hornby price points are likley 2/3 or less of that aimed at by Heljan (which probably indicated a difference of the "finesse" of the Heljan vs Hornby approach), and you'd be a fool to announce any speculative products until it is clear how quickly Hornby are shipping theirs if it could suddenly be another thing that "they were working on".

[Haymarket47]

1 minute ago, frobisher said:

 

That's a little unfair; They'd certainly put a significant amount of R&D cost into the exercise given what they'd shown. But they were gazundered significantly by Hornby.  The Hornby price points are likley 2/3 or less of that aimed at by Heljan (which probably indicated a difference of the "finesse" of the Heljan vs Hornby approach), and you'd be a fool to announce any speculative products until it is clear how quickly Hornby are shipping theirs if it could suddenly be another thing that "they were working on".

I could be wrong.but I’m sure Hornby have had this project in the pipeline for a number of years. With this in mind I think it’s unlikely that they  attempted to gazump Heljan in this regard - despite their recent efforts 🤦‍♂️Duplication is a much discussed topic but recent examples include Bachmann 55s and also Class 37’s compared to Accurascale. Punters make the choice at the end of the day. Maybe Heljan could have done an Accurascale and produced a cracking model at a reasonable price and given Hornby some competition? Just a thought…

[frobisher]

1 hour ago, Ravenser said:

Again - how do the three couplings in the 3 different scales compare? Which couples best? What about uncoupling? Which is smallest and neatest? How about close coupling? (The Arnold coupler in N  is poor enough that most suggest it militates against shunting successfully. The tension lock in OO is a pig to uncouple, ugly and obtrusive. Come to that the N gauge coupler is pretty chunky. The Tillig -type looks like the best of the three, albeit against pretty weak competitors)

 

On the upside, it's a potential area for improvement in the field (and N gauge simultaneously...).  If Microtrains could be tempted to produce an NEM version of theirs it would be nice to have some competition for the Dapol Easi-Shunts, but another, "pretty" shuntable NEM coupling for TT/N would be very welcome if some manufacturer would take up the challenge.

 

 

[natterjack]

36 minutes ago, frobisher said:

gazundered significantly by Hornby

Sorry again but this holds no water. Had Heljan development proceeded to any form of working mechanisms they would be able to translate one of their numerous CAD archives to TT120 product and the obvious ones for them would be the Class 47 or 20 which would have equally 'gazundered' Hornby. If they do have working mechanisms then why not market those alone to the welcoming arms of kit bashers and scratch modellers?

Edited February 11, 2023 by natterjack
emended

[frobisher]

1 minute ago, Haymarket47 said:

I could be wrong.but I’m sure Hornby have had this project in the pipeline for a number of years. With this in mind I think it’s unlikely that they  attempted to gazump Heljan in this regard - despite their recent efforts 🤦‍♂️Duplication is a much discussed topic but recent examples include Bachmann 55s and also Class 37’s compared to Accurascale. Punters make the choice at the end of the day. Maybe Heljan could have done an Accurascale and produced a cracking model at a reasonable price and given Hornby some competition? Just a thought…

 

It's maybe a little cycnical, but to manage to pre-announce all three of Heljan's targets as well AFTER Heljan had announced their intentions, and only showing any development evidence of one of those...

 

That said, the 08 was always a poorer choice for Heljan - It's required for trainsets, Hornby were going to make one as a matter of priority.  The 31 was a good even bet, especially as Hornby hadn't been showing any particular attention to their 00 model.  The Austerity though is a model that Hornby don't currently have modern CAD/research for, and previously seen no intention of updating in 00.  THAT'S the suspicious response.

 

But Heljan had announced their price point for the 31, and it's likely they would have been trying to compete with a premium model verses what ever Hornby was producing.  If I were Heljan I would be sitting back and sees what happens with Hornby before taking another stab.  They'll know damn fine what stage of development Hornby was at (at range launch) with the 31 compared to theirs when the Hornby one finally hits the market.  At that point they'll know when they can safely announce product should they wish to.

 

10 minutes ago, natterjack said:

Sorry again but this holds no water. Had Heljan development proceeded to any form of working mechanisms they would be able to translate one of their numerous CAD archives to TT120 product and the obvious one for them would be the Class 47 which would have equally 'gazundered' Hornby. If they do have working mechanisms then why not market those alone to the welcoming arms of kit bashers and scratch modellers?

 

Heljan were at a reasonably advanced CAD stage with the 31, and as has been pointed out repeatedly (mostly by Hornby), you can't just translate CAD between the scales automagically but existing CAD can form a starting point.  Heljan had sunk costs in what they had done, and weren't wanting to throw good money after bad in an emerging market.

 

Your suggestion was that they should sink similar costs into trying to produce a LOWER priced product than the one Hornby had pre-announced, when they had previously been working towards a HIGHER price point than Hornby was aiming at...

 

At this point in the game, we really don't need competition on models you need to grow the range of what is available.

 

I can see Heljan coming back for another bite at things, just not for a while, along with other potentially interested parties who are looking to see what Hornby actually delivers and how quickly.

 

 

You don't have working mechanisms until you manufacture them... And for modern manufacturing these are bespoke to each model... 

 

 

 

[natterjack]

4 minutes ago, frobisher said:

And for modern manufacturing these are bespoke to each model...

That only really applies to wheelbase and not the all important gear trains- and as Tillig have demonstrated a flexible system is easily designed to work very well. Then again, my O gauge experience with Heljan has been somewhat mixed (plenty of spare gears in the stash).

[Haymarket47]

18 minutes ago, frobisher said:

 

It's maybe a little cycnical, but to manage to pre-announce all three of Heljan's targets as well AFTER Heljan had announced their intentions, and only showing any development evidence of one of those...

 

That said, the 08 was always a poorer choice for Heljan - It's required for trainsets, Hornby were going to make one as a matter of priority.  The 31 was a good even bet, especially as Hornby hadn't been showing any particular attention to their 00 model.  The Austerity though is a model that Hornby don't currently have modern CAD/research for, and previously seen no intention of updating in 00.  THAT'S the suspicious response.

 

But Heljan had announced their price point for the 31, and it's likely they would have been trying to compete with a premium model verses what ever Hornby was producing.  If I were Heljan I would be sitting back and sees what happens with Hornby before taking another stab.  They'll know damn fine what stage of development Hornby was at (at range launch) with the 31 compared to theirs when the Hornby one finally hits the market.  At that point they'll know when they can safely announce product should they wish to.

 

 

Heljan were at a reasonably advanced CAD stage with the 31, and as has been pointed out repeatedly (mostly by Hornby), you can't just translate CAD between the scales automagically but existing CAD can form a starting point.  Heljan had sunk costs in what they had done, and weren't wanting to throw good money after bad in an emerging market.

 

Your suggestion was that they should sink similar costs into trying to produce a LOWER priced product than the one Hornby had pre-announced, when they had previously been working towards a HIGHER price point than Hornby was aiming at...

 

At this point in the game, we really don't need competition on models you need to grow the range of what is available.

 

I can see Heljan coming back for another bite at things, just not for a while, along with other potentially interested parties who are looking to see what Hornby actually delivers and how quickly.

 

 

You don't have working mechanisms until you manufacture them... And for modern manufacturing these are bespoke to each model... 

 

 

 

Interested to know how you know that Hornby don’t have any CAD/research for the Austerity🤷🏻‍♂️

[Ravenser]

1 hour ago, Roy L S said:

Sorry @Ravenser but as an N modeller of many years myself, your proclamation that: -

 

There is a widespread prejudice that making , modifying, detailing or repainting rolling stock is not entirely practical in N.

 

...is completely wide of the mark. There are plenty modelling in N who do all of these things and your sweeping generalisation does you and your apparent "cause" (which almost seems to be to promote TT120 on behalf of Hornby regardless of other people's valid challenges) no favours.

 

Here is the Shapeways purchased 3D printed EM1 in N I have just completed, it involved significant chassis modifications and some care in painting and finishing but if far from perfect was actually "entirely practical" - I do not consider myself to be anything more than an average modeller and I know plenty with varying levels of modelling experience in N who will have a go.

 

 

N couplings (yes the Arnold type) have the big benefit of making it possible to lift vehicles directly out of a train without the contortions associated with either the OO hook and bar type or the Tillig abominations you refer to, which in my view are absolutely no way the "best of the three" - they are the single worst thing about my TT120 "Eastener" set. Indeed, for the TT120 shunting layout I plan once I have the 08, I will be taking advantage of the NEM pockets on loco and wagons, removing the Tillig monstrosities and be using Dapol "Easi-Shunts". instead.

 

I think that trotting out numbers and percentages to try and make a case for TT120 is equally irrelevant at this point. In terms of market penetration so far maybe 2000 sets have been sold and it is very clear a fair number of those to existing modellers of other scales like me who are curious, and at about £165 after club discount (and no postage) willing to take a "punt" (almost rude not to in fact). TT120's ability to gain adequate market share to support itself as a scale in this country is simply unknown at this point, and it would seem Hornby don't really have a firm handle, as from the interview with Simon K in Railway Modeller the decision to proceed was based more on internal experience than external market research. What we do know is that there are hopes to attract new people to the scale rather than simply targeting existing modellers and use different channels for promotion but it is early days.

 

Personally I think TT120 will carve a niche and in time maybe more support will come on board, but it is notable that on learning of Hornby's involvement Heljan didn't see an opportunity of sufficient size, and when you drill down PECO will find a market internationally for the limited track range they have so far released whether Hornby succeed with the UK range or not - very canny.

 

I simply see TT120 as another choice, it doesn't in itself represent a radical solution that solves any perceived "problems" other scales may have and most certainly not the issue of getting a decent model railway in a small space. In its own right from what I have now seen and handled I must say that the A4 especially is a lovely model and hopefully if what follows is equally good (and reading accounts on here) QC tightened up, TT120 will sell itself as said choice or even in addition to other scales modelled.

 

Roy

 

 

 

 

I had this comment from a letter in the current NGS Journal in mind: 

Quote

... assembling an appropriate mix of stock for a modern image layout is no easy feat. This is particularly the case if you subscribe to the philosophy of a former Journal editor that "Everything that is placed on the layout must be to the same (high) standard." As this rules out the use of modified stock for all but the select few who possess the skills to bash and finish a model to the same standard as the products which our manufacturers are producing today

Conversions and kit-building are simply not a credible option for the vast majority in his view - only RTR can do the job

 

That's me told then - the Chivers SSA kit and the NGS chemical TTA kit I'm currently working on can never be good enough to sit alongside a Dapol or RevolutioN wagon with any credibility......  not unless my name's Tim Watson

 

I also note someone who had a pop at me on another thread, indicating 

Quote

I have scratchbuilt stock on G scale but would not consider this in N. I have built a fair number of N gauge wagon kits. All my N gauge locos and coaches are RTR simply because I know I can’t produce a finish that is up to modern factory produced standards. So RTR will always look better than home built unless you are an exceptional model maker and decorator. On the other hand I see N as being very constructional when it comes to scenery and buildings 

 

And I referred previously to hearing someone exhibiting an N gauge layout as a show saying that he wouldn't consider building kits - they were too difficult.

 

I'm coming from a 4mm background where it has long been taken for granted that an ordinary competent  can build a better wagon than anything you can buy , and where only recently have RTR locos and coaches reached the standards of good kitbuilt models. I really hope the prejudice against construction in N is ill-founded, but it seems to be real and quite widespread and I'm finding it a bit chilling. If all that were possible in N is taking things out of a box and running them as is., I personally would find that pretty limiting.

 

I've launched into building a modest-sized modern image shunting layout in N , to use some models I'd more or less accidentally acquired , in the blithe assumption that a shunting layout with operational interest  using RTR models was routine proven stuff, and I'm now getting serious cold feet about whether I'm attempting something that ordinary mortals can make work.

 

I'm having to change the couplings at great expense (still not quite as good as Kadees in 4mm), I bought a shunting loco that was supposed to be the very bee's-knees in N gauge running - and it's not actually as good as the Farish 04 , ready made points with RTR are creating all sorts of problems....

 

I'm now sufficiently concerned by the issues , and the repeated whispers that "you can't do this in N . Not what N is for.." that I am actually wondering whether I would be better to pull the plug now and abandon the project before I pour more time, effort and money into something that may not actually work .. 

 

I have no doubt such a layout can be built in 4mm and 3mm . But in N? Where is the cut off point at which this sort of thing stops being viable, and all you can do is run round in a circle at a decent clip? Would I be better just to cut my losses at an early stage and walk away from a layout with nearly all the track laid and wired and nearly all the stock bought?

 

My motive here is that we have a new scale - and a significant number of folk (not including you) appear to be trying hard to post it out of existance before it becomes established . As a hobby we ought to be trying to find positives and opportuntities in a new scale, not trying to club any possibilities out of existence

 

It's not just about "Hornby -hating" . My recollection of the initial thread about the Peco announcement was that discussion involved repeated interventions from outside by people telling us that TT:120 wasn't happening, that the Peco products were not for the British market . that the Peco announcement did not mean what it said, and only the very naive would take them at face value. "TT:120 is not happening. Stop talking about it: this is NOT going to happen. Move along now, nothing to see here"  Over and over again

 

In over 40 years in the hobby I don't think I've seen major announcements greeted with such sustained hostility, amounting to sullen anger and seething outrage. There really do seem to be quite a few folk out there flatly determined that TT:120 will not happen.

 

P.S. Like the EM1

Edited February 11, 2023 by Ravenser

[frobisher]

38 minutes ago, Haymarket47 said:

Interested to know how you know that Hornby don’t have any CAD/research for the Austerity🤷🏻‍♂️

 

Certainly nothing in the current 00 range... So if there is any it's from a standing start OR an aborted project.  But if the J94 had been aborted because of the DJM model, I'd have expected that to have reared it's head again much sooner than this, and in 00...

[frobisher]

1 hour ago, natterjack said:

That only really applies to wheelbase and not the all important gear trains- and as Tillig have demonstrated a flexible system is easily designed to work very well. Then again, my O gauge experience with Heljan has been somewhat mixed (plenty of spare gears in the stash).

 

BUT the tooling for the mechanism is bespoke to each model, so you don't have a working mechanism until you manufacture it... Do Heljan have existing CAD components for drive systems they could repurpose for TT:120? Almost certainly.

[jonnyuk]

i usually like Charlie's videos, well polished, factual, unbiased and generally good spirited. I actually felt cross at his tt:120 video, so biased, premeditated and so unlike him, really seen another side to him, maybe his videos are so polished you don't actually see the real charlie but in this one you did.

 

Either way the only opinion that counts is yours, if you like it then you will buy more, i certainly have and will continue to do so. When i spoke to customer services about returning eastener, they said all pre-orders had been spoken for, another batch was due soon that would be processed. So it looks like what ever Hornby are producing is selling.

[britishcolumbian]

18 hours ago, Ravenser said:

To put it quite starkly, it is entirely possible for more than half the hobby to be strongly negative about 1:120 scale and hostile to its existence - but for 1:120 scale still to attract the support of 1 in 11 or 1 in 10 of the hobby and to become a very active modelling scale.

Hornby's venture could end right here - British 1:120 will carry on, just like it has in North America even when there was a spell of 50 years without any RTR available, and only here and there a few guys making small batches of kits in their garages. But now with the state modelling is in general, it'll be a lot easier for British 1:120 to carry on.

 

Let the haters hate - being hated/ridiculed can be empowering.

 

Edited February 11, 2023 by britishcolumbian

[Les1952]

5 hours ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

 

 

Showing the 3 A4's side by side was quite clearly for the purpose of comparing the relative sizes of each model.

Nothing whatsoever to do with the relative merits of the individual examples being used to demonstrate the size differences.

The question being asked, was whether the slight difference in size, above N, was a worthwhile reason to introduce this scale?

It was a genuine question that was left open. People will have differing views on the answer.

Clearly, quite a lot of people think so

 

He noted that some people had expected the TT120 models to be much closer to halfway between 00 and N.

I will admit it surprised me too, although I'm not particularly interested in either N or TT120 myself.

 

.

 

So why use an N-gauge model that is known to be overscale?

 

Les

[Johan DC]

4 minutes ago, jonnyuk said:

i usually like Charlie's videos, well polished, factual, unbiased and generally good spirited. I actually felt cross at his tt:120 video, so biased, premeditated and so unlike him.

I had the same feeling, and the opposit with Sam's Trains' video.

 

About the J94. I think it's a very logical choice of Hornby, it's the class 66 of the steam era, a lot are preserved and in more than one European country. In fact, the only steam engine you can see running on a regular basis in Flanders is a J94. Maybe thé reason that Heljan choose it as well? 

 

[britishcolumbian]

2 hours ago, natterjack said:

other emergent suppliers coming along (a new name to me has just announced a new Iberian loco!)

https://sudexpressmodels.eu/leaflets/Sudexpress_Novelties_2023-2024.pdf (TT from p. 114)

 

Sudexpress does Portuguese outline (and others) in HO, but so far anyways their TT announcements are all German liveries of tthe EuroDual/BR 159. But a new manufacturer of RTR in TT is always welcome regardless of what they're making!

[Haymarket47]

46 minutes ago, frobisher said:

 

Certainly nothing in the current 00 range... So if there is any it's from a standing start OR an aborted project.  But if the J94 had been aborted because of the DJM model, I'd have expected that to have reared it's head again much sooner than this, and in 00...

So, in summary you’re speculating.

[britishcolumbian]

20 minutes ago, Les1952 said:

 

So why use an N-gauge model that is known to be overscale?

 

Les

To highlight how "close" TT is to N, can be the only answer. Deliberate misinformation.

[Les1952]

When we first started to get negative posts about TT:120 (well before Hornby's involvement) I began by being bemused/amused in fairly equal amounts.

 

Reading about the Peco involvement made me consider that I could follow up my N-gauge Bregenbach im Schwarzwald with a TT:120 layout rather than another Continental N-gauge.  Over my five exhibition layouts each has been substantially different to the previous one/ones requiring new research and the acquisition of new skills- my way of trying to overcome a family history of dementia by keeping my modelling challenging- RSI and arthritis are in any case preventing me making models in N to the standard I made (in OO and TT) in my teens and twenties.

 

However, the remorseless attack by some people on why the scale should exist at all, and on Hornby in particular are now increasingly making me angry.  Not a place I need to be considering that hobbies are for relaxation.  This video in particular- by the end of it I was spitting blood.  I felt it was unnecessarily nasty in its attitude to the models and to Hornby's business plan.  

 

It is a hobby.  It is supposed to be relaxation.  Negativity such as this video and many of the posts in this thread are not good for the hobby, or those who enjoy it.   Having met SK on a few occasions I've found even when caught completely off guard he has unrelenting enthusiasm for the hobby and the pleasure it can give.  He is also dedicated to bringing the hobby to as many new people as possible.  TT:120 in the UK is one (note, one) means of growing the hobby.  

 

Les

 

 

Edited February 11, 2023 by Les1952
typos...

[Ravenser]

16 minutes ago, Les1952 said:

When we first started to get negative posts about TT:120 (well before Hornby's involvement) I began by being bemused/amused in fairly equal amounts.

 

Reading about the Peco involvement made me consider that I could follow up my N-gauge Bregenbach im Schwarzwald with a TT:120 layout rather than another Continental N-gauge.  Over my five exhibition layouts each has been substantially different to the previous one/ones requiring new research and the acquisition of new skills- my way of trying to overcome a family history of dementia by keeping my modelling challenging- RSI and arthritis are in any case preventing me making models in N to the standard I made (in OO and TT) in my teens and twenties.

 

However, the remorseless attack by some people on why the scale should exist at all, and on Hornby in particular are now increasingly making me angry.  Not a place I need to be considering that hobbies are for relaxation.  This video in particular- by the end of it I was spitting blood.  I felt it was unnecessarily nasty in its attitude to the models and to Hornby's business plan.  

 

It is a hobby.  It is supposed to be relaxation.  Negativity such as this video and many of the posts in this thread are not good for the hobby, or those who enjoy it.   Having met SK on a few occasions I've found even when caught completely off guard he has unrelenting enthusiasm for the hobby and the pleasure it can give.  He is also dedicated to bringing the hobby to as many new people as possible.  TT:120 in the UK is one (note, one) means of growing the hobby.  

 

Les

 

 

 

Can I strongly second this.

 

Nobody is obliged to go into TT. The vast majority of the hobby never will. If you have no interest in adopting the scale , I would respectfully suggest ignoring the subject rather than making several posts in TT threads telling those interested in its possibilities that it's rubbish and doesn't have any, and people shuoldn't adopt it.

 

7mm isn't my cup of tea. I don't feel obliged to post in dedicated 7mm threads telling everyone that 7mm doesn't have much future and they shouldn't chose it as a scale.....

[ThaneofFife]

Yes but surely people looking at getting into the hobby ( and i dont think we'rextalking trlephones here) shouldnt be insulated from criticisms of tt120 when its constructive.....its no diffetent to when people criticised heljans first attempt at the class 86  or dcc sound when that came along in 00 all those years ago......

I agree that theres no place for spitecul hate comments but theres plenty of roo. For people to see what others make of the new venture.

[Hobby]

 I've no issue at all with constructive criticism, we've had a fair bit on here and it's in general been helpful. But that video wasn't constructive criticism, it was a hatchet job. We had enough of that earlier in the thread, I hoped we'd have moved on, but it seems that for some we have not.

[jonnyuk]

i just dont understand why Charlie approached it like he did. No doubt people wanting to get into tt will google it, search youtube and guess what videos will be near the top?? some one talking complete boll8cks to the new comer is one sure fire way to put them off, that is why i expected better, even Sams Trains put it into perspective, his was a very balanced review.

[frobisher]

1 hour ago, Haymarket47 said:

So, in summary you’re speculating.

 

But reasoned lacking evidence to the contrary ;)

 

Regardless, the choices revealed by Hornby were sufficient to shut down that path for Heljan, at least for now.

[jonnyuk]

having said the above Hornby have created a brand problem for the well versed hobbyest, unfortunately some just can't see past it now, no matter what Hornby produce. 

I don't know how Hornby get that back, i don't think they will to be honest. Personally Hornby have not done anything against me, i like their products, generally i have had no issues with them, their range serves me well. I do  think they have turned a corner, their latest releases are very very good, 9f, Lion to name a few. sure they have dropped a few clangers even on new stuff but go and take a look on the AS pages, every new release they have done had had issues and they can walk on water. Issues with a rtr model is par the course, they will never ever be perfect. 

 

To put it into perspective, last Sept i picked up a new EV, at first i thought it was perfect, however silly software glitches drive me mad sometimes, however would i change it, send it back, nope as the plus's out weigh the negatives and i have this same attitude to trains.

 

[natterjack]

For those such as 'Charlie' with scraping Hornby coach wheels, an easy fix is shown here (Page 3 has the illustrations);

 

https://uk.Hornby.com/community/forum/easterner-coaches-wheels-scraping-on-curves-342296?ccm_paging_p=3&ccm_order_by=&ccm_order_by_direction=