Hornby announce TT:120

[009 micro modeller]

9 hours ago, teletougos said:

N really isn't the scale for that kind of detail, doesn't have the 'presence', nor as I have seen, is it that good for shunting. 

I agree on the first two points but 009 can work for shunting, so given that it uses the same gauge and some of the same mechanisms I’m inclined to attribute any major issues with shunting in N to the couplings (which are generally different from those used in 009). That said, 009 shunting tends to be easier with larger wagons so it could be the smaller scale of N that’s the issue.

 

9 hours ago, teletougos said:

That's basically what I'm getting at. I was not the first to have said it.  The initial comment about the issue with modern era OO was on RMWeb (can't find it now). It reasoned that a layout, as a minimum ought give a train three times its length to run in, plus space for a fiddle yard - which needs to be as long as the train.  A 66 and three ferrywagons takes 4'. So a 16' shelf layout is needed to run that. 12' in view + 4' fiddle yard.

I see what you mean but not sure if it’s relevant for all layout types, e.g. for a typical Inglenook it’s obviously incorrect based on the specified siding lengths (though personally I don’t usually like Inglenooks that are entirely fed from a non-scenic traverser for similar reasons to the ones you mention, in the sense that you hardly get to see the loco).

 

9 hours ago, teletougos said:

This is why I think TT is the smallest practicable size. 

As mentioned above, this isn’t true in a commercial sense as there are plenty of N gauge manufacturers and a few in Z and T. But again I see what you mean; for me when you get to very small scales it becomes a different kind of modelling and more about the overall landscape than fine detail (for example, T gauge is very good for this as it’s tiny, you can model enormous structures and landscapes in a small space, but generally can’t hope to achieve the same level of fine detail and focus on smaller structures associated with 00 and TT).

[Steamport Southport]

I'll just leave this here for those that think N Gauge or 2mm scale is too small for shunting or fine detail...

 

 

 

Why are we going over the same arguments that were dismissed on the first few pages?

 

 

Jason

[Jeff Smith]

1 hour ago, Steamport Southport said:

Why are we going over the same arguments that were dismissed on the first few pages?

Because it's a long thread that new people are probably joining without reading from the start.......

[natterjack]

3 minutes ago, Jeff Smith said:

Because it's a long thread that new people are probably joining without reading from the start.......

Tolstoy was a good way into War And Peace by this stage, and we've all read that haven't we.

[britishcolumbian]

5 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

I'll just leave this here for those that think N Gauge or 2mm scale is too small for shunting or fine detail...

 

 

 

Why are we going over the same arguments that were dismissed on the first few pages?

 

 

Jason

I've seen Proto:160 done successfully, as an experiment; I've seen fish made in 1:160, and spoked wheels on a (non-powered) track speeder... yeah: extreme detail is doable in N. If you're as... committed, let's say, as the gentleman in question who did these things. Is that practical for most modellers? No. Have you ever seen those videos of this guy who has a miniature (dollhouse sized) fully working kitchen, and he makes real food in it, in dollhouse-sized portions? Yeah... that's doable too. But not practicable. TT's forte really is that it can do the things that N can do but HO/OO cannot because it's small enough, and it can do all the things OO/HO can do but N cannot, because it's big enough. *That* is the point.

[britishcolumbian]

4 hours ago, natterjack said:

Tolstoy was a good way into War And Peace by this stage, and we've all read that haven't we.

The only Russian novel I could finish was Crime and Punishment. Tried W&P and Anna Karenina, but couldn't finish either of them.

[BachelorBoy]

On 28/02/2024 at 23:56, Porfuera said:

 

 

The original criticism was that the range isn't big enough to build a 'serious' model railway but there is always going to be something missing from RTR to stop someone making an exact replica of some place and time and compromises always have to be made except by a very few people.

 

The gaps in RTR OO are tiny compared to the chasm for TT120 so far.

 

I think you are right that you can build a "serious" model railway in TT120 with the models available now.

 

But  options are very limited. 

 

 

[Michanglais]

Going back to the models for a bit - I've just read that the Swallow MK3s are available. For some reason, the Hornby site sent me an email to confirm availability of the power cars but nothing for the MK3s. Have they just literally become available? 

 

Bit peeved in that I've got a 10% discount promo and would have liked to use it buying the entire set. Oh well. 

 

Whatever the case, I'm pleased to see them available because I thought they weren't due until summer (I stand to be corrected on that one). 

 

I shall now have to unpack some moving boxes that I put my TT track in thinking I'd be moved by now...

[Roy L S]

5 hours ago, britishcolumbian said:

I've seen Proto:160 done successfully, as an experiment; I've seen fish made in 1:160, and spoked wheels on a (non-powered) track speeder... yeah: extreme detail is doable in N. If you're as... committed, let's say, as the gentleman in question who did these things. Is that practical for most modellers? No. Have you ever seen those videos of this guy who has a miniature (dollhouse sized) fully working kitchen, and he makes real food in it, in dollhouse-sized portions? Yeah... that's doable too. But not practicable. TT's forte really is that it can do the things that N can do but HO/OO cannot because it's small enough, and it can do all the things OO/HO can do but N cannot, because it's big enough. *That* is the point.

 

It may prove to be the case for some people with a propensity to (say) scratch-build, but in truth there is otherwise almost nothing that TT120 can offer that is not possible in N. In fact it actually faces some interesting disadvantages, space for one and to take an example, my N layout which is 7.5ft x 2.5ft equates to an area of 18.75 square feet, to create an identical layout in TT120 (which is just 1/5 larger size wise) the dimensions grow to 9.4ft x 3.1ft and the area grows to 29.1 square feet which is in square footage terms significantly more. 

 

TT120 is a credible scale for sure, and for some I do not doubt that being that bit bigger than N will make it the right choice for them, but to talk in terms of "advantages" as regards N is actually for the most part more subjective than factual.

 

As regards OO, yes, it takes a lot less space and it could well be that those new to the hobby and attracted to the universally recognised Hornby "Brand" will go for it for that reason alone without looking further and as I recall it was largely those "new" people Hornby were targeting.

 

Roy

[Michanglais]

One argument I haven't seen come up for a while is that in TT:120, everything is to scale. Correct gauge to scale. Both British OO and N are 'incorrect'.

 

While this may not be an issue for some modellers, it always bugged me as a mainly Continental Europe modeller in HO and N (+ variants using the same track). The only British OO locos I've got are AC electrics given I doubt we'll see them in TT for a long time. 

 

Even tho the OO uses the same track gauge as my HO stuff, I have to store it at a strategic length because it just looks plain wrong.

 

This was one of the initial main arguments for TT:120. Clearly, apart from wagons, Continental and British stock are not generally seen side-by-side but, despite the very attractive recent release 37s in OO, I'm holding out for one in TT.

[Roy L S]

11 minutes ago, Michanglais said:

One argument I haven't seen come up for a while is that in TT:120, everything is to scale. Correct gauge to scale. Both British OO and N are 'incorrect'.

 

While this may not be an issue for some modellers, it always bugged me as a mainly Continental Europe modeller in HO and N (+ variants using the same track). The only British OO locos I've got are AC electrics given I doubt we'll see them in TT for a long time. 

 

Even tho the OO uses the same track gauge as my HO stuff, I have to store it at a strategic length because it just looks plain wrong.

 

This was one of the initial main arguments for TT:120. Clearly, apart from wagons, Continental and British stock are not generally seen side-by-side but, despite the very attractive recent release 37s in OO, I'm holding out for one in TT.

A fair point about scale/gauge ratio, and no getting away from that being out for both OO and British N. Speaking as a British N modeller I have never concerned myself too much with the discrepancy because the scale four inches the track is too narrow to prototype represents just over 0.5mm, so you would need good eyes to spot it! However in OO (4mm/ft) 16.5mm gauge represents 4ft 1in and so the 2.3 mm discrepancy is arguably more visible and even more so the scales - 4mm/ft v's 3.5mm/ft.

 

Consistent scales (2.5mm/ft) between TT120 and established Continental TT is another distinct advantage as far as mixing and matching British and Continental stock is concerned (for those who want to) too so yep, let's not forget that one. 

 

So no argument, that's two very valid points in terms of positives of TT120.

 

Regards

 

Roy

[Johan DC]

Nah, should've been N!  😄

 

 

[Hroth]

11 hours ago, natterjack said:

Tolstoy was a good way into War And Peace by this stage, and we've all read that haven't we.

 

I've got a 3 volume set of W&P on the bookshelf.  Its been there for decades, it's not been touched yet....

 

[HExpressD]

9 minutes ago, Johan DC said:

Nah, should've been N!  😄

 

 

Not sure what this guy's issue is, seemingly just trying to pick fights with every manufacturer since his Bachmann video got smacked down

[Michanglais]

14 minutes ago, HExpressD said:

Not sure what this guy's issue is, seemingly just trying to pick fights with every manufacturer since his Bachmann video got smacked down

 

I was quite surprised to see this pop up in my feed yesterday. I've been watching a few of his vids since the Bachmann debacle but this one took me by surprise. 

 

I think he's an ebay seller - maybe he somehow sees TT:120 as affecting his market somehow?

 

[Hobby]

Never bought any of it but feels that he can criticise it without any experience or evidence to back up his criticisms (except for quoting Sam's seriously bad "survey"), sounds just like several posters on this thread! His video is well titled, though, it certainly is tragic, sad and pish!

[Johan DC]

31 minutes ago, HExpressD said:

Not sure what this guy's issue is, seemingly just trying to pick fights with every manufacturer since his Bachmann video got smacked down

I think he's doing it for the 'clicks'. Surfing on Sam's Trains' succes maybe? Seems to me he never had a lot of views, until he started bashing some Hornby and Bachmann products.

[teletougos]

30 minutes ago, Hroth said:

 

I've got a 3 volume set of W&P on the bookshelf.  Its been there for decades, it's not been touched yet....

 

 

I speed-read it.

 

It concerns Russia.

[Les1952]

1 hour ago, Michanglais said:

One argument I haven't seen come up for a while is that in TT:120, everything is to scale. Correct gauge to scale. Both British OO and N are 'incorrect'.

 

The only British OO locos I've got are AC electrics given I doubt we'll see them in TT for a long time. 

 

 

 

Oddly enough with classes 86 and 87 now being mostly located in Eastern Europe (and being overhauled and repainted at last- one even sporting a fresh green livery AND its UK nameplates...) these are the types I could see the likes of Tillig having a go at.  They already cover one of the classes the 86s and 87s work alongside.

 

Tillig appears to see TT:120 as their property as successors to Berliner TT Bahn, and I would place them as the most likely to have a stab at the UK market in retaliation against Hornby.

 

Les

[Hobby]

Yes, I agree, Les, when it's been discussed before I've said the same thing. I suspect that up until now they've thought the market for those classes as too small, but if they see TT take off in the UK they'll do them.

[natterjack]

47 minutes ago, Les1952 said:

Tillig appears to see TT:120 as their property

The Tillig bogie/drive design template does seem to lend itself to rapid adaptation to new wheelbase and body outlines; who knows but maybe they  could position themselves as open to commission in the manner of Heljan in OO.

Edited March 1 by natterjack
spell check

[Hroth]

46 minutes ago, teletougos said:

 

I speed-read it.

 

It concerns Russia.

 

And War?

 

[teletougos]

20 minutes ago, natterjack said:

The Tillig bogie/drive design template does seem to lend itself to rapid adaptation to new wheelbase and body outlines; who knows but maybe they  could position themselves as open to commission in the manner of Heljan in OO.

 

I think the Berliner Bahnen one does, as you can move axles easily. And tap the worm along the drive shaft. If you're careful. But it's a bit ancient. 

[britishcolumbian]

1 hour ago, teletougos said:

 

I speed-read it.

 

It concerns Russia.

British literature: I will die for the King

French literature: I will die for love

American literature: I will die for freedom

Russian literature: I will die

[E100]

I do think a way for Hornby to try and dig themselves out of a TT120 shaped hole is to swing some focus towards those cross European models such as 87's but also wagons used on both sides of the channel to bolster their European brands at the same time. To be fair they are obviously doing the 66 though arguably more from a UK perspective that more lateral thinking. I do understand the need for the phase 1/2/3 models but beyond that I can certainly see more broad appeal models coming to the fore even if that comes at the slight detriment to the UK range.

 

I would also be interested to understand if models such as the Flying Scotsman are selling well on European layouts in the same way that the HO models seem to have gone down well.