Hornby announce TT:120

[fezza]

4 hours ago, Railpassion said:

Is it me, or is the choice of models utterly chaotic?

 

 

 

We are desperate for a J50 said noone ever.

 

Yet we still have no DMUs (either first or second generation), no Standard 5s, Standard tanks or 4Fs - you know stuff that would actually be useful to a wide range of people who want to run a railway realistic and appropriate stock.

 

There was an April Fools joke on the internet stating that Hornby had abandoned TT. Perhaps the bigger joke is that is continuing with an utterly random range of models. If I was a shareholder I would be very worried.

[Porfuera]

14 minutes ago, Michanglais said:

Did he not also say there would be 'extra' in Hornby Magazine than in a future pdf? (Bit unfair for us not able to pick up a copy...).

 

He was talking in a bit of a rush - I had to listen to it a couple more times! - but what I think he was saying is that the catalogue contains everything that is on the website but that the catalogue has "a bit more in it" (i.e. more than the website has) rather than the Hornby copy having more than the pdf.

[Porfuera]

11 minutes ago, fezza said:

If I was a shareholder I would be very worried.

 

I'm not sure shareholders know much about the real railways - Mike Ashley doesn't strike me as being much of a train buff.

 

Edited April 2 by Porfuera
Grammar!

[Hobby]

Deleted

Edited April 2 by Hobby

[1andrew1]

6 minutes ago, Hobby said:

And the share price went up 5% according to someone on FB following the announcement!

This is the day's share price graph: https://www.Hornby.plc.uk/share-price-graph/

 

Hornby plc opened the day at 38p, went up to 40p at 10am and again at 11am and now 37.33p (4.15pm)

 

Edited April 2 by 1andrew1

[GenericRMWebUsername]

Lots of negativity here.

 

By the end of the year, multiple compelling criticisms of TT120 will have been alleviated. 

 

1) "It's all Pacifics" - We will have the J50, and at least two more are in the pipeline. 

2) "The 08 shunter should have been in an early British Railways livery"- We will have have the 08 shunter in BR green.

3) "It's all steam"- We will have Class 43, Class 50, and Class 66.

4) "There's nothing for the Class 66 to pull"- We will have modern container wagons. 

 

There's still a lot missing from the range because it's early. But a lot of critical components are coming together. Some of those puzzle pieces were announced today. I'm optimistic. I'm expecting 2025 to be the year of GWR. That's when the Pannier Tank and the Castle Class should arrive. And of course, the Class 37 will also make its debut in 2025 too. SR is probably 2026. 

 

 

[D9020 Nimbus]

5 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

BTW Terriers weren't shunters they were passenger locomotives!

They hauled mixed trains to Hayling Island and operated and shunted the Newhaven West Quay branch.

 

I suspect the only reason the J50 was preferred was because it would be very difficult to fit a Bluetooth decoder in a "Terrier".

 

J50s may well have been vacuum fitted but only for station pilot and ECS work. I've never seen a photo of one on a passenger train.

[andrewshimmin]

12 minutes ago, GenericRMWebUsername said:

Lots of negativity here.

 

By the end of the year, multiple compelling criticisms of TT120 will have been alleviated. 

 

1) "It's all Pacifics" - We will have the J50, and at least two more are in the pipeline. 

2) "The 08 shunter should have been in an early British Railways livery"- We will have have the 08 shunter in BR green.

3) "It's all steam"- We will have Class 43, Class 50, and Class 66.

4) "There's nothing for the Class 66 to pull"- We will have modern container wagons. 

 

There's still a lot missing from the range because it's early. But a lot of critical components are coming together. Some of those puzzle pieces were announced today. I'm optimistic. I'm expecting 2025 to be the year of GWR. That's when the Pannier Tank and the Castle Class should arrive. And of course, the Class 37 will also make its debut in 2025 too. SR is probably 2026. 

 

 

 

Agreed. They're slowly but surely building a range.

I think the grumpiness mainly boils down to people who are disappointed their particular priority models aren't coming soon.

But one person's priority is another person's yawnfest.

My top priority would be something like a Midland Compound and 0-4-4T in pre-grouping livery!

Producing a LNER tank engine used for shunting and ECS to go with the LNER mainline express locos seems reasonable to me, even if J50s would never be anywhere near the top of my list of desired locos.

As to people talking about branch passenger trains - from what I've seen in old photos, these were nearly always pre grouping carriages right until the end of steam...

Besides, from a personal selfish perspective they're already producing models faster than I can afford to buy the ones I like... So a bit of a slower roll out suits me fine.

[Steamport Southport]

34 minutes ago, D9020 Nimbus said:

They hauled mixed trains to Hayling Island and operated and shunted the Newhaven West Quay branch.

 

I suspect the only reason the J50 was preferred was because it would be very difficult to fit a Bluetooth decoder in a "Terrier".

 

J50s may well have been vacuum fitted but only for station pilot and ECS work. I've never seen a photo of one on a passenger train.

 

Oh. One pulled mixed trains occasionally!

 

Any evidence they were ever used as shunters apart from the few that were used at Brighton Works over the years? Nope. They were deemed to not be of use as shunters or goods engines. That's why most of them were sold off prior to 1923 as being useless.

 

Even the IoW used the E1s for shunting and goods trains.

 

 

A bit like saying A4s were goods engines due to a couple of instances of them pulling goods trains on running in turns and occasional use on fitted express freights near the end of steam.

 

Funny how this hobby always looks for exceptions rather than the normal everyday to justify things that hardly ever happened. 

 

A Pannier once pulled the Cornish Riviera Express for a short distance as the booked engine had failed. Doesn't mean they pulled it everyday!

 

 

Jason

[montyburns56]

5 hours ago, Railpassion said:

Is it me, or is the choice of models utterly chaotic?

 

 

 

Yes and no. There is a logic to it as they are choosing models that have recently been tooled up for their OO range as presumably it will save money on the research/CAD costs. 

[Dunsignalling]

59 minutes ago, andrewshimmin said:

 

Agreed. They're slowly but surely building a range.

I think the grumpiness mainly boils down to people who are disappointed their particular priority models aren't coming soon.

But one person's priority is another person's yawnfest.

My top priority would be something like a Midland Compound and 0-4-4T in pre-grouping livery!

Producing a LNER tank engine used for shunting and ECS to go with the LNER mainline express locos seems reasonable to me, even if J50s would never be anywhere near the top of my list of desired locos.

As to people talking about branch passenger trains - from what I've seen in old photos, these were nearly always pre grouping carriages right until the end of steam...

Besides, from a personal selfish perspective they're already producing models faster than I can afford to buy the ones I like... So a bit of a slower roll out suits me fine.

 

Though some will regard (some of) the already-fulfilled priorities as yawnfests, too. Those interested in Southern prototypes, so far, have nothing even to anticipate.

 

TT:120 is frankly not yet a place for those requiring a coherent range of models matching their personal interests, and it won't become one for several more years.

 

That said, If you like the size, the items that have already been released/announced, and can tolerate extensive mixing and non-matching for the foreseeable future; go for it. 

 

Whichever category you occupy, though, don't imagine that your desires will be fulfilled in the new scale any sooner or more widely than it has taken the established scales to get where they are today.

 

In any new scale, prototype choices will be heavily influenced by known popularity. Hornby knows what has sold well for them in OO; why else were the A3 and A4 their first releases in TT:120?

 

John

Edited April 2 by Dunsignalling

[andrewshimmin]

Guys, Hornby is not in the business of provisioning our railway modelling dreams.

Hornby is in the business of selling models to make money to make other models to sell.

Presumably they know from OO that the J50 will sell well (and the other models they've chosen for the first few years of TT120).

[andrewshimmin]

1 minute ago, Dunsignalling said:

 

Though some will regard (some of) the already-fulfilled priorities as yawnfests, too. Those interested in Southern prototypes, so far, have nothing even to anticipate.

 

TT:120 is frankly not yet a place for those requiring a coherent range of models matching their personal interests, and it won't become one for several more years.

 

That said, If you like what has already been released/announced and can tolerate extensive mixing and non-matching for the foreseeable future; go for it. 

 

Whichever category you occupy, though, don't imagine that your desires will be fulfilled in the new scale any sooner or more widely than it has taken the established scales to get where they are today.

 

In any new scale, prototype choices will be heavily influenced by known popularity. Hornby knows what has sold well for them in OO; why else were the A3 and A4 their first releases in TT:120?

 

John

 

Exactly. 

[Legend]

7 hours ago, Railpassion said:

Is it me, or is the choice of models utterly chaotic?

 

 

 I think yes .  My thoughts are that Simon Kohler looked to see what sold in OO and simply thought he would do the best sellers . A3,A4 and an 08 . Totally dis functional .  While I’m looking forward to the Duchess and Staniers it’s a bit left field having introduced eastern models . These are going to be outliers in the range for years .

 

The J50 will bolster the Eastern side and fill in need for an 0-6-0 that should have been recognised from the beginning .

 

The designer said today that the 37 was scanned and CAD CAM done from fresh as although these models exist in OO there was no CAD files . That perhaps explains the reason why we are getting a 50 first instead of 37/47.  If you look at Farish extension of their modern range in 81 it was HST, 37,47 and 08 . I would have thought that sensible for TT too . Certainly when it reaches that critical mass I’ll have a look at TT120 as a secondary layout . I love that HST . But their models are all over the place at the moment . 

Edited April 2 by Legend

[HExpressD]

3 hours ago, fezza said:

 

We are desperate for a J50 said noone ever.

 

Yet we still have no DMUs (either first or second generation), no Standard 5s, Standard tanks or 4Fs - you know stuff that would actually be useful to a wide range of people who want to run a railway realistic and appropriate stock.

How long do you think it takes to design, tool, check, modify, approve, produce, ship and market a single product, let alone multiple out of interest?

[fezza]

12 minutes ago, HExpressD said:

How long do you think it takes to design, tool, check, modify, approve, produce, ship and market a single product, let alone multiple out of interest?

 

Maybe Hornby should have thought of that and got a properly thought out and logical range of good quality products ready before launch?

 

If the answer is they don't have sufficient capacity for a  viable TT range, why launch a TT range? The fact they have driven other potential TT suppliers out of the market without being able to offer products of their own is crazy and does nothing to encourage growth of the scale.

[HExpressD]

23 minutes ago, fezza said:

 

Maybe Hornby should have thought of that and got a properly thought out and logical range of good quality products ready before launch?

 

If the answer is they don't have sufficient capacity for a  viable TT range, why launch a TT range? The fact they have driven other potential TT suppliers out of the market without being able to offer products of their own is crazy and does nothing to encourage growth of the scale.

But they did, and do have a viable TT range? You can view it here if you like:

 

Hornby TT:120 Catalogue | Hornby UK

 

As for driving suppliers out, I'm not sure that's fair. Fair enough they announced some of the same things as Heljan but the choice to pull out was theres. If their 31 was at CAD stage it would be out now if they had carried on with it and we've seen not a peep of a Hornby 31.

 

A range that isn't as big as you'd like =/= a range that isn't viable.

[Jeff Smith]

39 minutes ago, HExpressD said:

How long do you think it takes to design, tool, check, modify, approve, produce, ship and market a single product, let alone multiple out of interest?

 

20 minutes ago, fezza said:

 

Maybe Hornby should have thought of that and got a properly thought out and logical range of good quality products ready before launch?

 

If the answer is they don't have sufficient capacity for a  viable TT range, why launch a TT range? The fact they have driven other potential TT suppliers out of the market without being able to offer products of their own is crazy and does nothing to encourage growth of the scale.

Oh dear, such negativity and naivety.  Unfortunately A Model World gave a very distorted view of the actual work required.  Yes, perhaps other choices could have been made but I'm sure were debated at length to initiate a range expected to continue into mainstream..

 

Try this 

 

 

[Porfuera]

1 hour ago, Legend said:

My thoughts are that Simon Kohler looked to see what sold in OO and simply thought he would do the best sellers . A3,A4 and an 08 . Totally dis functional . 

 

But if you're launching a new UK outline scale, don't you want to start with the best sellers? Hornby are there to sell toy trains to the general public, not to please people on RMweb who want to build a layout set in a particular region and era.

 

And even if they did start off with one region and era you'd still get people complaining that it wasn't of interest to them and why didn't Hornby do x, y or z instead. If you were to look through this thread I'm sure you could find a post advocating something from almost every region and era since railways were invented. Whatever Hornby do they won't manage to please all of the people all of the time.

 

In any case, however chaotic the range may look, it seems that Hornby are doing well with their current choices - many items have sold out repeatedly over the last 15 months or so, mainly because they can't produce the stuff fast enough. And that isn't something that's restricted to Hornby - I'm still waiting for Heljan's Class 02 that was announced in September 2020.

 

Edited April 2 by Porfuera

[Dunsignalling]

1 hour ago, fezza said:

 

Maybe Hornby should have thought of that and got a properly thought out and logical range of good quality products ready before launch?

 

If the answer is they don't have sufficient capacity for a  viable TT range, why launch a TT range? The fact they have driven other potential TT suppliers out of the market without being able to offer products of their own is crazy and does nothing to encourage growth of the scale.

The driving force was that the competition in OO has become much hotter than it's ever been and Hornby saw their previous dominance declining; combined with SK's long-standing nostalgia for Tri-ang TT-3.

 

The alternatives of N and/or OO were also becoming more competitive and Hornby would have been starting cold in either just as they have in TT:120, so plumping for the new scale has a valid rationale behind it.

 

TT:120 is an attempt to establish a new exclusive fiefdom to (hopefully) balance out Hornby's declining position in OO. The difficulty is that the TT:120 range constitutes a competitor to their own Railroad range aimed at budget buyers in OO, so they may have forged a double-edged sword.

 

I doubt Hornby want meaningful competition in the new scale even before their own involvement has proven itself. Fortunately, the new boys all seem to be doing far too nicely in OO and N to require a 'Plan B'. 

 

My take is that we'll only really know TT:120 has taken off when a couple of other RTR brands come after a slice of the action.

 

John 

Edited April 2 by Dunsignalling

[moawkwrd]

1 hour ago, fezza said:

 

Maybe Hornby should have thought of that and got a properly thought out and logical range of good quality products ready before launch?

 

If the answer is they don't have sufficient capacity for a  viable TT range, why launch a TT range? The fact they have driven other potential TT suppliers out of the market without being able to offer products of their own is crazy and does nothing to encourage growth of the scale.

What a ridiculous statement.

 

Are you seriously asserting that Hornby shouldn’t have bothered with a new scale UNLESS they could’ve released every item available in other scales from the get go? You realise how absurd that would be? How on earth would that have helped competition either? 

Heljan gave up on TT like a child who didn’t get its own way. The reality is they aren’t a manufacturer who can support a new scale like Hornby could. They could’ve released their models already and beaten H by a few years… like what happens in other scales all the time.

 

It isn’t even true of OO or N gauge - there are plenty of items in either scale out of production and hard to find second hand now.

 

Some people here have a strange TT/Hornby sized chip on their shoulders for reasons unknown.

Edited April 2 by moawkwrd

[gc4946]

If Hornby produces a Black 5, J94, classes 31 and 37 as planned, the best area to model based on what's actually offered or in the pipeline would be either the southern ECML or West Riding of Yorkshire in the steam/transition era.

In terms of post-steam diesel/electric practice, BR Western Region (HST, 08, 47, 50) or lines served by the current GWR (HST, 08, 66)

Edited April 2 by gc4946

[ToledoRails]

I'll echo my thoughts here, but Hornby have simply fumbled this range right out the gate. If they want to lean into the LNER/Eastern Region that's fine, (no worse than Tri-ang's backbone being the LMS!) but the J50 should have been a launch item. A passenger train set with a 3rd radius oval and a J50 on a goods set, say two or three wagons and a brakevan, and a second radius oval would have been an excellent way to get started with a brand new scale. 

[idd15]

So my take on all this. Very good to see Hornby are still developing and putting significant investment into TT120, and long may it continue. Maybe things are not going quite as quickly, or in the many and varied directions as perhaps we’d like. But hey at least it’s happening! 😊

pip pip

idd

 

[moawkwrd]

7 minutes ago, ToledoRails said:

I'll echo my thoughts here, but Hornby have simply fumbled this range right out the gate. If they want to lean into the LNER/Eastern Region that's fine, (no worse than Tri-ang's backbone being the LMS!) but the J50 should have been a launch item. A passenger train set with a 3rd radius oval and a J50 on a goods set, say two or three wagons and a brakevan, and a second radius oval would have been an excellent way to get started with a brand new scale. 

But on the flip side if there had only been that available back in late 2022 - there would’ve been just as much doom and gloom mongering, perhaps more so.

 

From a manufacturing perspective, Pacific’s plus carriages is a far easier prospect for a set than loco + 3 different wagons + brake van. It would’ve taken longer to produce such a set and therefore likely meant Christmas 2022 was missed.

 

A goods set has been rumoured already and makes more sense now with the J50 than the Class 08 - so who knows it might appear yet.

Edited April 2 by moawkwrd