Hornby 2023 Speculation?

[SD85]

A retooled rebuilt MN to complement the excellent original MN in the range would be most welcome. The current tooling is holding up OK but buying them new is a bit pointless since a lot of them turn up second hand for anything between 90-150 quid. And as pointed out, it surely would be tempting for another manufacturer to have a go if Hornby won't do it.

 

The retooled 8F would be another obvious one for Hornby or any other manufacturer to do, especially as the model has not been in the catalogue for some years IIRC.

 

I asked Hornby at the MK show in October if they would produce a Z class. No chance. I then asked practically every other manufacturer at Warley if they would produce a Z class. Nope. Looks like Golden Arrow or DMR are the only options then..........

Edited December 19, 2022 by SD85

[adb968008]

8 minutes ago, SD85 said:

A retooled rebuilt MN to complement the excellent original MN in the range would be most welcome. The current tooling is holding up OK but buying them new is a bit pointless since a lot of them turn up second hand for anything between 90-150 quid. And as pointed out, it surely would be tempting for another manufacturer to have a go if Hornby won't do it.

 

The retooled 8F would be another obvious one for Hornby or any other manufacturer to do, especially as the model has not been in the catalogue for some years IIRC.

 

I asked Hornby at the MK show in October if they would produce a Z class. No chance. I then asked practically every other manufacturer at Warley if they would produce a Z class. Nope. Looks like Golden Arrow or DMR are the only options then..... 

Z looks a good one for KRModels.

 

just make a big bertha without the tender 

 

😜

 

[SD85]

On 15/12/2022 at 19:36, phil gollin said:

.

 

Strange the lack of "Southern" subjects being suggested, considering where Hornby is based.

 

PLEASE, no more Merchant Navies, or WC/BoB's.

 

4-COR,   4-SUB,  or  LBSCR/SR/S. Region K-class 2-6-0s would all be useful and popular.

 

.

 

I agree that a K class would be great. It would nicely dovetail with the Bachmann H1/H2 Atlantics and E4.

 

There are two elephants in the room when it comes to Southern era models. The first is the lack of a U class which was a wide ranging mixed traffic locomotive and as I've said many times now the argument that it's "too similar to an N" doesn't wash anymore given that Hornby produced the 78xxx which is basically an Ivatt 2MT with minor detail differences.

 

The other one is a 4-CIG or an Electrostar. It seems that every 60s EMU has been modelled but not the 4-CIG. The lack of any Electrostar model from any manufacturer in the last 15-20 years is TBH baffling. Either way, if you want to model the Brighton main line post 1965, it's pretty hard to do it. I do understand that EMUs cost a lot though which is probably a major factor.

[Dunsignalling]

15 minutes ago, SD85 said:

A retooled rebuilt MN to complement the excellent original MN in the range would be most welcome. The current tooling is holding up OK but buying them new is a bit pointless since a lot of them turn up second hand for anything between 90-150 quid. And as pointed out, it surely would be tempting for another manufacturer to have a go if Hornby won't do it.

 

The retooled 8F would be another obvious one for Hornby or any other manufacturer to do, especially as the model has not been in the catalogue for some years IIRC.

 

I asked Hornby at the MK show in October if they would produce a Z class. No chance. I then asked practically every other manufacturer at Warley if they would produce a Z class. Nope. Looks like Golden Arrow or DMR are the only options then..........

I am the long standing owner of a careworn and atrociously painted Millholme Z that I rescued from a dog's home thirty-odd years ago and restored to decent society.

 

Consequently I'd prefer a W or an H16 if large SR tank locos are under consideration, though I doubt Hornby has either in mind.

 

I think the H16 might be just quirky enough to tempt Rapido but not quite quirky enough  for KR.

 

John

[SD85]

I must admit I probably rather got on the nerves of the people on the Dapol stand at Warley. Over the weekend I visited them several times and suggested producing a Z class, then a K class, then mentioned that if Hornby weren't going to bother retooling their 8F there was an obvious gap in the market for them. I also did my usual gentle prodding of trying to get them to consider producing Bulleid Pacifics in 7mm scale.

 

I ended up buying a 7mm Terrier off their stand in the end because I felt like I should probably actually compensate them for having to listen to my suggestions for two days..........

Edited December 19, 2022 by SD85

[Dunsignalling]

14 minutes ago, SD85 said:

 

I agree that a K class would be great. It would nicely dovetail with the Bachmann H1/H2 Atlantics and E4.

 

There are two elephants in the room when it comes to Southern era models. The first is the lack of a U class which was a wide ranging mixed traffic locomotive and as I've said many times now the argument that it's "too similar to an N" doesn't wash anymore given that Hornby produced the 78xxx which is basically an Ivatt 2MT with minor detail differences.

 

The other one is a 4-CIG or an Electrostar. It seems that every 60s EMU has been modelled but not the 4-CIG. The lack of any Electrostar model from any manufacturer in the last 15-20 years is TBH baffling. Either way, if you want to model the Brighton main line post 1965, it's pretty hard to do it. I do understand that EMUs cost a lot though which is probably a major factor.

I think the cost problem with EMUs is just the tip of the iceberg. Unless one's layout is a very basic terminus-FY set up, which can probably be covered using the 2-car units already produced, you are going to need loads of them.

 

Multiply c£450 for a 4-car by ten or a dozen (for starters) and eyes start to water,. Well, mine would anyway.

 

John

Edited December 19, 2022 by Dunsignalling

[SD85]

That's the thing with EMUs, yeah.

 

I still think the Stadler FLIRT units were an odd choice, though. An Electrostar just seems a far more obvious gap in the market to aim for.

 

I wonder if EMUs might be more viable in TT.

Edited December 19, 2022 by SD85

[TomScrut]

58 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

755 was the wrong choice

 

It does leave itself open for 231 and/or 756 though?

[Dunsignalling]

12 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Things like an 8f and rebuilt MN are too tempting for other manufacturers to ignore imo.

 

 

 

I agree, even if nobody has either on the go already, I think they will certainly become irresistible if Hornby don't announce replacements this January. 

 

[TomScrut]

4 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

I think the cost problem with EMUs is just the tip of the iceberg. Unless one's layout is a very basic terminus-FY set up, which can probably be covered using the 2-car units already produced, you are going to need loads of them.

 

Multiply c£450 for a 4-car by ten or a dozen (for starters) and eyes start to water,. Well, mine would anyway.

 

John

 

It depends on the layout, but I agree that most of the time more than one unit could be required to make a realistic vision of the place in question. Saying that, not having any at all is even more unrealistic.

 

That is exactly why I have 2 LNER Azumas, and will have 2 TPE mk5 sets, because there's a very good chance 2 could be in the station at a time.

[Dunsignalling]

4 minutes ago, SD85 said:

That's the thing with EMUs, yeah.

 

I still think the Stadler FLIRT units were an odd choice, though. An Electrostar just seems a far more obvious gap in the market to aim for.

 

I wonder if EMUs might be more viable in TT.

I think Hornby chose the Flirt with the longer term in mind and likely usage by more operators.

 

Ever more services involve working over sections of electrified and non-electrified lines in the course of their journeys, and diesel traction is to be banned from London Termini in the not-too-distant-future.

 

I consider that the Flirt's intermediate diesel vehicle to be a highly practical solution to providing for such services, as well as over lines that are in course of being electrified. Once complete, take it out and you have a straight EMU. Far easier than having small generators and batteries distributed along the train.

 

One possible candidate might be SWR, who must be (or at least I hope they are) pondering what they will need to ultimately replace the 159s on Waterloo-Salisbury-Exeter services. 

 

John

[Pint of Adnams]

On 17/12/2022 at 23:08, The Black Hat said:

Agreeing with you through most of this. The problem with 0-6-0s is that (as usual) companies have been going around picking the wrong ones. J14 was just a token gesture as Hornby looked to sew up the GE area and wanted it all for themselves. Problem is that with doing the Brit, L1, D16, etc you just need the one J14/J15 for the collection. Bachmann tried to be clever with the J11, expect GC polls poorly and by going down the middle thought that it would pick up Midland and Eastern demand. Not quite... Again your Southen classes such as C class wont sell in great number as people want them as a token amongst all the other stuff. 

Hornby never produced a J14 - that may have been similar to the J15 that they did produce but had a higher-set boiler and was mechanically poor and so very short-lived. Admittedly Hornby probably tried to over-capitalise on livery variations, principally in the BR period, not many modellers might have realised that other variations were actually catered for becuase they were not well publicised. These variations were summarised in the GER Society News. What Hornby did not offer other variations such as the side window cab nor tender cab, nor earlier iterations with the GE-style wooden cab roof and earlier boiler variations.

Hornby could also have leveraged the design effort to produce the E4 2-4-0 - almost identical to the J15 save for the wheel arrangement and outside framing to the leading carrying wheels.

And then there's the multiplicity of the 0-6-0 and 2-4-2 Tanks (Buckjumpers and Gobblers) with the former, which all together with the E4, always polled well.

One of the constraints on potential sales is the near total absence of GER-period rolling stock - coaching and freight - the Oxford Rail GE Van being the only exception. GER coaching stock lasted until the end of steam in East Anglia, even some 6-wheeled examples being found on the Mid-Suffolk Light Railway in the 1950s.

At least Rapido have grasped the nettle with the J70 Tram and Wisbech & Upwell tram cars, even if as a spin-off from the Titfield Thunderbolt commemoration and the Model Rail commission.

And I agree that the Gresley corridor stock was poorly selected and badly replicated, albeit with the faults corrected after external intervention on the non-gangwayed models. Again this stock survived well and good accurate models of appropriate types would sit well with Hornby mainline LNER locomotives, of which there are more than sufficient.

[MikeParkin65]

49 minutes ago, SD85 said:

A retooled rebuilt MN to complement the excellent original MN in the range would be most welcome. The current tooling is holding up OK but buying them new is a bit pointless since a lot of them turn up second hand for anything between 90-150 quid. And as pointed out, it surely would be tempting for another manufacturer to have a go if Hornby won't do it.

 

The retooled 8F would be another obvious one for Hornby or any other manufacturer to do, especially as the model has not been in the catalogue for some years IIRC.

 

I asked Hornby at the MK show in October if they would produce a Z class. No chance. I then asked practically every other manufacturer at Warley if they would produce a Z class. Nope. Looks like Golden Arrow or DMR are the only options then..........

A rebuilt MN would sit very well with Hornby - Southern, big named and green. Also reckon it has good potential for 'one off sales'  - my collection is predominately ex LMS and ex LNER themed but I'd definately have a rebuilt MN for 'specials' as there is prototype precedent. Not so sure about the 8F - Bachmann have the potential to make one (they have done the research for the N gauge version after all) or one of the new manufacturers may have it in their sights.  

[Dunsignalling]

17 minutes ago, TomScrut said:

 

It depends on the layout, but I agree that most of the time more than one unit could be required to make a realistic vision of the place in question. Saying that, not having any at all is even more unrealistic.

 

That is exactly why I have 2 LNER Azumas, and will have 2 TPE mk5 sets, because there's a very good chance 2 could be in the station at a time.

How about two 12-car Electrostars, though?

 

I suspect that neither you or I are all that typical.

 

Despite my own record on Bulleid Pacifics (and, come two think of it, since Hornby introduced them, my average is less than 2.5 per year anyhow) I think there's reluctance to spend money on large quantities of the same/very similar stuff if a more varied selection is on offer.

 

John

[wombatofludham]

The chat about the Flirt and future runs is interesting in that unless Hornby have tooled up the model to allow the Welsh version to be modelled correctly with the extra door, would enthusiasts be happy to spend the kind of money the Flirt is being touted at for a straight relivery and turn a blind eye to the missing door if the current Anglia tooling is used?  I can't help thinking not.

So, I suspect future runs will depend on the tooling having been designed to be adapted, or Hornby taking a punt at a straight relivery to no doubt a lot of criticism.

I have my own ideas which is more likely.

[TomScrut]

37 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

How about two 12-car Electrostars, though?

 

I suspect that neither you or I are all that typical.

 

I suspect we aren't either!

 

But yeah 12 car Electrostar would be touch and go with my station. I aren't sure a 9 coach Azuma would go either. Electrostar is out of region for me anyway so it is a moot point.

[Gilwell Park]

I am getting very annoyed reading umpteen requests for Hornby to re-tool models already in the range. What is wrong with their existing LMS 8F & why o why should they be expected to produce multiple variants of the MN?. How many people really need half a dozen pacifics on their layout?  A Brighton K sounds an excellent idea as does a GE E4. Let's have some variety in the new models, not slightly different re-runs of existing models. Roger.

[rogerzilla]

If someone made an SR K1 or W, would much retooling be required to do both?  The side tanks are literally the same, as they were kept and recycled when the Ks became Us, and the K1 and W are visually almost identical, even down to the tank cutaways and huge side steps.

 

A K has the wrong size and shape outside cylinders, of course.

[The Black Hat]

11 minutes ago, Gilwell Park said:

I am getting very annoyed reading umpteen requests for Hornby to re-tool models already in the range. What is wrong with their existing LMS 8F & why o why should they be expected to produce multiple variants of the MN?. How many people really need half a dozen pacifics on their layout?  A Brighton K sounds an excellent idea as does a GE E4. Let's have some variety in the new models, not slightly different re-runs of existing models. Roger.

Theres quite a lot wrong with the current 8F. With the Hornby Black 5 fitted with smoke and lights being done, its firing a gun on the next chapter of DCC: The Next Generation. It will see engines being retooled again, so that full sound and lights can be done as a minimum - cue firebox glows, or even headlamps now on engines. That means that even recent DCC fitted engines can be targets for an upgrade, but plenty of those done when super detail was relatively new have only had basic DCC set ups installed. Now the desire is for more pick-ups through the tender and for the socket and speaker in the tender or tanks able to have room for decent speakers so that the sound quality can match that of the engines appearance. 

The 8F is massively overdue such an upgrade, but if your getting frustrated over just this one engine - then the future doesnt bode well as just about every single engine done to this point will now have some justification for the DCC upgrade and so be mentioned in the future. 

[Karl]

A couple of reliveries/minor tooling mods I think we may see are:

 

- J15 done as a Y14 in GER blue as per the preserved one. Pre-grouping & colourful the first release of such seem to fly off the shelves ala Midland 1P, Bachmann C Class.

- J27 with the mods needed for 65894 and similar variants.

- Princess Coronation with D/Chimney and deflectors as per 6233 

- Std 4 4-6-0 double chimney and BR1B not weathered BR Black ( I don't think this has been done by either H or B in the latest tooled versions_

 

I'm just hoping for a year of the Mogul in Steam with something like the K4 or K2. A retooled 8F I think is likely at some point as the existing one doesn't have the fine details of later models but with the Black 5 announced last year I can't see another large LMS this year. The 8F definitely has an accurascale likely feel given that they are doing the powering britain wagons and with the 37 in the range for the common heavy hauler in Diesel period from the 1960's the 8F seems a logical one for them in the steam range.

[e30ftw]

8F makes sense, which is why Hornby probably wont do it for a while.

 

Re_liveries of small steam and diesel industrial shunters

 

new livery's of the (new) HST

 

A Flying Scotsman 

 

Dublo KING or other large kettle has been mentioned.

 

King Charles Kings

 

Royal purple 67 or a black limited edition royal 67.

 

Some pre grouping stock new tools

 

Nothing new tool wise for D+E modelers, or if they do it would be something silly like a 37/47

[Flying Pig]

19 minutes ago, Karl said:

J27 with the mods needed for 65894 and similar variants.

 

I wonder if we'll see the J27 released by Hornby.  It really isn't up to the standard of their own models and I think we might see a significant price increase if it did appear in their range.

[adb968008]

2 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

 

One possible candidate might be SWR, who must be (or at least I hope they are) pondering what they will need to ultimately replace the 159s on Waterloo-Salisbury-Exeter services. 

 

With the rundown and cut backs, transferring this route to GWR to run Azumas from Paddington via Reading would be a speed / time upgrade. The units could goto GWR to replace the HSTs etc.

[Dunsignalling]

30 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

With the rundown and cut backs, transferring this route to GWR to run Azumas from Paddington via Reading would be a speed / time upgrade. The units could goto GWR to replace the HSTs etc.

It really wouldn't. The only benefit would be to GWR's diesel bill!

 

Reading-Basingstoke is a slow line, and even if Paddington had the capacity to run the extra trains,  an IET running from there to Basingstoke would take longer than an 159 does from Waterloo.

 

On top of that, the line speed west of Salisbury is only 85 so the bi-mode IETs would just as far out of their comfort zone as they are West of Exeter.

 

TBH it would make more sense to routinely change trains at Basingstoke for an electric into Waterloo, as already happens in times of disruption.

 

John

[SD85]

I'd just wire up Exeter to Basingstoke and then have a fleet of dual voltage units that switch over at the Basingstoke stop.