TT:120 Easterner

[Jeff Smith]

Yes, I know they are not available yet but just thought I would create a thread complimentary to the Scotsman one.  I placed my order on Nov 2nd from here in the US.

 

BRER/LNER is definitely not my immediate area of interest but the A4 is a very special loco so decided on it rather than the Scotsman.  A layout may get built but nevertheless I do have one shelf left in my largely P4 display case!

[Robin Brasher]

'Silver King' is a special locomotive for me so I am going to wait for it to appear together with some crimson and cream coaches.  Meanwhile I look forward to seeing some pictures of the Easterner set.

[rogerzilla]

You'd think a real "Easterner" would have had one of the streamlined B17s used on the "East Anglian", rather than an A4.  Now that would be a USP for TT.

[Ravenser]

1 hour ago, Jeff Smith said:

 

 

BRER/LNER is definitely not my immediate area of interest but the A4 is a very special loco so decided on it rather than the Scotsman.  A layout may get built but nevertheless I do have one shelf left in my largely P4 display case!

 

Much easier to build an ECML layout in TT:120 than in 4mm, as the space requirement is much less.

 

Tony Wright's Stoke Summit was effectively 4 plain tracks in open countryside, to watch the trains go by, A double track circuit fed by a fiddle yard would do the job (Digswell Viaduct, Welwyn N station and Welwyn S Tunnel??)

 

With A4s and A3s in squadron service , Mk1s and Pullmans you are a fair way to the ECML of the 1950s . Throw in a 9F and a Brush 2 , some Gresley coaches (all promised)  and the key missing items become a V2 and an A1

 

 

[LMSfan72]

10 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

 

A double track circuit fed by a fiddle yard would do the job (Digswell Viaduct, Welwyn N station and Welwyn S Tunnel??)

 

 

That’s what I plan to have a go at! 

[RichardT]

1 hour ago, Ravenser said:

 

Much easier to build an ECML layout in TT:120 than in 4mm, as the space requirement is much less.

And even easier in N. Which has A3s, A4s and Gresley carriages available rtr now. And lots of other suitable stock for post-1948 eras.

(Oh, sorry, I forgot “it’s too small” - must be true, because Mr Kohler said so! 😂)

 

RichardT

[Ravenser]

9 minutes ago, RichardT said:

And even easier in N. Which has A3s, A4s and Gresley carriages available rtr now. And lots of other suitable stock for post-1948 eras.

(Oh, sorry, I forgot “it’s too small” - must be true, because Mr Kohler said so! 😂)

 

RichardT

 

But if someone likes TT:120 and the models concerned, and has the set , all that's irrelevant. What matters is that space is a huge problem for doing it in 4mm, and very much less of a problem in TT:120.By the time you've planned the thing and built the boards, a lot more of the stuff will be available 

 

(The TT coaches so far are rather nice btw) 

 

As a practical issue, ECML layouts don't seem to happen in N , they happen in 4mm - indicating that for some reason the folk who want to model that subject don't want to do it in N. (I'm perfectly well aware of Copenhagen Fields, although strictly speaking its 2mm finescale a slightly different animal)

 

What can you do with a TT:120 trainset? Use it as the core of a simple "watching the trains go by" ECML layout

 

"You shouldn't model the ECML in TT:120 , you should model it in N " is not a sensible response here

[Taigatrommel]

I'm wondering about getting one to renumber/name the loco as 60009 in 1990s condition.  Aside from not knowing exactly which years she carried "Osprey" as opposed to "Union of South Africa" and making sure chimney, handrails and tender are correct, is there anything else that 60004 is likely to have different to 60009?

[Jeff Smith]

If you want an Era 5 A4 you have to buy the Easterner although I'm sure Era 4 liveries were seen well into Era 5.  How quickly were Mk 1 coaches repainted from blood and custard?

[Hroth]

3 hours ago, Robin Brasher said:

'Silver King' is a special locomotive for me so I am going to wait for it to appear together with some crimson and cream coaches.  Meanwhile I look forward to seeing some pictures of the Easterner set.

 

A Silver King would have to be diecast, with tinplate litho Gresley coaches in blood'n'custard...  In a blue box!

🤪

 

Meanwhile I'll keep on waiting for my Eastener....

 

 

[Ravenser]

1 hour ago, Jeff Smith said:

If you want an Era 5 A4 you have to buy the Easterner although I'm sure Era 4 liveries were seen well into Era 5.  How quickly were Mk 1 coaches repainted from blood and custard?

 

The experts will respond, but I think blood & custard would have been getting pretty rare by 1960. And the ECML sets should have been getting the latest newest coaches on the ER/NEReg anyway

 

Again the experts will correct me - but I think 1959 is when Class 40s were brought onto the ECML expresses? The Brush 2s came onto GN surburban duties in 1958-9

 

Tony Wright would know all the details - I think Little Bytham is set in 1958 (the year the station closed)? Not a lot of blood and custard in his sets from memory of his posts.

 

Also if things snowball, and Worsley Works shoot down their 3mm  Mk1 etched sides to TT120 as seems likely - reworking Hornby CKs into other types of Mk1 would be simpler if you are dealing with a single colour livery . Even I fancy my chances of doing a reasonable job with plain maroon and a spray can in 4mm. As a P4 modeller it ought to manageable for you in 1:120...

[Les1952]

3 hours ago, rogerzilla said:

You'd think a real "Easterner" would have had one of the streamlined B17s used on the "East Anglian", rather than an A4.  Now that would be a USP for TT.

 

.....but much less likely to sell to Hornby's declared target market.

 

It isn't a coincidence that the first two locos are Gresley Pacifics and that a peppercorn A1 (aka Tornado) is in the pipeline for stage 4 or 5...

 

Les

[Les1952]

2 hours ago, RichardT said:

And even easier in N. Which has A3s, A4s and Gresley carriages available rtr now. And lots of other suitable stock for post-1948 eras.

(Oh, sorry, I forgot “it’s too small” - must be true, because Mr Kohler said so! 😂)

 

RichardT

 

I've just sold an ECML layout in N.......

pic of renumbered Dapol A4 with Minitrix brake as first coach running on Croft Spa at Spalding show where the layout was sold into retirement.

 

 

I hope that either Hornby will get a separate double-chimney A4 out fairly quickly or someone in the aftermarket will release a 3D printed replacement double chimney.

 

Les

 

Edited January 2, 2023 by Les1952
grammar

[Ravenser]

5 minutes ago, Les1952 said:

 

.....but much less likely to sell to Hornby's declared target market.

 

It isn't a coincidence that the first two locos are Gresley Pacifics and that a peppercorn A1 (aka Tornado) is in the pipeline for stage 4 or 5...

 

Les

 

The LNER had 201 Pacifics and 2 streamlined B17s, which were de-streamlined after the war

 

The Pacifics were used over about 750 route miles., serving London , 5 major provincial conurbations and 7-8 medium sized cities.  The streamlined B17s operated over 112 route miles serving London , one medium sized city and one large county town.

 

Streamlined B17s haven't even been done in OO.....

[Les1952]

14 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

 

The LNER had 201 Pacifics and 2 streamlined B17s, which were de-streamlined after the war

 

The Pacifics were used over about 750 route miles., serving London , 5 major provincial conurbations and 7-8 medium sized cities.  The streamlined B17s operated over 112 route miles serving London , one medium sized city and one large county town.

 

Streamlined B17s haven't even been done in OO.....

 

Exactly.

 

Les

[Steamport Southport]

25 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

 

The LNER had 201 Pacifics and 2 streamlined B17s, which were de-streamlined after the war

 

The Pacifics were used over about 750 route miles., serving London , 5 major provincial conurbations and 7-8 medium sized cities.  The streamlined B17s operated over 112 route miles serving London , one medium sized city and one large county town.

 

Streamlined B17s haven't even been done in OO.....

 

I think you've got the amount of Pacifics a bit high. Many were BR built.

 

I've got it at 139 at 31/12/1947

 

1 to 113 and 500 to 525.

 

Also there would be loads of Crimson and Cream about in 1960. Maroon wasn't adopted until 1956 and brand new coaches weren't getting repainted for fun.

 

According to the RCTS.

 

Odd Blood and Custard coaches were reported as being on the Western Region in 1963 with the RCTS reported that Mk1 CK W15622 was still in Crimson Lake & Cream in February 1964.

 

A bit biased towards the Southern but this website has details.

 

https://www.bloodandcustard.org/

 

 

Jason

[Ravenser]

45 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

I think you've got the amount of Pacifics a bit high. Many were BR built.

 

I've got it at 139 at 31/12/1947

 

1 to 113 and 500 to 525.

 

Also there would be loads of Crimson and Cream about in 1960. Maroon wasn't adopted until 1956 and brand new coaches weren't getting repainted for fun.

 

According to the RCTS.

 

Odd Blood and Custard coaches were reported as being on the Western Region in 1963 with the RCTS reported that Mk1 CK W15622 was still in Crimson Lake & Cream in February 1964.

 

A bit biased towards the Southern but this website has details.

 

https://www.bloodandcustard.org/

 

 

Jason

 

 

I was repeating someone elses recent quoted figures on here  (201 Pacifics / 184 V2s ) The 201 Pacifics almost certainly includes BR built A1s, and A2s.

 

As were talking 1950s ECML , and relative potentials , it's probably near the mark. I was being sloppy saying LNER Pacifics, though if you told someone A1s weren't LNER Pacifics they might raise an eyebrow - BR Pacifics implies Britannias to most folk

 

As far as Mk1s are  concerned , the HMRS Parkin Vol 1 has a photo of Bradford Forster Square carriage sidings , with just 3 blood/custard visible : "By the autumn of 1958 the original red and cream liveried coaches were becoming rarer..." says the caption

 

I would expect Mk1s in ECML sets to be the latest most recently delivered Mk1s the ER/NEReg had - therefore disproprtionately maroon. Cascading of coaching stock has been standard practice on the ECML for generations.

 

I am going to stick my neck out wildly and suggest 3 maroon to 1 b/custard on the ECML by 1958/9 , with the B/c being skewed towards the older Gresley stock.

 

Parkin again - "crimson and cream lasted well on little used stock....isolated examples still being noted in 1964"

 

He has a b/w photo from 1955 of a Mk1 displaying "rampant corrosion" on B/C paintwork "only three years after building"

 

ECML express sets were NOT little used stock...

 

For what it's worth - Blacklade's "funny trains" kettles are nominally set in 1958, so I'm sensitive to the issue, though quite a bit of the "funny trains" sets are in fact non-corridor stock. I have so far managed to duck doing blood and custard myself. Maroon yes (the dratted Tourist Bk 3rd ) plain crimson yes, but the only two b/c are a Hornby Gresley BCK and a detailed CKD Dapol Stanier CK. My two Ratio LNWR corridors are in plain LNER brown cos I didn't fancy attempting B/C on them (They are ex M&GN - a  very slight stretch for 1958 - but the GE Section kept all pregrouping vehicles in brown and never applied BR liveries on them)

 

Blacklade's 2 car sets are a very much lower grade duty than ECML expresses

 

(And the Southern were expert at revarnishing to keep old paintwork going. Contemporary observers were able to compare the new 1956 green directly against revarnished malachite because the SReg managed not to repaint quite a lot of vehicles during the B/C era. That wasn't the case on other Regions)

Edited January 3, 2023 by Ravenser

[Les1952]

19 hours ago, Ravenser said:

 

 

I was repeating someone elses recent quoted figures on here  (201 Pacifics / 184 V2s ) The 201 Pacifics almost certainly includes BR built A1s, and A2s.

 

As were talking 1950s ECML , and relative potentials , it's probably near the mark. I was being sloppy saying LNER Pacifics, though if you told someone A1s weren't LNER Pacifics they might raise an eyebrow - BR Pacifics implies Britannias to most folk

 

 

They were my figures, and did include those built posthumously by LNER works.  It was in the context of ex-LNER lines and the fact that so many fast locos were not just there for big fast passenger trains but to make sure the fast freight was fast.

 

Peter Coster in one of his books mentions that in the fifties there were eighteen freight paths per day in each direction from Doncaster to Peterbrough timed to run at an average of 60mph start to stop.  Given that in either direction Stoke Summit has to be climbed to, one wonders what sort of speeds they reached going down the other side.  It does explain, however, the use of A4s on some of the hardest and fastest workings.  For example the "Scotch Goods"- aka No.1 Down - was an A4 turn required to run very fast, with engine changes for other Pacifics to take it all the way to Edinburgh.

 

Les

 

Edited January 3, 2023 by Les1952

[Grafarman]

Just a heads up; The Easterner set is currently labelled 'Unavailable' so no more pre-orders for the time being, but The Scotsman set is still accepting pre-orders...

 

David

Edited January 19, 2023 by Grafarman

[Chris M]

On 02/01/2023 at 21:37, Ravenser said:

 

But if someone likes TT:120 and the models concerned, and has the set , all that's irrelevant. What matters is that space is a huge problem for doing it in 4mm, and very much less of a problem in TT:120.By the time you've planned the thing and built the boards, a lot more of the stuff will be available 

 

(The TT coaches so far are rather nice btw) 

 

As a practical issue, ECML layouts don't seem to happen in N , they happen in 4mm - indicating that for some reason the folk who want to model that subject don't want to do it in N. (I'm perfectly well aware of Copenhagen Fields, although strictly speaking its 2mm finescale a slightly different animal)

 

What can you do with a TT:120 trainset? Use it as the core of a simple "watching the trains go by" ECML layout

 

"You shouldn't model the ECML in TT:120 , you should model it in N " is not a sensible response here

I agree that nobody should tell anyone else what they should or should not do but the point that  an ECML project would be easier in N than in TT:120 is a reasonable comment. There is a much wider availability of stock in N (and there will be for many years to come) and of course you can fit 20% more into N than you can in TT:120.

[spamcan61]

1 hour ago, Grafarman said:

Just a heads up; The Easterner set is currently labelled 'Unavailable' so no more pre-orders for the time being, but The Scotsman set is still accepting pre-orders...

 

David

The Scotsman set went 'unavailable' a couple of weeks back and is now available again, not sure if that's a second batch or they found some more in the warehouse, a good sign from Hornby's point of view anyway.  Hopefully my Easterner set will turn up soon, even if I'm not sure what I'm going to do with it in the medium term.

Edited January 19, 2023 by spamcan61

[Ravenser]

1 hour ago, Chris M said:

I agree that nobody should tell anyone else what they should or should not do but the point that  an ECML project would be easier in N than in TT:120 is a reasonable comment. There is a much wider availability of stock in N (and there will be for many years to come) and of course you can fit 20% more into N than you can in TT:120.

 

However the context is someone who has a TT:120 set of an ER flavour.

 

"You should do it in N" is not a relevant reply to "What should I do with my TT:120 set"

 

Modelling the ECML in 4mm is obviously challenging because of the space requirement . But almost all the flagship ECML steam layouts are in 4mm not N. The most notable exception, Copenhagen Fields , is 2mm finescale , which is a somewhat different proposition.

 

Why this should be is an interesting question. But the hobby seems to have voted with its feet against the idea of doing the ECML in N

 

Certain advantages to doing it in TT120 can already be identified . The valve gear on the  TT Pacifics is noticeably finer than their N gauge equivalents which have very chunky valve gear. The track will be about 25% finer than in N , since the same rail codes are used in TT. TT:120 is a scale track gauge. TT:120 is to NEM310/311 standards - no British N gauge stock is to any known wheel/track standard, nor is one item of stock consistant with another, even from the same manufacturer. And NEM310/311 standards for TT are proportionally finer than the equivalents for N gauge

 

We can also note that the Mk1 coaches Hornby have produced look pretty good - and to my eye rather better than their equivalent in N . The Pullmans look good too, and the Pacifics seem as good as or better than those available in N. 

 

As TT:120 models have twice the volume (and probably at least twice the mass) of N , they have more "presence", and that is helpful with big engines and express trains on a major mainline . N doubt N has an even smaller footprint , but the question is whether TT:120 is big enough to avoid losing all the benefits of 4mm whilst still delivering a dramatic space saving over 4mm

 

This should also mean that making things yourself is easier. Having dabbled with a little N myself in recent months I notice that it's a much more RTR culture than I'm used to in 4mm . Making kits at all is quite a bold step in N , they are noticeably more compromised and some of them - such as Langley whitemetal kits - are old and relatively crude. (NGS wagon kits are rather better than this , but still much more simplistic than we are used to in 4mm. Instructions that imply most people will choose to leave the kit in self-coloured plastic certainly raise my 4mm-trained eyebrow)

 

Again , though , context is critical here. The OP's main modelling interest is in P4, and he lives in the US. Given that , existing RTR support for everything is not the be-all and end-all for him. A willingness to make things, a preference for scale gauge and coherent wheel/track standards, and a readiness to do something a bit different can all be assumed. Given that he normally works in 4mm , advantages of TT:120 against 4mm are relevant. I really don't think the OP's  going to model the 1950s ECML in P4 - from what I can make out his P4 modelling is focussed on much smaller earlier subjects.

 

Hence "what can I do with this set" - merits the answer - "model something that is far too big to do in P4 , as a low-stress side project, using a lot of RTR material  "

 

Laying Peco Code 55 points will certainly be lower stress than handbuilding pointwork in P4....

 

Something like "Stoke Summit " is certainly going to be doable in TT:120 , and a lot of people are attracted by that sort of subject. Within 18 months enough items should be available in TT:120 to cover most of the bases  (That will include diesel bodies from Lincoln Locos and etched Mk1 sides from Worsley) . It will take you 18 months to plan, build the boards, and lay and wire the track...

[Roy L S]

3 hours ago, Ravenser said:

 

However the context is someone who has a TT:120 set of an ER flavour.

 

"You should do it in N" is not a relevant reply to "What should I do with my TT:120 set"

 

Modelling the ECML in 4mm is obviously challenging because of the space requirement . But almost all the flagship ECML steam layouts are in 4mm not N. The most notable exception, Copenhagen Fields , is 2mm finescale , which is a somewhat different proposition.

 

Why this should be is an interesting question. But the hobby seems to have voted with its feet against the idea of doing the ECML in N

 

Certain advantages to doing it in TT120 can already be identified . The valve gear on the  TT Pacifics is noticeably finer than their N gauge equivalents which have very chunky valve gear. The track will be about 25% finer than in N , since the same rail codes are used in TT. TT:120 is a scale track gauge. TT:120 is to NEM310/311 standards - no British N gauge stock is to any known wheel/track standard, nor is one item of stock consistant with another, even from the same manufacturer. And NEM310/311 standards for TT are proportionally finer than the equivalents for N gauge

 

We can also note that the Mk1 coaches Hornby have produced look pretty good - and to my eye rather better than their equivalent in N . The Pullmans look good too, and the Pacifics seem as good as or better than those available in N. 

 

As TT:120 models have twice the volume (and probably at least twice the mass) of N , they have more "presence", and that is helpful with big engines and express trains on a major mainline . N doubt N has an even smaller footprint , but the question is whether TT:120 is big enough to avoid losing all the benefits of 4mm whilst still delivering a dramatic space saving over 4mm

 

This should also mean that making things yourself is easier. Having dabbled with a little N myself in recent months I notice that it's a much more RTR culture than I'm used to in 4mm . Making kits at all is quite a bold step in N , they are noticeably more compromised and some of them - such as Langley whitemetal kits - are old and relatively crude. (NGS wagon kits are rather better than this , but still much more simplistic than we are used to in 4mm. Instructions that imply most people will choose to leave the kit in self-coloured plastic certainly raise my 4mm-trained eyebrow)

 

Again , though , context is critical here. The OP's main modelling interest is in P4, and he lives in the US. Given that , existing RTR support for everything is not the be-all and end-all for him. A willingness to make things, a preference for scale gauge and coherent wheel/track standards, and a readiness to do something a bit different can all be assumed. Given that he normally works in 4mm , advantages of TT:120 against 4mm are relevant. I really don't think the OP's  going to model the 1950s ECML in P4 - from what I can make out his P4 modelling is focussed on much smaller earlier subjects.

 

Hence "what can I do with this set" - merits the answer - "model something that is far too big to do in P4 , as a low-stress side project, using a lot of RTR material  "

 

Laying Peco Code 55 points will certainly be lower stress than handbuilding pointwork in P4....

 

Something like "Stoke Summit " is certainly going to be doable in TT:120 , and a lot of people are attracted by that sort of subject. Within 18 months enough items should be available in TT:120 to cover most of the bases  (That will include diesel bodies from Lincoln Locos and etched Mk1 sides from Worsley) . It will take you 18 months to plan, build the boards, and lay and wire the track...

Wow! Are you sure you aren't Simon Kohler writing under a pseudonym?!

 

My next layout is in the planning stage, it will be in N and it will be ECML based. That does not stop me buying a TT120 Easterner set or feeling that because I have one I cannot possibly want the other, but please let's have some balance shall we?

 

1) The only TT120 loco released to date is the A3, the valve-gear is very nice, but on a comparative basis really no finer that the N counterparts from what I can see. The TT120 A4 does not have speedo and lubricator-drive fitted - the Dapol A4 does - just one example of the larger model actually having less finesse! 

2)  If you want to see fine wheels in N, take a look at the BachFarish A1 and A2 which have lovely chemically blackened fine wheels and valve-gear. For TT120 those "common" wheel standards does not appear a blessing, more a curse as far as I can see. The Hornby models shown have pretty coarse wheels both in flange-depth and tread sizes, not something that especially "sells" it as an alternative.

3) Track. A focus on Code 55 but all modern British N models will run on Code 40 track which is available in kit form with proper bullhead rail section fitting into chaired sleepers. It is a viable choice for those who want it.

3) Coaches - I have way in excess of 20 of the most recent BachFarish Mk1s and they are exquisite. Thus far we have only seen pictures of the Hornby ones and from that limited perspective I would say that while they look pretty nice they are certainly no better. So far It has so far been impossible to compare directly (I will be when my Easterner set arrives). I am assuming the TT120 coaches have close-coupling mechanisms allowing corridors to "kiss" with suitably short shank couplings used like N ones do?

5) If you want to model the ECML in TT120 you will need to wait a significant period of time for Gresley and Thompson coaches - these are both available in N already...

6) "Presence" - a meaningless statement that is completely open to interpretation. TT120 is just 20% bigger all round than N, and what constitutes that anyway? Arguably it can just as well mean the "presence" of a scale length train in the landscape, much easier achieved in N where it is possible for five coaches in the space four would take in TT120. On the subject of haulage the marginally bigger size/volume is irrelevant, my N locos will comfortably pull a prototypically representative train.

7) Availability - There is already a whole range of locos and stock to fit the ECML scheme available in N. Taking just transition period locos as an example, there are Class 55, 47,40.37,25, 24, 20, 08, plus 101 and 108 DMUs, in steam A4, A3, A2, A1, B1, WD 2-8-0, 8F 2-8-0, Standard 5MT, J39, Standard 4MT tender and tank locos, 3MT Tank, J50 on the horizon...and that is just off the top of my head.

 

Of course it is not my place to comment on what people choose to model, that is entirely (as it should always be) a very personal choice. If someone elects to try an ECML layout in TT120 then that's absolutely brilliant in my view and I wish them every success, However, it remains a cast iron fact that In TT120 it will be years before a rounded representation of RTR models is available (if it ever is).

 

Lastly, just to say I have been modelling in British N for in excess of 40 years and I am pretty astonished for it to be suggested that I and N fellow modellers should collectively be stereotyped as "shake the box" modellers. There are actually plenty of kits available in a variety of different media from a range of suppliers, including from the N Gauge society (for members), Chivers (now taken over by Roger's son), Peco to name a few. On top of this there are a wide range of 3D prints covering aspects from structures to wagons, coaches and indeed locos available. My current project -  I have a Woodhead EM1 on order from Shapeways, I have sourced a chassis which will need serious modification. I have also designed and 3D printed numerous items including some Gresley Suburban coaches - admittedly not great but they didn't come out of any box. Pics below of said Gresley Suburbans, a scratchbuilt terrace including a corner shop (it has an interior) and 3D printed Quad-Art set from Shapeways (underframes scratch-built, bogies from N Gauge Society)...

 

Take a look at Dan Hull's Nottingham Northampton Victoria layout in this month's Railway Modeller too and see all the non-RTR locos on his layout...

 

Anyway, to conclude, there will be a long way to go before TT120 even remotely challenges British N in terms of depth of range if it ever does (which I doubt). As of now and for the foreseeable future it will therefore be impossible to model the ECML in TT120 truly authentically - it was a lot more than A3s/A4s and Mk1 coaches - this is simply a fact.

 

I am intrigued by TT120 hence ordering the Easterner set. However for all the same reasons as TT3 failed in the 60s when N was becoming dominant I am concerned that it will today still have somewhat similar disadvantages to OO in terms of overall space saving, and being just 1/5 bigger than N will provide no particular benefit in terms of size/detail. I think (hope) it will find a "niche" and maybe if promoted in the right way may attract altogether new railway modellers, but given the online only sales strategy I can't see how it will ever gain wider visibility. Time will tell...

 

Roy

 

P.S. A pic of my Gresley Subs and also the 3D printed Quad set I bought (underframes scratch built) - not a box in sight!

Edited January 19, 2023 by Roy L S

[Jeff Smith]

Ok, lets get back on the rails here.  Lets not wear our colours on our sleeves too much, we all have valid (to us) reasons for modelling in the scales and gauges that we prefer......

 

The question is what to do with this new scale to make best use of what Hornby and others are intending to produce?

[Jeff Smith]

For my own part, although ordering the Easterner this is a value for money buy to understand the scale and quality.  The Mk1 coaches might find a use on a GWR BLT which is my main interest.  And obviously I look forward to the suggested GWR products....