Hornby TT120 1st Anniversary

[Hobby]

5 minutes ago, frobisher said:

I suspect that they have a quite substantial membership initially because it was "free",

 

I'm sure I've seen the figure of 14750 somewhere (summer club mag?), so as you say keeping it free (no obligations!) would seem a logical step, most people who are at all interested will, I suspect, continue their membership, especially as it doesn't cost them anything to do so.

[Steamport Southport]

52 minutes ago, frobisher said:

The Hornby collector's club sent out wagons and locos for your membership, so this isn't an unknown to Hornby.  Maybe a paid premium club membership might come down the line.

 

Whilst I'm not presently a member of either the Bachmann or Hornby Collectors Clubs, my impression was always that Hornby's "freebies" were more generous, but the Bachmann magazine was better for content.  The TT magazines have somewhat redressed that in my mind.

 

I was thinking more "proper" wagons than the yearly one with a date on it.

 

Something that is useful and one that people would buy if available separately.

 

I'm afraid I'm much more happier with the Bachmann wagon than getting a free 0-4-0T which has stopped now anyway. Without knocking Hornby I feel the Bachmann CC is streets ahead in quality and value for money, with the Hornby Club seemingly more aimed at beginners.

 

As an example this is the current Bachmann wagon with a few others throughout the thread. 

 

 

From Bilbo's post here.

 

 

 

 

Jason

[The Stationmaster]

2 hours ago, Hobby said:

 

Your evidence for that is where?

 

Another way of reading what's happened is that the initial offers were to get the scale going, once it was (is!) there is no need for all the extras, especially ones like a paper magazine which would have been costing them a lot if money with no return. What they've done seems perfectly logical.

Exactly so.  TT120 has grown up and become a recognisable reality without the need for that initial promotional razzamatazz.  Yes it still needs promotion but Hornby have repeatedly expressed their commitment to it and actions will speak for themselves rather than a load of longer term 'promises' about what is coming when.

 

I sometimes wonder just how many times they have to repeat their commitment to TT120  in order to persuade some people that it is real?

[smr248]

3 hours ago, Hobby said:

 

Really? Where do you get that impression from? 

Well, for one thing it's now October 11th and I seem to have missed all those exciting announcements which were due to be made yesterday (allegedly)...

I really do hope that someone will start driving TT forward.

[Hobby]

53 minutes ago, smr248 said:

Well, for one thing it's now October 11th and I seem to have missed all those exciting announcements which were due to be made yesterday (allegedly)...

 

From what I have seen it was Social Media that blew everything up out of all proportion so people expected more than what was delivered.

 

This is what caused all the froth, direct quote from the Hornby FB page: 

 

"Join us next week as we celebrate our first anniversary of Hornby TT:120!

 

We have planned a jam-packed TT Takeover day and would love to share your Hornby TT:120 photos to mark the special day. Tag us in them, share them in the comments below, or email them to us at marketing@Hornby.com to be featured.

 

It's been an amazing journey so far, and with lots more to look forward to, it's sure to be a brilliant day.

 

Stay tuned for updates, and mark your calendars for an unforgettable week ahead!"

 

As far as I'm concerned that was typical of FB hyperbole, and I suspect reflects the type of the people "write" the page for the company. For them all the posts on the day being about TT120, the double points day, free membership for another year (without the discount but with free magazines) and competition (for a prize worth £764!) would seem to have been exciting, for the rest of us who wanted something a little more concrete, perhaps not!

 

But other than that i see nothing to say that things have changed and that TT120 is still proceeding as planned, I'm not sure what more they can do. 

Edited October 11, 2023 by Hobby

[Jeff Smith]

I think it's worth pointing out that Hornby has made considerable progress in making as many items in TT120 available as it has over the past 12 months.  Yes it's been working on this for several years but it is basically trying to duplicate a range that has been mature for many years.  Not being an 00 modeller I don't follow new 00 model releases from any company but to expect Hornby to magically make available a whole new range overnight and keep up with it's existing range seems somewhat naive.  And, remember Hornby does not have direct control of its production facility(s) in the way a company like Peco does.  Anyone who has worked in batch manufacturing knows that schedules change frequently to accommodate resource availability etc.  We all want a green 08 but fitting it in probably takes a year's planning........

[Johan DC]

1 hour ago, smr248 said:

Well, for one thing it's now October 11th and I seem to have missed all those exciting announcements which were due to be made yesterday (allegedly)...

I really do hope that someone will start driving TT forward.

There was a quite interesting vlog with with Sam, the developer of the Class 50, with some engineering samples, on FB and IG there were shots of some nice TT layouts, there was another video about TT120's first anniversary and the email about the TT-membership. No new announcements, but I think Hornby, for all their faults, is driving TT forwards. Two steam, one diesel, several coaches and wagons, tracks, buildings and we have seen testsamples of a lot more. But it seems that for some, it's never enough. 

I can't compare, but how did N ever start?

Edited October 11, 2023 by Johan DC
Past perfect, I always get that wrong.

[Hobby]

9 minutes ago, Johan DC said:

I can't compare, but how did N ever start?

 

In the main with British locos "modified" to fit on Continental chassis?! It's "interesting" looking at that early stock that comes up at swapmeets from Minitrix, etc! Imagine if Hornby had tried that with some Arnold locos...

[smr248]

Didn't N start with Arnold?

Or was the question about British N?

[smr248]

Regardless, this was in the days when they were made in Germany, before cheap Chinese Labour.

[Hobby]

24 minutes ago, smr248 said:

Didn't N start with Arnold?

Or was the question about British N?

 

I was thinking the latter, you're probably right about Arnold!

[Nearholmer]

I’m pretty certain that Lonestar Treblolectric predated Arnold N, although it turned out to be a bit of an evolutionary dead-end, being Very British: highly ingenious; somewhat under-engineered; and, definitely under-capitalised.

 

Regarding TT120: I’m still scratching my head about what seems to me to be a somewhat scattergun approach in the offerings. Maybe there’s an element of “ranging shots” in all this, where they are trying to find out what the profile of the people who really buy into it might be, before tightening the targeting (or not tightening, if the actual buyers prove not to be much bothered about mixing eras, areas etc. and just enjoy playing trains).

 

Will it take off and really grow as a scale? I think that depends not on persuading existing hobbyists to change scales, although some are always neo-curious, but on

newbies, people on the brink

who have no commitment to an existing scale.

 

PS: I thought that celebrating the first anniversary by sending me an email telling me that I was no longer going to get a magazine through the post, or a discount, struck an odd chord; something more positive might have been better!

 

 

 

 

Edited October 11, 2023 by Nearholmer

[Hobby]

I don't think it's a scattergun approach at all. They need to establish the scale and to do that they need to produce stuff that will sell in large numbers, not to people like you but to the general public which you might remember was their target market. So the choice of A1/3s and A4 is a very logical choice. An HST is the next big one due out and again a very well known train, even outside the railway enthusiast fraternity. They will, and have, sold to the existing model railway enthusiast, I'm one of many, but I've also seen a lot more new people to the hobby.

 

As regards the anniversary and what they've done, we were told the discount was only for a year and people who joined later got charged 30 quid, so I suppose a free magazine every 3 months and being able to access the club pages where announcements will be made isn't bad. The way it was done wasn't brilliant I agree, but at least we are still getting something for nothing!

[Nearholmer]

Hmmm …… to me, being able to make an at least half-plausible train isn’t likely to be a niche want among buyers, limited to long-serving enthusiasts. “The General Public” that is prepared to spend non-trivial sums on this stuff must have some eye for plausibility, otherwise why bother to make what are very good models for them.

So, while I get “big steam engine and pullmans”, and “big steam engine and ordinary coaches”, and I very much get “HST”, I genuinely don’t understand why there is nothing that really matches the 66, or why the particular goods wagons have been chosen, largely with nothing half-plausible to pull them.

 

I may have dozed-off and missed them, but a container wagon, plus containers in every hue, and/or a big gondola in several liveries seem really noticeable absentees …… those are things people see behind all those 66s when they travel by rail, and they are colourful, and I imagine that they’d sell. Is it that there are suitable vehicles available from European sources to satisfy?

 

The 50 seems a bit random to me too. Would “The General Public” know if it was a 47 instead? I rather doubt it. Yet the latter would surely have wider “enthusiast appeal”, and sure as heck gives plenty of livery options.

 

I suppose what I’m saying is that different choices wouldn’t hurt the not-knowledgeable take-up, but would foster purchases by the knowledgeable.

Edited October 11, 2023 by Nearholmer

[Covkid]

29 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

Hmmm …… to me, being able to make an at least half-plausible train isn’t likely to be a niche want among buyers, limited to long-serving enthusiasts. “The General Public” that is prepared to spend non-trivial sums on this stuff must have some eye for plausibility, otherwise why bother to make what are very good models for them.

So, while I get “big steam engine and pullmans”, and “big steam engine and ordinary coaches”, and I very much get “HST”, I genuinely don’t understand why there is nothing that really matches the 66, or why the particular goods wagons have been chosen, largely with nothing half-plausible to pull them.

 

I may have dozed-off and missed them, but a container wagon, plus containers in every hue, and/or a big gondola in several liveries seem really noticeable absentees …… those are things people see behind all those 66s when they travel by rail, and they are colourful, and I imagine that they’d sell. Is it that there are suitable vehicles available from European sources to satisfy?

 

The 50 seems a bit random to me too. Would “The General Public” know if it was a 47 instead? I rather doubt it. Yet the latter would surely have wider “enthusiast appeal”, and sure as heck gives plenty of livery options.

 

I suppose what I’m saying is that different choices wouldn’t hurt the not-knowledgeable take-up, but would foster purchases by the knowledgeable.

I think the reason they chose the 50 instead of the 47 is because they have CAD for them in OO. I believe the Hornby OO 47 is either the ex Lima or the original Triang versions. However, why use the new, short brake van CAD instead of their BR 20T van which I imagine they still have the CAD for. I am age 61 and cannot ever recall the short brake vans whereas the 20T standard brakevan still in use right to the end of breakeven usage in the late 1990s with DRS.

 

I agree that the class 47 should be a priority and green ones could mingle with Gresley pacifics

[Nearholmer]

Ah!  I hadn’t factored what CAD files they have to hand into this ……. I can see that the design costs might be very different as between something where they already have them, and something where they don’t.

[Legend]

13 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

Hmmm …… to me, being able to make an at least half-plausible train isn’t likely to be a niche want among buyers, limited to long-serving enthusiasts. “The General Public” that is prepared to spend non-trivial sums on this stuff must have some eye for plausibility, otherwise why bother to make what are very good models for them.

So, while I get “big steam engine and pullmans”, and “big steam engine and ordinary coaches”, and I very much get “HST”, I genuinely don’t understand why there is nothing that really matches the 66, or why the particular goods wagons have been chosen, largely with nothing half-plausible to pull them.

 

I may have dozed-off and missed them, but a container wagon, plus containers in every hue, and/or a big gondola in several liveries seem really noticeable absentees …… those are things people see behind all those 66s when they travel by rail, and they are colourful, and I imagine that they’d sell. Is it that there are suitable vehicles available from European sources to satisfy?

 

The 50 seems a bit random to me too. Would “The General Public” know if it was a 47 instead? I rather doubt it. Yet the latter would surely have wider “enthusiast appeal”, and sure as heck gives plenty of livery options.

 

I suppose what I’m saying is that different choices wouldn’t hurt the not-knowledgeable take-up, but would foster purchases by the knowledgeable.

 

Yeah they may have had the CADs for the 50 already , however for me the 47 would have been the better choice even if it cost more to develop . We are getting one in phase 3 or 4 anyway

 

I think for this scale to succeed beyond its initial honeymoon  it needs to get to critical mass pretty soon . Farish puttered along in the 70s but it was really 1981 with the expansion of the range to have 37/47 and HST that made it serious contender .

 

You are correct - whats the point of the pretty little goods stock when there's no 0-6-0 to pull them ?

 

Mk2e and Mk2f .....why? Surely one would do , and that really makes the need for a 47 all the more pressing .

 

I think you can see most definitely the hand of SK in these choices . Big LNER pacifics , a love affair with the 50 ,very little other  BR Blue and a lack of joined up thinking .

 

Still interested in a possible layout , but only when 37/47/HST established .........and maybe a dmu too 

 

I think the 66 is required for modern modelling , and I thought I read somewhere there were container wagons coming. You need an IET 800 and an MU of somesorts too for critical mass for that era . 

 

Edited October 12, 2023 by Legend

[PaulRhB]

13 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

Hmmm …… to me, being able to make an at least half-plausible train isn’t likely to be a niche want among buyers, limited to long-serving enthusiasts. “The General Public” that is prepared to spend non-trivial sums on this stuff must have some eye for plausibility, otherwise why bother to make what are very good models for them.

So, while I get “big steam engine and pullmans”, and “big steam engine and ordinary coaches”, and I very much get “HST”, I genuinely don’t understand why there is nothing that really matches the 66, or why the particular goods wagons have been chosen, largely with nothing half-plausible to pull them.

Their comments originally were that they weren’t after the enthusiasts but bringing in new people who hadn’t had room before. Slightly odd because for a bigger market you are best off appealing to both. Doing the bright and colourful private owners but no appropriate locos for the enthusiasts means you’re limiting potential sales. Ok some may put them trainset style behind Mallard or a 66 but others are going to wait until there’s something to go with them. If they wanted bright why not do tanks in BP green to go with the 08 on release and they would go with the 66’s too. Containers again offer bright colours so why aren’t they developing alongside the 66?

 

I’ve bought the LNER pacifics in the hope they do appropriate coaches. Yes Hornby three of the locos released so far, nearly a third of your range, have no correct coaches! Southern Pullmans look great but they are wrong, so do us some Gresley coaches and while you’re at it a Merchant Navy to go with the Pullmans. Both of those are in the OO range so some sort of CAD exists! 🤪

The range is just a bit of a mess so far. 

[Hobby]

Looking outside the more "serious" forums such as this and away from specialised exhibitions I see lots of people who couldn't give two figs what their locos pull and whether they are "prototypically correct", they just play trains to enjoy themselves, that's why they have an oval or two of track and not much regard for how the prototype behaves. A lot of them, especially on the TT FB pages I'm on also seem to be new to the hobby, so perhaps Hornby have been more successful than you give them credit for! There's a whole world of model railways out there full of people who don't actually worry if the loco and coaches don't match and just enjoy running what they want... Sometimes I feel people can get too serious about what is, after all, just a hobby for fun, not life and death! :)

Edited October 12, 2023 by Hobby

[Nearholmer]

I think we all get that the “couldn’t care two figs” market is significant, that’s not challenging to understand; the bit that is challenging to understand is why they’ve not offered very much cogency in the range so far, because that deters those who do care about figs, and, as per the 50 vs 47 example, and the containers vs 10ft WB goods wagons example, those who don’t care would presumably buy either.

 

Anyway, having no prior investment in any small scale, a desire to build a conventional scenic layout in a small scale for the first time in decades, being era/area catholic, and having the space ready for it, I’m weighing this up against 00, N, and H0e, and so far I can barely see anything I could build. Maybe something shunty, late 1970s, with an oil terminal and a coal yard, and wait for the “main haul” loco and some blue/grey Mk1 to follow.

[PaulRhB]

39 minutes ago, Hobby said:

 I see lots of people who couldn't give two figs what their locos pull and whether they are "prototypically correct", they just play trains to enjoy themselves,

Which is why I said,

”Slightly odd because for a bigger market you are best off appealing to both. ”

I’m just saying doing a steam 0-6-0 instead of the 08 first would have made more sense and then release the 08 with the MGR’s and other modern stock. Those who don’t “give two figs” would be very very happy with a Jinty or J94 in various guises to pull those PO wagons. 

 

We currently have;

LNER pacifics - no appropriate stock. . 
BR Eastern pacifics - mk1 coaches

08 shunter - one box van. 

PO wagons - no appropriate locos.

SR Pullmans - no appropriate locos. 

If you simply change the 08 to their advertised J94 you’ve covered several preserved railways, if it was a Jinty then it would be ok in period and current.
If you changed the Pullmans to Teak you’ve covered all three LNER liveries locos. 
I just think they could have hit the enthusiast market in a much bigger way without compromising the much vaunted ‘new to the hobby’ market. I have discussed this with a friend who’s the MD of UK division for a huge international company and he thinks their choices are bonkers for not using other stuff already in their range of CAD that’s equally attractive to the new market but embraces the enthusiast too.
Hornby have done similar daft things with stock and locos for years in OO and bumped along with reports of crisis and several changes of management. Even the APT coaches turned up months before the sets and they could only run with the sets! It’s not just TT it’s a range wide problem, but exacerbated in TT because there’s no old stock or s/h stuff in shops or eBay to smooth it over. 

 

39 minutes ago, Hobby said:

 perhaps Hornby have been more successful than you give them credit for!
 

 

Part of that success being because I have taken a chance on the range and bought the locos shown above and five of the po wagons to support the range so I’m hoping it is successful, I just feel they could have sold more by doing teaks. 
I have eight Pullmans but I’d have bought three sets of teaks! Plus the teak coaches are very attractive coaches in themselves, easily as eye catching as the Pullmans, and could have gone with the BR liveried pacifics too. 

We conducted a test with three friends wives months ago at the pub with pics of teak and Pullmans, one went Teak, one went Pullman and one liked them both equally. 

 

39 minutes ago, Hobby said:

 

Sometimes I feel people can get too serious about what is, after all, just a hobby for fun, not life and death! :)

Yeah I take it far too seriously 🤣

Edited October 12, 2023 by PaulRhB

[Hroth]

14 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

and so far I can barely see anything I could build.

 

This is my problem too.

 

I'd like to build an intermediate size layout that would give a bit more scope than available in OO and I've concluded that a. I don't want to do a roundy and b. I fancy a Minories.  But that isn't going to happen as while I can justify using the A4 and Mk1 carriages in the Easterner set*, there's nothing to do a station pilot duty (the 08 would do, but none are green and I don't want to do a relivery) and I'd like at least one suitable transition era diesel to keep the A4 company! Then there's the lack of 1st gen DMUs...

 

So, I'll admit I got the Easterner when it first came out, but it's going to sit in store along with my Triang R.0 set until maybe something suitable comes along.

 

* I'm allergic to their initial A3 Pacific....

 

 

 

[Hobby]

49 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

the bit that is challenging to understand is why they’ve not offered very much cogency in the range so far

 

As it's only been going 12 months, perhaps? The range so far allows people to run passenger trains and small goods trains behind the 08. We know from that documentary on them that to take a loco from first idea to full launch takes a long time, in some cases many years. So it's a question of establishing the scale, which they've done, and then developing it, which from what they have said is coming up in the next 12/18 months they will do. OK it might not meet the standards of people who want exact scale 10ft wheelbase wagons (please let's not go down that route again, surely it's been done to death?), but for most of us it'll do...

 

PS: Why isn't 009 on your list?

 

 

32 minutes ago, PaulRhB said:

LNER pacifics - no appropriate stock. Pullmans, see comment below, though I accept not 100% accurate they look acceptable for the target market
BR Eastern pacifics - mk1 coaches

08 shunter - one box van. and PO wagons - heritage railways and early BR - though a green or black 08 would be nice

PO wagons - no appropriate locos. see above

SR Pullmans - no appropriate locos. see above

 

Yeah I take it far too seriously 🤣

 

Funnily enough that list looks just like what was available in the early days of 00, before more stock was added... As I said, give them chance, they've only just launched it!

 

Regards "teak" stock, many people don't know there's a difference between the SR and LNER loco hauled Pullmans so would find the current range as acceptable to make up a model of the Yorkshire Pullman of the 30s, even though it might not actually be "right".

 

PS: I do hope the wheelbase on that mineral wagon is correct, though!

Edited October 12, 2023 by Hobby

[No Decorum]

9 minutes ago, Hobby said:

 

PS: Why isn't 009 on your list?

 

Perhaps an afterthought but a very good question. I have acquired a fair amount of 009 because it’s compatible in scale with what I already have. I was intrigued by TT120 because of the scale and gauge consistency but I wasn’t going to start all over again.

[Hobby]

19 minutes ago, Hroth said:

* I'm allergic to their initial A3 Pacific....

 

Agreed! Though I do like the one with the small smoke deflectors for some reason! :)