Hornby TT120 1st Anniversary

[PaulRhB]

16 minutes ago, Hobby said:

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.

 

and they were banging on about how long this has been gestating so plenty of time to develop the J94 before the 08, it all comes down to their decision of what to develop first. An inside frame steam loco is definitely easier than an outside frame 08 anyway. 
They made a conscious decision to do this random selection, it wasn’t forced on them by production schedules slipping. 

 

16 minutes ago, Hobby said:

So it's a question of establishing the scale, which they've done, and then developing it,

Yes very true but establishing with core items that appeal to both markets is just as easy. 
We managed it with kits at RJH and with DK bringing stock and locos together. 
 

21 minutes ago, Hobby said:

wouldn't have a clue what you are talking about, but they do know what a Pullman is

Do they? Two out of the three wives we asked hadn’t heard of a Pullman and the one that had liked the teak coach as much. The three of them went on the picture to decide. They guessed instantly that teak was the wood finish too because they were more familiar with that word from furniture items. I think you’ll find the thing that draws their attention first is a picture not wording it’s a pullman. Go on the various adverts and show them to non train people and see how many recognise a pullman, you won’t find it in big lettering on the ad either. Then try the same blind test we did and see which they prefer from a photo. 
 

[Nearholmer]

35 minutes ago, Hobby said:

Why isn't 009 on your list?

Because I did 009 to death in the 1970s ‘Golden Age’, when it involved carving locomotives out of amorphous lumps of whitemetal sold in boxes with enticing pictures on the lids, and torturing dodgy N-gauge mechanisms to get them to run at all. And, because I’m into industrial, rather than ‘common carrier’ in narrow gauge, and there are some very nice r-t-r industrials available in H0e.

[Hobby]

The point I was making was not about what they preferred but what people "knew", many non railway people know what a Pullman is, they are well known as coaches for luxury travel, a teak coach, not. So selling a Pullman to a non enthusiast will be easier than a teak coach, regardless which looks the best (which is in the eye of the beholder anyhow), personally I prefer the Pullman, the only Gresley teak coach I saw was in blue/grey at Piccadilly in the 70s! 

 

Regards the market, they seem to have appealed to both markets judging by people's comments that they've bought some so perhaps they've managed it. What they haven't done is developed a fully coherent range, yet, but as i said it's early days and I'm not sure how they could have done it differently when launching a new scale. I see plenty of comments along the lines of "why didn't they make a "Class 30MT tender/tank loco with matching coaches and wagons", but it's one of those "damned if they do and damned if they don't" scenarios, if you ask 100 railway modellers what they'd like you'd get 100 different answers!

[Hobby]

7 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

Because I did 009 to death in the 1970s ‘Golden Age’, when it involved carving locomotives out of amorphous lumps of whitemetal sold in boxes with enticing pictures on the lids, and torturing dodgy N-gauge mechanisms to get them to run at all. And, because I’m into industrial, rather than ‘common carrier’ in narrow gauge, and there are some very nice r-t-r industrials available in H0e.

 

Some nice industrial 009 in the Light railways Stores/Narrow Planet range! Excluding the L&B RTR stock isn't most of the rest (Talyllyn and Ffestiniog RTR) industrial?! :)

 

(Whilst I model in H0e, it's more mainline stuff, much of the industrial stock for it is a bit of a compromise (600mm gauge stock on 750/760mm gauge), I'd still be tempted to do 009 for industrial NG where i wanted to model 2ft gauge/600mm, but that's a personal preference, just not using Peco CrazyTrack or Mainline, code 60 or below looks much better.)

[PaulRhB]

3 minutes ago, Hobby said:

but it's one of those "damned if they do and damned if they don't" scenarios, if you ask 100 railway modellers what they'd like you'd get 100 different answers!

I agree 100% on that damned either way but they released matching coaches for the BR pacifics and they’re going to do matching coaches for the LMS ones, that’s what odd, why not do Eastern pullman changes?
There’s cohesion in future items so why muddle them up at the start with this almost random set? Scotsman in its current livery with mk1’s would surely be a no brainer to appeal to the ooh I’ve heard of that market from your theory, what have we got? Nighthawk & Trigo! They hold Scotsman licenses too!

 https://uk.Hornby.com/catalogue/train-sets-rolling-stock/locomotives?langPath=Hornby-uk&filters[min_price]=0&filters[max_price]=586.99&filters[Pre-Order]=false&filters[Brand]=&filters[Scale]=1%3A120+Scale&filters[DCC+Status]=&filters[Gauge]=&filters[Motor]=&filters[UK+Era]=&filters[mandatory_filter_by][product_category]=Locomotives&page_id=318&sort-by=8&page=1&inputValueChanged=filters[Pre-Order]
 

Or release a Southern pacific if you want to do SR Pullmans. An Ocean Liner special set would look colourful and tap into the cruise market so you could sell it to those who catch the VSOE specials and travel on the QE2.2. 

[Nearholmer]

4 minutes ago, Hobby said:

I'm not sure how they could have done it differently when launching a new scale. I

By providing things that match.

 

The big steamers and coaches match one another, and work within their own eras or as “steam specials” in more recent times. ✔️ 

 

An HST clearly matches within itself, and has very wide era-span. ✔️ .

 

08 matches anything post c1950 depending on what colour it is. Very big ✔️ ✔️ 

 

66? Ah ……. Nothing for it to haul.

 

Etc ….. I’ve made the same point repeatedly, so won’t …. Er…, repeat it.

[Nearholmer]

Minor 009/H0e excursion for Hobby’s interest.

 

This is, IIRC Code 55 rail, layout built c1985:

 

This is Peco Code 80, layout built c1981 (looks as if I moved the hut forward onto the new layout!):

 

 

[Hobby]

27 minutes ago, PaulRhB said:

and they were banging on about how long this has been gestating so plenty of time to develop the J94 before the 08,

 

That's a good point, I do wonder how much of the "hype" we had around what was to come was driven by people clamoring for things and the likes of SK just saying things to "shut them up" (wrong phrase, I know, but you hopefully get the gist). Since he's gone it's been noticeable that we are starting to see more realistic estimates of delivery dates with a lot less set in stone. That's lead to some people saying it's a sign of the business failing but I wonder if instead it's a move towards better managing of expectations. Hopefully it's the latter and in my view it's no bad thing.

 

11 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

66? Ah ……. Nothing for it to haul.

 

Perhaps the HAA when it arrives, but my understanding is that the Class 66 is also an aim at the Continental TT market, so perhaps we're likely to see that in the Arnold range in due course, first of the trans continent locos (excluding the Kof!)...

[PaulRhB]

5 minutes ago, Hobby said:

but I wonder if instead it's a move towards better managing of expectations. Hopefully it's the latter and in my view it's no bad thing.

Let’s hope so! I really like the scale and if it’s been a bit more cohesive at the start I’d probably have bought at least two more sets of coaches by now, more wagons and possibly two steam locos instead of one 08. That soon mounts up across the enthusiast market without affecting the new market share as you’d still have those colourful PO wagons. 
A Jinty and a Pannier would also open up a big range of blt layouts although the J94 is a good first choice as it’s a staple of preserved lines and lots of colourful liveries. The J94 would also be at home on mk1’s in the current era so relevant to what people see now on a day out. 
Again I’d have put the J94 in the 08 production slot and sold it in start sets too. The Heritage Flyer with a couple of mk1’s and the Industrial Goods with some PO wagons. 
Plus year two and where’s the round the Christmas tree set? 

[The Stationmaster]

Simple thing when you think about it - I'll lay good money that thousands more people outside the existing enthusiast/modeller world have travelled behind or seen a Gresley pacific than have ever seen a 350 shunter (aka 08)   The age of steam was an age of glamour - albeit often imagined by many people and nostalgia and glamour will appeal to many people.  So if you launch something new and aim at a new market area you logically go for what you believe will appeal to that market.

 

In the meanwhile you ytry to keep the 'enthusiasts' and modellers happy witha long list of what is to come but with an indeterminate timescale and lots of breezy talking things up. But the key market for some time will inevitably be the newcomers who need to see and buy what they think of as 'trains' and most of them won't have the slightest interest in 'goods trains' even if they're in pretty colours.   That new market might well know preservation lines because they go to see Santa, eat mince pies and drink mulled wine, or go for murder mystery evenings etc - that means older coaching stock and steam locos.  OK so there should be a market for the J94 rather than the 350  but would that satisfy the cohort of enthusiast modellers?

 

Don't forget that whatever they say or do - and Hornby fortunately now seem to be much more realistic about what they say and when it will appear - they can't do it all at once and never will.

[The Stationmaster]

9 minutes ago, PaulRhB said:

 
Plus year two and where’s the round the Christmas tree set? 

Reportedly they are 'on the way' according to someone from Hornby I spoke to recently

[frobisher]

3 hours ago, Legend said:

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

 

I can understand how they are doing them (the difference between the two is pretty much the "underframe" equipment), but as you say, why? One or other would have been sufficient in the first wave and do the other later on.  But doing them together uses up production slots that could have given greater variety on other coaches such as the MK1... But until the 47 appears, there's nothing in the range that prototypically hauled these.

[PaulRhB]

43 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

Reportedly they are 'on the way' according to someone from Hornby I spoke to recently

Need to hurry up then as people don’t have a lot of spare cash to buy a last minute extra at the moment. They need to be in the shops in the next four weeks really. From my nine years in retail the only thing that sells well last minute at Christmas is very cheap or the latest fad and I don’t think these hit either of those. 

[Jeff Smith]

Hardware obviously has the long timescales, liveries presumably easier to introduce.  The 08 should perhaps have also been available in BR green and LMS black........

[Les1952]

1 hour ago, Jeff Smith said:

Hardware obviously has the long timescales, liveries presumably easier to introduce.  The 08 should perhaps have also been available in BR green and LMS black........

 

production slots?  China has production problems with all goods as far as I recall........

 

Les

[D9020 Nimbus]

Class 47s (and 31s/37s) are planned. So are KFA container wagons. In many cases the order in which things come out seems to be determined by what they have in the way of recent information — hence the 50 being ahead of the 47.

 

It's the brake van that puzzled me. Granted, they will have the CAD from the OO version as a starting point, but the Stanier 20t brake van is even more recent in OO, and lasted well into the BR era.

[Covkid]

10 hours ago, Hobby said:

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! :)

Without doubt "Hobby" but would a model railway enthusiast spend more cash by augmenting their trainset than an average Joe? Although we tend to be a pernickety bunch we probably spend more. But do Hornby really prefer to flog trainsets and little more to the average Joe.?

[MartinRS]

10 hours ago, PaulRhB said:

Yeah I take it far too seriously

You don't live anywhere near Far Twittering do you?

[Jeff Smith]

As Henry Ford is reputed to have said, he's in business to make money not cars!

 

If Hornby can sell extra trainsets, for which the design has already been done and dusted, or invest in a new design for a limited run, then probably the former; perhaps until it's got enough money in the bank from selling trainsets!

[PaulRhB]

22 minutes ago, MartinRS said:

You don't live anywhere near Far Twittering do you?

Windsor Gardens, 

 

[MartinRS]

I can understand why Hornby produced the Mallard and the Flying Scotsman. These iconic locos would have been low hanging fruit for continental manufacturers if Hornby had omitted them from their initial range. The obvious problem with these locos is the lack of a front coupling and a reasonably priced TT:120 turntable. Hornby have suggested that a TT:120 layout could be built on a widow sill, which is true, but what rolling stock would be suitable, other than the class 08? Although present family commitments mean I have little free time I do plan to build a double track 'dog-bone' layout, with two junctions, both on the same (hidden) loop, leading to terminus stations. The advantage of this arrangement is point to point running with the option of just watching trains go round and round.

 

I'm not so sure about Hornby's first diesel being a Class 50. Something ubiquitous, with a wide area of operation and longevity to accommodate different liveries would have been a far better choice in my opinion. (A range of liveries would enable the roll-out of a 'new' loco every year, with just the body-shell being different). A loco with a history of hauling both passenger stock and a wide range of freight wagons would have made more sense to me. If you was to accurately model a class 50 with all of the 16T mineral wagons the entire class had ever hauled I suspect you would have a light engine. If you did the same with a a Class 31 or 47 you would have a very tired angry shunter! (The planned 21T mineral wagon appears to be a strange choice to me. I just can't understand why Hornby didn't choose the 16T mineral wagon, a far more common vehicle).

 

Someone on RMweb posted publicity for the initial Graham Farish N gauge range in one of the TT:120 or Hornby threads. What was apparent was the variety (not number) of locos suitable for a wide range of operating requirements. If my present circumstances had been different I would probably been pretty annoyed about Hornby's present range of motive power. As it happens, the lack of ubiquitous diesels and mid power range steam locos mean I'm just not spending anything on TT:120 at the moment. I can certainly remember from my childhood that large pacifics cost more than a 4-6-0s. I would imagine the same is true today. The emphasis on large pacifics could price some potential buyers out of the market. I'm still enthusiastic about TT:2120 but disappointed in the range of products Hornby have on offer.
 

[Hobby]

11 hours ago, Covkid said:

Without doubt "Hobby" but would a model railway enthusiast spend more cash by augmenting their trainset than an average Joe? Although we tend to be a pernickety bunch we probably spend more. But do Hornby really prefer to flog trainsets and little more to the average Joe.?

 

The current enthusiast probably would spend more, "Covkid", if they already model in TT120, but they don't, so are unlikely to buy more than one or two for display/interest purposes unless they are changing scale such as me, whereas with the average Joe with no such commitment to an existing scale the sky's the limit once they've got them hooked. I suspect they'd like to sell to both, but getting a whole lot of average Joes interested gives them a whole new market. So far, judging by the posters on FB, they seem to have "tapped" them quite well.

[Legend]

The reason we have got what we've got is Simon Kohler . Its got his fingerprints all over it ........large LNER pacifics , Class 50 which he has done to death in OO, Pullmans  !

 

One of the best and most cohesive introductions was Mainline Railways 1976/77.   J72 / 4MT 4-6-0 and Class 45.  With it a series of wagons for J72, Mk1 coaches for J72 in BR livery, 4MT and Peak A very cohesive range with trainsets to match . So it looks like Mainline were trying to expand market , and I remember these sets appeared in shops that didn't stock model railways . Presumably they already stocked something made by Palitoy.  But at the same time it appealed to people who already had model railways . Even their Mk1 was cleverly worked to have an SK which hadnt previously been available.  Why not appeal to both new and existing markets . Win Win !  I know its obviously a different gauge and not supposed to tempt people away from their existing OO range but I do think TT120 has completely failed in attracting those who do know something about railways but have so far lacked the space . They know A3/A4 Pacifics look stupid on 10ft wheelbase goods trains. 

Edited October 13, 2023 by Legend

[Hobby]

 

Mind you, I'd agree it looks a little silly! ;)

 

Edited October 13, 2023 by Hobby

[Legend]

Just now, Hobby said:

 

 Yeah I know . In later life .