TT:120: TTA tank wagons

[Phil Parker]

A few quick shots from the Great British Model Railway Show this weekend when Hornby kindly let me extract the deco sample tank wagons form the display case.

 

[Ravenser]

Not entirely sure why they've gone to town on the underframe detail, though I suspect it might be a one piece moulding, or mostly so.

 

Any dimensional comments will no doubt wait until these are in people's hands . This is one case where representative drawings are readily available in Tourret's book

 

However looks very nice, with a variety of ladder positions available. These should be very useful for modern image modellers as soon as main line diesel locos are available

 

There are a handful still clinging on in revenue service, I believe: pretty well the last 4 wheel wagons in revenue use

Edited October 29, 2023 by Ravenser

[eastwestdivide]

Odd that the green one is prefixed PBO. The correct owner prefix for BP was BPO, although I’ve an idea at least one was wrong like this in real life. 

[Revolution Ben]

12 hours ago, Ravenser said:

Not entirely sure why they've gone to town on the underframe detail, though I suspect it might be a one piece moulding, or mostly so.

 

<snipped>

 

There are a handful still clinging on in revenue service, I believe: pretty well the last 4 wheel wagons in revenue use

 

Hi there,

 

Perhaps the detail is a result of Hornby's own experience?  Their 'Railroad' range gives them unique access to the only hard sales data that would allow an empirical judgement.

 

Re 4-wheel wagons in service:  The Plasmor blockfreight PNAs and Alvance (ex-Alcan) alumina PCAs are still in revenue traffic and, certainly in the case of the alumina tanks, will be for some years to come.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

Edited October 30, 2023 by Revolution Ben

[Phil Parker]

12 hours ago, Ravenser said:

Not entirely sure why they've gone to town on the underframe detail

 

No one complains when Rapido do it.

[Johan DC]

1 hour ago, Phil Parker said:

 

No one complains when Rapido do it.

This is Hornby, damn if they do, damn if they don't! 

[jjb1970]

10 minutes ago, Johan DC said:

This is Hornby, damn if they do, damn if they don't! 

 

Unfortunately there's quite a bit of truth in that I think.

[davebem]

2 minutes ago, jjb1970 said:

 

Unfortunately there's quite a bit of truth in that I think.

They look great, its still £7.46 cheaper than the graham farish version, so with that detail its a bit of a bargain.

[jjb1970]

4 minutes ago, davebem said:

They look great, its still £7.46 cheaper than the graham farish version, so with that detail its a bit of a bargain.

 

I quite agree. My comment wasn't about this wagon but more that there's a body of voices in the hobby who seem to look for what to criticize. I think it's true for most manufacturers to a degree but does seem especially prevalent for Hornby. Sometimes I think the criticism is warranted, such as when they accept pre-orders from their dealers which are then not fulfilled but in many cases it does seem like axes are being sharpened.

On Hornby TT I am very impressed by what they're doing.

[peak experience]

i was hoping the grey tankers had the ladder position of the green tanker but it's a minor quibble. can't wait to receive mine. was there any indication of a release date? 

[Phil Parker]

1 minute ago, peak experience said:

i was hoping the grey tankers had the ladder position of the green tanker but it's a minor quibble. can't wait to receive mine. was there any indication of a release date? 

 

Winter 23/24 according to the card on the stand.

[steve1023]

Esso looks really nice. Might be my first TT purchase. 

[hmrspaul]

8 hours ago, peak experience said:

i was hoping the grey tankers had the ladder position of the green tanker but it's a minor quibble. can't wait to receive mine. was there any indication of a release date? 

But it is the correct ladder provision for 6105 https://PaulBartlett.zenfolio.com/essopickeringa/e4bebcd30

BPO67765 (not PBO!) https://PaulBartlett.zenfolio.com/bpo67xxxpickeringtta/e722cae4e

 

I cannot read the number on the Procor Total TTA similar to https://PaulBartlett.zenfolio.com/brttanks/e343b2e5e

 

Paul

 

[Great Waterton]

23 hours ago, eastwestdivide said:

Odd that the green one is prefixed PBO. The correct owner prefix for BP was BPO, although I’ve an idea at least one was wrong like this in real life. 

 

If there was an odd one, or a one off from the norm, trust Hornby to find it and make it.🤣 

 

And before anyone says anything, I'm a massive Hornby fanboy and supporter. In fact they're my favourite brand but I'm not blind to some of their absolute howlers in recent years. 🫢😆

Edited October 31, 2023 by Great Waterton

[Porfuera]

On 30/10/2023 at 13:38, Phil Parker said:

Winter 23/24 according to the card on the stand.

 

And also Winter 23/24 according to the online shop but in the "August Updates" edition of TT Talk the release date was said to be December.

 

I realise Winter 23/24 fits in with that but if it was still going to be this year rather than next then you think they might've been able to confirm that.

 

Never mind - if they arrive in January then at least they will be something to brighten up the post-New Year blues!

 

Here it is:

 

 

[Ravenser]

On 30/10/2023 at 10:18, Phil Parker said:

 

No one complains when Rapido do it.

 

It's not a complaint - but can it be seen when the wagon's on the track? 

 

At least some of it  may be needed to support pipework etc that can be seen when the vehicle is right way .

 

  I'm not a fan of underframing when it comes to kits - Parkside wagons with plain flat undersides are much more convenient  for glueing sheet lead in place than anything that has chassis framing underneath, and nobody has ever suggested Parkside kits are compromised as a result (Framing on vintage 12T tank wagons is a very different matter - that's exposed)

 

Its just this sort of thing has always seemed pointless and invisible detail. I kind of understand it on Hornby's OO TTA - that's a premium product in a hotly competitive sector and needs to raise the bar on a very respectable Bachmann model. Rapido too are offering a premium product at a premium price, and the underframe can be a selling point even if you can't see it: "You'll know its there"

 

It's just TT:120 has been presented as an affordable (but accurate) product rather than a premium range - and presumably this sort of thing has a cost . I suppose expunging it from the 4mm CAD when reworking for 1:120 would have had a cost too.

 

Not a complaint, merely modest surprise

[Johan DC]

I follow your reasoning, but I'm afraid for Hornby, that if they didn't do the underframe detail, some might say that it's Design Clever all over again. 

 

[jjb1970]

I am probably in a minority on RMWeb but I don't object to a 'design clever' approach if it is well done. The problem with the concept as tried by Hornby was that it wasn't that well executed in some cases. I thought the SR EMUs were well done, but the steamers of that era less so (and the idea of using common tooling for models in the Railroad and main ranges by varying the paint finish wasn't good). 

 

However, the idea of putting money where it makes the most difference and paring down stuff which isn't seen in normal use seems perfectly reasonable to me. Underframe detail is a good example, of course it's nice but it makes no difference if operating models on a layout. Get the shape right and nail the overall impression, and then use judgement on level of detail and trick features. Kato and Tomix do it extremely well in N if manufacturers want examples of the concept done well.

[steve1]

Are these also a foretaste of what we can expect from the 4mm version that was announced earlier in the year?

 

steve

[BroadLeaves]

1 hour ago, jjb1970 said:

the idea of putting money where it makes the most difference and paring down stuff which isn't seen in normal use seems perfectly reasonable to me. Underframe detail is a good example

I'm with you on this one.

Sprung buffers err... spring (sorry) to mind as well. I can see them making sense on O gauge, where they may actually get used and have some effect on a close coupling with a tight curve, but on OO with tension locks? They'll never get used. Prodded once with a finger when the wagon is unboxed and that's it.

I can see it's fast becoming table stakes in the RTR market though. Perhaps not for TT (yet), but certainly for OO, where it appears to be almost a proxy for quality. Wagon A has sprung buffers, wagon B doesn't; therefore wagon A is "better" in some way.

[steve1]

4 minutes ago, BroadLeaves said:

I'm with you on this one.

Sprung buffers err... spring (sorry) to mind as well. I can see them making sense on O gauge, where they may actually get used and have some effect on a close coupling with a tight curve, but on OO with tension locks? They'll never get used. Prodded once with a finger when the wagon is unboxed and that's it.
 

 

Not everyone uses tension locks in 4mm. I appreciate sprung buffers on my stock that is 3 links fitted.

 

steve

[markw]

13 hours ago, Ravenser said:

 

It's not a complaint - but can it be seen when the wagon's on the track? 

 

At least some of it  may be needed to support pipework etc that can be seen when the vehicle is right way .

 

  I'm not a fan of underframing when it comes to kits - Parkside wagons with plain flat undersides are much more convenient  for glueing sheet lead in place than anything that has chassis framing underneath, and nobody has ever suggested Parkside kits are compromised as a result (Framing on vintage 12T tank wagons is a very different matter - that's exposed)

 

Its just this sort of thing has always seemed pointless and invisible detail. I kind of understand it on Hornby's OO TTA - that's a premium product in a hotly competitive sector and needs to raise the bar on a very respectable Bachmann model. Rapido too are offering a premium product at a premium price, and the underframe can be a selling point even if you can't see it: "You'll know its there"

 

It's just TT:120 has been presented as an affordable (but accurate) product rather than a premium range - and presumably this sort of thing has a cost . I suppose expunging it from the 4mm CAD when reworking for 1:120 would have had a cost too.

 

Not a complaint, merely modest surprise

On these TTAs the central frame members are lower than the solebars so yes they can be seen when looking side on.

I also notice there are plain springs on the Esso version and Brunninghaus on the others

[peak experience]

5 hours ago, markw said:

On these TTAs the central frame members are lower than the solebars so yes they can be seen when looking side on.

I also notice there are plain springs on the Esso version and Brunninghaus on the others

Would the different spring types tie them to certain eras or did the plain type last until withdrawal?

[Steamport Southport]

8 hours ago, BroadLeaves said:

I'm with you on this one.

Sprung buffers err... spring (sorry) to mind as well. I can see them making sense on O gauge, where they may actually get used and have some effect on a close coupling with a tight curve, but on OO with tension locks? They'll never get used. Prodded once with a finger when the wagon is unboxed and that's it.

I can see it's fast becoming table stakes in the RTR market though. Perhaps not for TT (yet), but certainly for OO, where it appears to be almost a proxy for quality. Wagon A has sprung buffers, wagon B doesn't; therefore wagon A is "better" in some way.

 

Not everyone who models in 4mm uses tension locks or has tight train set curves.

 

Maybe you should also tell Gibson, Dart/MJT, Lanarkshire MS and Markits to stop making sprung buffers as well, as they are obviously wasting their time....

 

 

 

Jason

[eastwestdivide]

On 30/10/2023 at 07:32, eastwestdivide said:

Odd that the green one is prefixed PBO. The correct owner prefix for BP was BPO, although I’ve an idea at least one was wrong like this in real life. 

Quoting myself, just found this in my collection under the "wrong in real life" category. The BPO prefix is wrongly applied as a suffix in the data panel. Also, unusually, marked up as TTB for air braked, vacuum piped. Hoo Junction 1983: