robmcg Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Hornby are to produce a super-detail unrebuilt Merchant Navy, fully detailed, with industry ground-breaking standards of detail. A spokesperson for Hornby, who could not be reached tonight, had no comment in response to reported statements that, "the market has been waiting for this for a long time, and we are going to deliver." Expected price range £350-£375. To be delivered on April 1, 2016. Early BR Brunswick Green c1951 condition. Streamlined tender. Professionally weathered. Optional near-scale-wheel front bogie supplied. All pipes, hoses, brake rods, and couplings factory fitted, coal supplied. Cylinder drains, ALL steps fitted. A completely new standard of modelling. Nameplates to be proof-read. Hornby's spokesperson also chose not to comment on rumours that a member of the Board had quipped, "this will put one up those fancy b******s at B*******n..." Note: some content in this post may have been contaminated by near-truth.. Pre-production picture below. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkC Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Delivery date duly noted... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussiebrfan Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 I think you been doing too much of the above!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmcg Posted February 10, 2014 Author Share Posted February 10, 2014 I find the suggestion of smoking dope offensive. I spent more than a couple of hours creating an image of what many would like Hornby to produce, and wrote about it in a light-hearted way. I carefully researched the many detail differences between early MN series engines and chose 35011 because of the second series 5100 gallon tender and other detail subtleties like valences, emblem size and so on, which I may have got not-quite-right, but I like the result. Photographing the weathered model is not as simple as you may think. That kind of unfriendly response is why I left this forum a few weeks ago. Why do I bother? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Multiple identity account Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 I find the suggestion of smoking dope offensive. I spent more than a couple of hours creating an image of what many would like Hornby to produce, and wrote about it in a light-hearted way. I carefully researched the many detail differences between early MN series engines and chose 35011 because of the second series 5100 gallon tender and other detail subtleties like valences, emblem size and so on, which I may have got not-quite-right, but I like the result. Photographing the weathered model is not as simple as you may think. That kind of unfriendly response is why I left this forum a few weeks ago. Why do I bother? It is probably just the misleading heading that you are getting such a response. I for one was drawn to the topic only because of the heading. After reading your OP it was kind of disheartening to find it a little different You can't blame anyone, there are many posts, threads and topics on this forum that have been misunderstood and you do get answers to something different. There is no one to blame, you can't blame the OP because it's not the easiest thing in the world to deduce feelings etc from a written/typed message and you can't blame the responses because they answer in a way they see it or they understand. As for your work, it is extremely remarkable and I love it. You have talent but I feel your headline was something that threw us off! Regards. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Trevellan Posted February 10, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 10, 2014 I find the suggestion of smoking dope offensive.... Interesting how we all interpret the written word in different ways. My reading of the response to your OP was that it was intended in the same light-hearted spirit, so let's keep things in perspective eh? I admire the work you do to produce some excellent images and the MN matches the usual high standard. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
locoholic Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 That kind of unfriendly response is why I left this forum a few weeks ago. Why do I bother? Well, a few weeks ago I queried why David Cameron was encouraging trade with China when Hornby were having so much trouble with manufacturing there. In reply, you posted a bit of a rant criticising me for being against free trade. (Subsequent posts about molds mysteriously disappearing, etc, would indicate that firms would be correct to think twice about trade with China.) The difference is that I didn't moan about your "unfriendly response" to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussiebrfan Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 I find the suggestion of smoking dope offensive. I spent more than a couple of hours creating an image of what many would like Hornby to produce, and wrote about it in a light-hearted way. I carefully researched the many detail differences between early MN series engines and chose 35011 because of the second series 5100 gallon tender and other detail subtleties like valences, emblem size and so on, which I may have got not-quite-right, but I like the result. Photographing the weathered model is not as simple as you may think. That kind of unfriendly response is why I left this forum a few weeks ago. Why do I bother? It was a joke!!! Okay you prefer open, honest communication that cannot be taken the wrong way, heres my attempt. I've always been a fan of your photography, I find it very clever, artisitic and inspiring. There was nothing unfriendly about my post, who mentioned dope anyway? It was just banter. I repeatedly find it amusing that the wriiten word of a harmless post can be interpreted in many ways. I'm sorry it you were offended but that was certainly not my intention, I'm also sorry if you have copped negativity on here in the past. I was laughing away to myself when I read your OP and thought good on you, a bit of light heartedness is surely welcome when posting about Hornby after all that has been posted about them recently. Surely an Aussie having a harmless jest with a New Zealander isnt the worst thing thats been posted on here. We wouldnt have ANZAC without us both together! Anyway for whats it worth please accept my sincere apologies, sorry. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edcayton Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Come on guys, lighten up! Rob's OP was a joke, as, clearly, was aussiebrfan's response. I too was drawn to the thread by the title, and found it amusing. Please can it stay that way? Ed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ceptic Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Aren't you a bit previous for April 1st., Rob ?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCAR6015 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Will Hornby still be trading in April 2016??? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted February 10, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 10, 2014 Will Hornby still be trading in April 2016??? Why do you pose that question ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozexpatriate Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 I find the suggestion of smoking dope offensive. Rob you take these things too much to heart and it is a very nice illustration. The Merchant Navy has been an odds on favourite for either Hornby or Bachmann Branch-Line for years now. Hornby have the chassis, Bachmann have the CAD from their Farish version. My guess continues to be Bachmann. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunsignalling Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Rob you take these things too much to heart and it is a very nice illustration. The Merchant Navy has been an odds on favourite for either Hornby or Bachmann Branch-Line for years now. Hornby have the chassis, Bachmann have the CAD from their Farish version. My guess continues to be Bachmann. My guess continues to be neither, but I'd love to be proved wrong! John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free At Last Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Does this belong to anyone... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozexpatriate Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 My guess continues to be neither, but I'd love to be proved wrong! Of course the version that appeals to me is the least likely of all to be produced in plastic RTR - the original five with the 'widow's peak' front end in malachite. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidM Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Nice photo, but bit of a pointless thread - if its a 'look at my photos' avenue, there's enough other threads for that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozexpatriate Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Nice photo, but bit of a pointless thread - if its a 'look at my photos' avenue, there's enough other threads for that? It's an April fools thread - perhaps a bit early but there's nothing wrong with that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil gollin Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 . Tedious. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Legend Posted February 10, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 10, 2014 I like Robs photos. Really he can bring the best out of a model. Really great stuff. But I do think it would be good to have them all on one thread. Were it April 1st I would see funny side but it's February so have to agree the thread is a bit pointless and the title completely misleading Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSpencer Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 For 30 seconds I really believed Hornby was going to do this. Great image Rob and well done. Does this belong to anyone... Dummy.jpg Yes my daughter, thanks I just spent the past 2 hours looking for it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adams442T Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 I, and many others I know, really enjoy Rob's masterful manipulations, and this one he has presented as a 'spoof' Hornby News Item. So what! If you don't like the mildly humorous intent with which it was done, don't bother with the thread. I can't see any point in moaning about it. Lighten up folks, for heavens sake! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PhilH Posted February 10, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 10, 2014 I, and many others I know, really enjoy Rob's masterful manipulations, and this one he has presented as a 'spoof' Hornby News Item. So what! If you don't like the mildly humorous intent with which it was done, don't bother with the thread. I can't see any point in moaning about it. Lighten up folks, for heavens sake! Have a look at post #4, I think it's the OP who needs to take this advice. But he does produce stonking photos..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Rob, you have a number of threads, and there is also the gallery, for your artwork. I can't imagine this as an April Fools thread on anything other than April Fools day. If this had been sold as "maybe Hornby would care to look at this?" then I think there'd have been less confusion and perhaps less animosity all round. That's not to say I don't admire the picture but I think the setup was unnecessary. By all means though, let's have a debate about the streamlined Merchant Navy. Why hasn't it been done? Rob's picture does show what a good looking model it'd be in 00, after all. Hornby never followed up their Bulleids and arguably they had everything except the body shells (they already had the valve gear and the wheelbase between their BoBs and Merchant Navy components). A complete mystery to me given you could have quite a variety of liveries including, but not limited to, malachite green, all over black, blue of two different shades and lining and the standard BR green. Of course, there were lots of differences between batches and individual locomotives so that in itself may have posed a few problems for selection of tooling but they seemed to manage perfectly well with the BoBs and WCs in that vein. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmcg Posted February 10, 2014 Author Share Posted February 10, 2014 I have added a question mark to the title. I ought to be more thick-skinned about 'dope' jokes.. In creating the photo I was imagining what an RTR 00 model would look like if done to the highest standards. I expect Hornby are more likely to do this than Bachmann, they have a chassis and tender base at least. It was curiosity about how it might look which inspired me, as well as the engines themselves born of the war. The timeframe suggested in msg 1 is actually almost plausible thus the reference to April1 I thought that being from me, together with the the April 2016 release, and the proof-reading of nameplate, it might be apparent that it was a gentle hoax. In any event all the things suggested have been done by Hornby. (or more rarely Bachmann) Alternative front bogie. Streamlined Coronation Front steps. Q1 and Britannia/Clan External brakerods. Bachmann Compound hoses pipes other brakerods. Britannia and some other both manufacturers Coal Britannia Cylinder pipes fitted. Castle. If with current Chinese labour costs and a base of £180 for a DCC-fitted model today at the 'best current standard', and knowing it would take 3 years plus to tool-up and produce this much-desired model, I though a premium for limited run + inflation might bring £350-ish, Hornby sold the GG sets rather easily. The price would be high if all assembly were done in factory. Maybe there would be a case for a bag of parts, but producing these and including them is nearly as expensive as fitting them? Food for thought anyway. I chose 35011 because it was a late rebuild (1959) and was always BR green from c1950 one of only three MNs to avoid other colours. It also has a series 2 tender. A wartime black 1st series version would my choice but they all differed so much it would be hard to manufacture. But mostly I just wanted to see how an original MN looked. It took 5 hours to produce from a WC pic. Sorry about my reaction, and sorry that people were taken in and or disappointed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.