Hornby to move offices from Margate to Sandwich

[Nedrahn]

In the past I would just have clicked "Disagree" and moved on, but now I have to write something to express myself. Apologies to everyone for the resulting tedium.

 

Firstly, Stagecoach (much praised by many as a TOC) has a long history of doing exactly this with public assets: one of their first actions on buying a formerly nationalised coach operator several decades ago was to sell off Southampton coach station as a redevelopment opportunity. Their coaches then stopped in the road, by the pavement, causing large-scale congestion and reducing public safety. The Council eventually had to spend more public money on building a whole new coach station for Stagecoach to use, while Stagecoach's owners frolicked in bathtubs filled with money (or something - I may have imagined the last bit).

 

Your outrage at Hornby strikes me as misplaced: a bit like blaming the theatre that sold a ticket to the assassin John Wilkes Booth, thus enabling him to get access to President Lincoln. Let's not slag off the man himself, or even the gun or bullet manufacturers, or perhaps even the bus company that gave Wilkes Booth a ride to the theatre; no, let's just focus on the theatre. Those evil bast*rds. We'll never watch another musical there again. Hah! That will teach them!

 

You wrote, quite clearly, "the issue is with the manner in which Gloag acquired this ... asset". Well, that may be so. In which case, why are you attacking poor bloody Hornby?

 

Paul

Given how much petty abuse has been thrown at Hornby for Design Clever, etc, on RMWeb, I think it's a bit rich to accuse me of attacking Hornby. My point is that Hornby is not under obligation to do business with the people who are intent on destroying Manston Airport - there are other offices and business parks. Yet Hornby has made the choice to move to Discovery Park regardless. As a result, I choose not to support Hornby any further. It's my opinion and my choice, and no amount of abuse or specious argument will change that. I have the right.

 

As for the comments, if mockery makes a little man feel big, then please do carry on. Bullies have never bothered me.

 

Regarding Manston, I notice very few of you with strong opinions on its worthlessness actually live in East Kent. I do. There's a lot of anger about what has happened to Manston, the manner in which it happened, and the utter betrayal (AGAIN) by our public servants (sic). Would some of you at least have the good manners to acknowledge that those who live in an area have some right to a say on its future?

[Fenman]

Given how much petty abuse has been thrown at Hornby for Design Clever, etc, on RMWeb, I think it's a bit rich to accuse me of attacking Hornby. My point is that Hornby is not under obligation to do business with the people who are intent on destroying Manston Airport - there are other offices and business parks. Yet Hornby has made the choice to move to Discovery Park regardless. As a result, I choose not to support Hornby any further. It's my opinion and my choice, and no amount of abuse or specious argument will change that. I have the right.

 

As for the comments, if mockery makes a little man feel big, then please do carry on. Bullies have never bothered me.

 

Regarding Manston, I notice very few of you with strong opinions on its worthlessness actually live in East Kent. I do. There's a lot of anger about what has happened to Manston, the manner in which it happened, and the utter betrayal (AGAIN) by our public servants (sic). Would some of you at least have the good manners to acknowledge that those who live in an area have some right to a say on its future?

 

It is, of course, absolutely your right to choose who you support and who you don't. I don't think anyone's arguing that it is not. What most of us are doing is questioning whether, given what you are complaining about, a boycott of Hornby is either proportionate or reasonable. For most of us it appears not to be. Stationmaster asked why you picked out Hornby to boycott rather than some other users of the site - like National Grid and the NHS. That seems like a reasonable question to me.

 

I am not sure from what you have written if it is me you are accusing of mockery, of being a little man or a bully. I can't see any of those caps fitting me (though my attempt to inject some levity into what might otherwise have been a po-faced reply might have been interpreted as mockery, I suppose). But I am glad you are not bothered. None of this strikes me as worth losing any sleep over (or of losing the opportunity to buy some lovely Hornby models, as it happens!).

 

Oh, incidentally, on this point:

 

"Would some of you at least have the good manners to acknowledge that those who live in an area have some right to a say on its future?"

 

Surely most of Hornby's employees would live in the area and, presumably, also have a right to some say in the future of the airport...?

 

Paul

[Ian Hargrave]

This topic is straying into the political zone and is becoming unnecessarily ill -tempered. I think we have Forum rules that govern this ?  I know precious little about Manston and not much more about Kent.Seems to me to be a dangerous area and a no-go zone.....time was Hornby used to produce model railways there . Ah yes,of course. Now...where were we ?

[phil-b259]

My point is that Hornby is not under obligation to do business with the people who are intent on destroying Manston Airport - there are other offices and business parks. Yet Hornby has made the choice to move to Discovery Park regardless. As a result, I choose not to support Hornby any further. It's my opinion and my choice, and no amount of abuse or specious argument will change that. I have the right.

 

Hornby, is also under no obligation to pander to the views of Thanet residents either - as with all business its primary duty is to its Shareholders (99.9999999% of which have no connection with Thanet or could give two hoots about Manston). Thus if a move to the Discovery Park results in lower costs to the business due to the business parks special status or because the rents are particularly good value then its a no brainer to relocate there (particularly as it means the current staff don't have to relocate to another bit of the country).

 

If you personally wish to boycott Hornby then thats up to you, but personally I don't see that Hornby have any reason whatsoever to not move to Sandwich if it makes financial sense for them.

 

 

Regarding Manston, I notice very few of you with strong opinions on its worthlessness actually live in East Kent. I do. There's a lot of anger about what has happened to Manston, the manner in which it happened, and the utter betrayal (AGAIN) by our public servants (sic). Would some of you at least have the good manners to acknowledge that those who live in an area have some right to a say on its future?

 

Anger about what has happened to the Manston with respect to what councillors may or may not have promised, doesn't get away from the basic fact that realistically Manston has no commercial future as an airport and its not our fault if you cannot accept the commercial reality of things these days. Yes as a resident you certainly have every right to say what you think as regards the future of Manston, but what I and many others take issue with is your assumption that simply because it has a big long runway it would make an ideal international airport when its plainly obvious to most people that simply isn't (and never has been a viable) option regardless of what officaldom may or may not have said / done on the subject.

 

As a RAF base it was fine where it was, but today its simply too far away from the bulk of the South Easts population to function as a passenger operation and its too far from the bulk of the UK to act as a freight operation. While Aircraft servicing and training rarely generates the amount of business to warrant a stand alone facility and thus it makes more financial / business / operational sense for airlines to develop / use facilities elsewhere, be that in the UK or overseas.

 

In many ways Manston could be put into the same bracket as the cross channel ferry ports at Ramesgate, Sheerness and Folkestone. Back in their hayday they made financial sense and were able to support commercial operations but the world has moved on and the commercial realities of todays world mean they are redundant. You can either leave them rotting away forever or actually be radical and turn them into something that todays world will be able to use, thereby generating at least some income. Once the RAF decided it didn't need Manston then the same applies.

[jjb1970]

Hornby didn't sell the airport to Ms. Gloag nor do any of the nefarious things which are upsetting some people in East Kent. Hornby are a local employer and it is in the interests of the local community and economy to keep Hornby in the area. I can understand why people are angry about the airport but Hornby have done nothing wrong in this instance. I can think of many reasons why I'd boycot a company but this is not one of them. 

[bigherb]

.

Anger about what has happened to the Manston with respect to what councillors may or may not have promised, doesn't get away from the basic fact that realistically Manston has no commercial future as an airport and its not our fault if you cannot accept the commercial reality of things these days. Yes as a resident you certainly have every right to say what you think as regards the future of Manston, but what I and many others take issue with is your assumption that simply because it has a big long runway it would make an ideal international airport when its plainly obvious to most people that simply isn't (and never has been a viable) option regardless of what officaldom may or may not have said / done on the subject.

 

As a RAF base it was fine where it was, but today its simply too far away from the bulk of the South Easts population to function as a passenger operation and its too far from the bulk of the UK to act as a freight operation. While Aircraft servicing and training rarely generates the amount of business to warrant a stand alone facility and thus it makes more financial / business / operational sense for airlines to develop / use facilities elsewhere, be that in the UK or overseas.

 

 

That is pretty much it, with the expansion of Lydd airport which will affect fewer people there is just not the need for Manston.

[bgman]

I heard they'd put an offer in on a new workshop too !

 

[Mike Storey]

Thanks for that Stu.  Having worked (in a consultancy role) on similar things in the past I couldn't restrain myself from bursting out laughing at some points in that document, especially the bit about gradients and some of the comments about the signalling and about level crossing modernisation.  In railway terms it strikes me as a very poor site indeed with heavy gradients and the level crossing - and although the latter could be modernised the gradients are immovable and just because the bit of paper that said don't build on heavy gradients no longer exists it was supposed to have been superseded by folk having the commonsense to do what used to be written down  (for example continuous brakes are no longer legally required by British legislation - but commonsense suggests they have an important part to play).

 

I agree the gradients as stated are problematic, at the east end anyway, but it does not mean they cannot be improved in the earthworks (unless the underbridge further east places a serious constraint in this), but this would change the estimate dramatically, as would changes to the AHB, which does not seem to have been sufficiently allowed in the estimates. The contingency allowed does not follow Treasury requirements, so I am surprised the council accepted it. Yet again, i am afraid we will see the design adopted by NR, who will then apply far greater contingency as well as further constraints, and the usual lairy story of NR charging far too much for "simple" works will rear its head, due to the consultants' poor initial work.

[Mike Storey]

Hi,

Mike thanks for your comments. I had wondered about the safety case in respect of the level crossings but didn't ponder to much on gradient issue. As regards the timetable a train stopping at the parkway station will mean arriving in Ramsgate and subsequent stations 4mins later. This will have an effect on other services, platforms, pathways etc. One possible solution is to retime other services to leave later. But to avoid knock on effects further along the network it is suggested trains miss out current stops so they so they end up being at the right place right time. I.E. keep the current timetable but take out a stop or two. It's only one of three possible options but it's the one that would have an effect on travellers, me included.

Talk on a taking 1 hour to get to St Pancras is interesting but I would assume to achieve that they would need to sort out the restriction at Grove ferry and raise speeds on the Ramsgate-Canterbury-Ashford line to something above its present Edwardian levels.

 

Stu

 

Thanks for posting the tech details Stu.

 

I have read section 3 in detail and the reductions in stops you cite are actually substitutions moved to another service, so that existing levels of service are maintained. There are no proposals here to reduce calling frequencies at any station.

 

I have commented elsewhere on the gradient and costs issues, but I have only built new platforms when the 1:500 rule was in place. I did however construct many platform extensions (mainly in Scotland) at gradients down to 1:300, on which there were no problems.

 

Mike

[Joseph_Pestell]

Given how much petty abuse has been thrown at Hornby for Design Clever, etc, on RMWeb, I think it's a bit rich to accuse me of attacking Hornby. My point is that Hornby is not under obligation to do business with the people who are intent on destroying Manston Airport - there are other offices and business parks. Yet Hornby has made the choice to move to Discovery Park regardless. As a result, I choose not to support Hornby any further. It's my opinion and my choice, and no amount of abuse or specious argument will change that. I have the right.

 

As for the comments, if mockery makes a little man feel big, then please do carry on. Bullies have never bothered me.

 

Regarding Manston, I notice very few of you with strong opinions on its worthlessness actually live in East Kent. I do. There's a lot of anger about what has happened to Manston, the manner in which it happened, and the utter betrayal (AGAIN) by our public servants (sic). Would some of you at least have the good manners to acknowledge that those who live in an area have some right to a say on its future?

 

I don't live in East Kent - but most of my relatives do. They flew from Manston a few times but then lost a holiday when one of the airlines flying from there went bust. There may be other reasons for that but I think that flying from Manston probably makes it difficult to attract viable numbers of passengers.

[Andy Y]

Would some of you at least have the good manners to acknowledge that those who live in an area have some right to a say on its future?

 

You seem to have an unfortunate turn of phrase which gets a few backs up so it may be worth reining that in please.

 

The move is obviously attractive to Hornby; if they were mindful of the same concerns as you and were offered a property deal which is out of the travelling distance of the employees would that be good for Margate/Sandwich/Thanet?

 

Maybe you could spare a thought for the livelihoods and employment of some of your near neighbours?

[The Stationmaster]

I agree the gradients as stated are problematic, at the east end anyway, but it does not mean they cannot be improved in the earthworks (unless the underbridge further east places a serious constraint in this), but this would change the estimate dramatically, as would changes to the AHB, which does not seem to have been sufficiently allowed in the estimates. The contingency allowed does not follow Treasury requirements, so I am surprised the council accepted it. Yet again, i am afraid we will see the design adopted by NR, who will then apply far greater contingency as well as further constraints, and the usual lairy story of NR charging far too much for "simple" works will rear its head, due to the consultants' poor initial work.

 

Thanks for posting the tech details Stu.

 

I have read section 3 in detail and the reductions in stops you cite are actually substitutions moved to another service, so that existing levels of service are maintained. There are no proposals here to reduce calling frequencies at any station.

 

I have commented elsewhere on the gradient and costs issues, but I have only built new platforms when the 1:500 rule was in place. I did however construct many platform extensions (mainly in Scotland) at gradients down to 1:300, on which there were no problems.

 

Mike

1 in 300 is not real problem Mike and is still outside the original 'normal minimum' which was 1 in 260 - although there were exceptions sometimes permitted where no alternative existed.  In fact it seems that in pursuit of other goals the consultants had avoided the sites which make sense from a gradient/railway civil engineering viewpoint and gone for a more awkward one a few miles along the line - strange to remark it's not the first time I've come across that with consultants who don't fully understand railway issues and dismiss them with a sweep of the word processor.  But then perhaps they were only saying what the commissioners of their report wanted them to say?

 

None of which - with due apologies to Andy - has anything to do with Hornby's factory move, but they do make model railways

[lapford34102]

Hi,

Mike, thanks again for your interesting, and dare I say it, insightful comments and points. I'll be going to the "consultation" at Ramsgate station next Tuesday and see what they have to say.

 

As regards Manston while I'm not as obviously passionate as Nedrahn is I will fully back him on one point. There is a universal opinion among people I know that we've had one put over on us.

 

To those who have commented, or intend to, on Manston's future I strongly recommend you watch this.

 

http://www.supportmanstonairport.org/transport-select-committee-manston-airport-evidence-session/

 

Stu

[Andy Y]

There is a universal opinion among people I know that we've had one put over on us.

 

 

I do agree with this and I know there was uncertainty for the future of at least one of the excellent museums to the NW of the site; has there been any resolution on this do you know Stu?

 

On another note I do wonder that if staff and stock are in two different locations, not to mention the visitor centre, whether as many of the Hornby staff will live and breathe the products as before. Will there be showcases of products to be proud of and certificates on the wall of a shared office complex? I'm sure there will be some in the organisation who have the exposure but will it be part of the culture?

 

At the present time mags can't get review samples of products in a timely fashion because they're in a different building. I did wonder if there was an agenda there but it's been intimated it will be rectified; maybe it just got overlooked with more important matters deserving attention?

[lapford34102]

Hi,

Andy, the "Spitfire Museum" is secure. The new owners have magnanimously gifted the land to the museum. Threatening that would have been a step too far. It might well end up in the middle of a housing development but that fate's already befallen other BoB airfields. The area next to it, not now technically part of the airport is already earmarked for development.

The "Manston History Museum" in the old MT building with assorted relics outside and just across the car park from the the Spitfire museum is far less secure.

 

As regards the fragmentation of Hornby's operation there's already one side effect. The Visitor's Centre shop is usually around a month behind other outlets getting new products. Please don't ask how I know........ :-(

 

Mike, forgot to mention about the revised timetables. Perhaps I was reading it with gloom coloured glasses, will have a re-read

 

Stu

[Ozexpatriate]

So the biggest question this thread provokes is whether Hornby will release a version of 21C170/34070 to commemorate their move to new digs.

And apparently they did!

 

It's R3249 and is a Hornby Collectors' Club 'exclusive', so sign up for the Hornby club now if you love celebrating the soulless goosestepping march of progress over Britain's heritage or perhaps celebrating the victory of free enterprise over overwrought, wishful, local government plans to build airports for the 21^st century or something else that people are evidently so passionate about in this thread that for some reason has escaped me.

And people accuse Hornby of not having any joined up thinking.
 
(I do hope people will recognize the intentional tongue-in-cheek in this post.)

[Ozexpatriate]

Tri-ang moved the hobby from one which was still in the realm of the relatively affluent to one which most families were able to afford - in much the same way as a Rolls Royce Silver Ghost was undoubtedly better quality than a Model T Ford, but without the latter car ownership would have remained an exclusive of the rich.

 

Unfortunately I fear that the current emphasis on expensive "super detail" models is now moving the hobby in the opposite direction.

As I understand it there are still very expensive brass models that are many times the price of plastic RTR ones. These and bespoke 'museum quality' models are the "Rolls Royce" in your analogy.

 

Ford prices went up too and they also made high-end cars.

[papagolfjuliet]

That is pretty much it, with the expansion of Lydd airport which will affect fewer people there is just not the need for Manston.

 

Not sure I agree with that. If you travel via HS1 it doesn't take much longer to get to Manston than it does to get to Stansted. Besides which, locals actually want Manston, and that's more than can be said of those living near Heathrow, or Gatwick, or on the Hundred of Hoo.

 

Not that any of this is relevant to Hornby's choice of landlord.

[Ozexpatriate]

I think the old assumptions about Railroad being for train setters have became very blurred. ... One of the issues with Railroad in recent times has been that it has started to sit uncomfortably between two worlds, with it becoming blurred where Railroad stops and main range begins. I think the new Railroad tooling fills a valuable spot for those on a budget.

And Nat Southworth agreed in his interview with Phil Parker from MREmag:

 

So far Nat says they have split the market between those after a train set and people who want, and are willing to pay for, top end models. The problem is the Railroad range which he admits is ill-defined. It should provide a useful halfway house but this isn't clear. I commented that I was surprised the Crosti 9F had been put in to Railroad - it appears that people within the company aren't sure how this has happened either.

This is very much Nat's job to sort this out. That he was willing to say 'on the record' that there is an issue is a positive step.

[Xerces Fobe2]

I heard they'd put an offer in on a new workshop too !

image.jpg

Perfect as it's grown and got a warped base!

[Mike Storey]

Hi,

Mike, thanks again for your interesting, and dare I say it, insightful comments and points. I'll be going to the "consultation" at Ramsgate station next Tuesday and see what they have to say.

 

As regards Manston while I'm not as obviously passionate as Nedrahn is I will fully back him on one point. There is a universal opinion among people I know that we've had one put over on us.

 

To those who have commented, or intend to, on Manston's future I strongly recommend you watch this.

 

http://www.supportmanstonairport.org/transport-select-committee-manston-airport-evidence-session/

 

Stu

 

It would be great to hear what you find out at the consultation Stu.

 

Perhaps we should start a new thread - Thanet Parkway and Manston Airport development? (to keep it having a railway content!) Where should that go in the contents list?

[robmcg]

As I understand it there are still very expensive brass models that are many times the price of plastic RTR ones. These and bespoke 'museum quality' models are the "Rolls Royce" in your analogy.

 

Ford prices went up too and they also made high-end cars.

 

I agree about the top end models, 00 or 0 scale/gauge.

 

When I was a teenager in the 1960s there were members of our local NZ model railway community who had many H0 scale brass models of American heavy steam prototypes, simply superb models made in Japan, much more expensive than my interest, UK 00 Kitmaster! They looked to me to be as good as anything made today.

 

I 'know' they were of superb quality, mostly unpainted brass, my father's office (NZ Railways Publicity and Advertising Dept) had a whole wall of gauge 1 NZR models which had been built by master craftsman Frank Roberts 1935-on , many used in the 1940 NZ Centennial Exhibition, some were 20v electric some live steam. Cab gauges had numerals, toolboxes on engines had individual tools inside...

 

I presume that Loveless and similar will produce in 00 excellent models to the standard of their beautiful 0 scale models?

[Combe Martin]

Re post 90 above about the on site shop being a month behind the retailers with new products, I bought the brand new BR condition ex-LMS horsebox in the site shop today. As I recall, availability of this was from about the 11th, i.e. yesterday. To me that sounds like it's supplies are as good as anyone else.

[phil-b259]

Not sure I agree with that. If you travel via HS1 it doesn't take much longer to get to Manston than it does to get to Stansted. Besides which, locals actually want Manston, and that's more than can be said of those living near Heathrow, or Gatwick, or on the Hundred of Hoo.

 

 

(1) The population of East Kent is too small to support a commercially operated international airport.

(2) Not all airport passengers live in or come from London.

 

Gatwick attracts passengers from 4 counties plus London thanks to its centralish position. It as direct train services to the airport from Hastings to Southampton and It is easily reachable from Reading (via FGW) and the likes of Cambridge and Peterborough will all be reachable without a change of train when Thameslink is finished. At present it has direct train services to 129 individual stations (which will increase to 175 with Thameslink) If coming by car it is similarly easily accessible thanks to the M25

 

Heathrow has good road access from multiple destinations across the SE (apart from  East Kent ) though rail is restricted to the GWML corridor, Luton is again easily accessible by road from large parts of the country (and when Thameslink is finished will be in relatively easy reach by those living in Surrey Sussex & Kent)

 

Stansted has good road access from multiple directions (though rail is restricted to the WAML corridor and the occasional through service via Peterborough & Leicester)

 

Southend has good road connections to Essex & London (though rail is limited)

 

Manston simply cannot compete.

 

 

Not that any of this is relevant to Hornby's choice of landlord.

 

Very true.

[phil-b259]

 There is a universal opinion among people I know that we've had one put over on us.

 

Nobody will dispute that but it still doesn't mean that Manston has, or indeed ever did have a realistic future as a commercial international airport.

 

In any case the Governments Airports commission have ruled out anything other than Gatwick or Heathrow now.