Hornby Merchant Navy announced (formerly Facebook leak)

[woodenhead]

Not for the first time, I am intrigued. Not about the tactics of Hornby or Bachmann, or Wonky Models Ltd for that matter, but by the enormous interest in this sort of locomotive. After all, RMwebbers, by and large, are well-informed people who know what ran where and when.

 

So, do I not like MNs? Fine locos in my view, and I saw them all, albeit most of them rebuilt by then, no doubt.

 

My confusion is caused by the very narrow sphere of operations of these locos. After all, their Route Availability meant they didn't really venture beyond Exeter, hardly saw Sussex in service, seldom slummed-it on a secondary route, still less a single line. They were heavy express locos, and that's that.

 

So, do all those enthusing here really have substantial main line layouts, on which an MN might look at home with 10 or more on the back? And, if not, wouldn't the Light Pacific be a more appropriate choice?

Very true, in N I had already dismissed a Farish MN when It comes out in favour of waiting for Dapol to release its WC despite being more confident about Farish mechanisms.

 

Mind you the Brighton Belles and Blue Pullmans sold with the former even more restricted than an MN.

[Roy P]

Ian, in pure modelling terms I understand your point but models allow us a bit of fantasy.

The NRMs "National Collection in Miniature" can be supplemented by the otherwise extinct types.

Rule 1.5 if you like

"It's my museum and I'll preserve what I like"

 

If one has the means of course, having a model railway and a loco collection could double the fun.

 

RP

[Dunsignalling]

Not for the first time, I am intrigued. Not about the tactics of Hornby or Bachmann, or Wonky Models Ltd for that matter, but by the enormous interest in this sort of locomotive. After all, RMwebbers, by and large, are well-informed people who know what ran where and when.

 

So, do I not like MNs? Fine locos in my view, and I saw them all, albeit most of them rebuilt by then, no doubt.

 

My confusion is caused by the very narrow sphere of operations of these locos. After all, their Route Availability meant they didn't really venture beyond Exeter, hardly saw Sussex in service, seldom slummed-it on a secondary route, still less a single line. They were heavy express locos, and that's that.

 

So, do all those enthusing here really have substantial main line layouts, on which an MN might look at home with 10 or more on the back? And, if not, wouldn't the Light Pacific be a more appropriate choice?

On that basis, you could rule out the King, not permitted west of Plymouth and heavily route-limited in general, rebuilt MNs and the LMS Pacifics; not to mention all those RA9 LNER types. Admittedly, the LNER did have quite a lot of RA9 route-mileage but the point about train lengths applies equally to all big locos.

 

The fact that the SR routes where the MNs did run are somewhat shorter than the WCML or GWR and GN main lines seems unimportant in the context of models, 99.9% of which will never get to run on layouts where they can cover more than a scale mile before arriving back where they started. 

 

John

Edited February 28, 2015 by Dunsignalling

[Downer]

I have no problem with both Hornby, Bachmann or both producing an original MN, but the timing of Hornby's announcement offers fresh evidence of the sleaziness which seems to characterise the company's dealings with all and sundry.

[Forester]

I'm afraid you've lost me here. You seem to misunderstand. 'Duplication' in this scenario is when two manufacturers model the same class of locomotive in the same scale. The number of 'variations' relates to the amount of tooling required for one manufacturer to produce the level of number/detail fidelity expected by the market. The latter is, of course, not duplication and I never said it was. In this particular instance, IF BOTH manufacturers produce a MN, they MIGHT by complete chance each produce a different variant, in which case the duplication might have less impact, as modellers who prefer Barwell to Margate or Margate to Barwell, could make their choice. It is, however, reliant entirely upon luck as any 'co-operation' in this respect could be seen as a cartel - as I've been told by both organisations in the past when we've discussed previous duplications. I seriously doubt that with costs rising as they are, there is 'plenty of room' for duplication of any sort - but there might be a bit of leeway IF different variants were chosen. If not, perhaps a BMC of railway manufacturing is inevitable, where you can have a Bachmann MN or a Hornby MN and the only difference will be the logo on the baseplate.

CHRIS LEIGH

 

Events have overtaken us.

 

It looks as though Hornby will be doing the Series One and Bachmann who have the drawings for their N gauge Series Two and Three are set up for the later MNs.

 

And in my view there is not only room for both (I will be buying both if they come to fruition) but one may actually assist sales of the other.

 

(Is it possible "Muz" has done some skillful guidance behind the scenes here?!)

[Mr chapman]

The N version is a later series that never carried southern livery. If Hornby produce a earlier southern version what's the hard? More motive power all around!

[coachmann]

My confusion is caused by the very narrow sphere of operations of these locos. After all, their Route Availability meant they didn't really venture beyond Exeter, hardly saw Sussex in service, seldom slummed-it on a secondary route, still less a single line. They were heavy express locos, and that's that.

 

So, do all those enthusing here really have substantial main line layouts, on which an MN might look at home with 10 or more on the back? And, if not, wouldn't the Light Pacific be a more appropriate choice?

You are bringing LOGIC into it my friend ha ha...  It'll never catch on! 

 

Many model train operators buy whatever pleases them hence the good sales of Brighton electrics, Blue Pullmans, one-off prototype Diesels, Beattie Well Tanks, Duchess's and Kings. I too received an Hornby email this afternoon and for some reason (call me illogical, call me a cynic), I saw it as a spoiler for Bachmann's announcement on Monday. But of course i don't know if Bachmann is to announce an original Merchant Navy, and guess what, I don't care either. Not that duplication in our small UK hobby doesn't bother me...It does. But Bulleid stuff is off my radar and I KNOW I dislike the rebuilds. But the sight and sound of an original might be a different kettle of spam next week at Llangollen...

Edited February 28, 2015 by coachmann

[Roy P]

Its true its true its true - I want one I want one I want one - http://www.Hornby.com/news/merchant-navy-class-coming-in-2016/ 

May I ask  21C1 "Which one"

 

RP

[Prometheus]

I have no problem with both Hornby, Bachmann or both producing an original MN, but the timing of Hornby's announcement offers fresh evidence of the sleaziness which seems to characterise the company's dealings with all and sundry.

'Sleaziness' ?  Perhaps a little strong there ? Surely this is just business. Given the opportunity, all will grasp the opportunity to be first to the post. There are no great moral ethics being trashed here.

 

Tony

[Bulleidboy100]

If they are going to be based on the first ten produced, lets hope they avoid using the names Canadian Pacific and Blue Star - already used by Hornby in rebuilt form. 

[Nile]

If they are going to be based on the first ten produced, lets hope they avoid using the names Canadian Pacific and Blue Star - already used by Hornby in rebuilt form.

Why?

[Roy P]

There's an awful lot of 'ifs' in this issue.

If you can keep your head when all about you .........

(Rudyard Kipling)......

[Downer]

'Surely this is just business.'

 

Wasn't that the Godfather's excuse?

[bigherb]

Hornby did say at the announcement of the 2015 range there would be further announcements during 2015, so we should have known something was coming. The timing would have had the conspiracy theorists up in arms whether they announced it before or after the Bachmann announcements.

It looks like Hornby have been working on it for some time and it now gives Bachmann notice that if they are working on one what the version Hornby are working on and Bachmann can do the latter version.

[Dunsignalling]

Whilst it's not certain that Bachmann will announce a MN (though Hornby's timing suggests that they think it probable), how soon is it likely to emerge?

 

If the apparent rate of progress on the Stanier Mogul and Brighton Atlantic are anything to go by, Hornby's will precede it by years rather than months!

 

John  

Edited February 28, 2015 by Dunsignalling

[darren01]

YES!!!!!!!

[The Black Hat]

Briefly a few things which could be expanded pending on Bachmanns move on Monday.

 

1. The Annoucement.

 

I quite like that Hornby has used different PR to communicate direct to consumers. Yes its a leak, but its more of a shrewd move. Now the agenda is set by Hornby announcing the Merchant Navy and moving to combat competition. Its a classic machiavellian style move but when we have bashed Hornby for being slower that its competitors and when those investing want to see it come out fighting  - what do we expect? Personally I like the commitment, the desire to get out first and set the agenda. It means they need to be confident, that they want to bring their products back to market but also maintain the high expectations they are setting for themselves. The turn around for Hornby is impressive and Id hope it bodes well for them and once established again Id like more morality to return - but they are not there yet. Bachmann meanwhile, still have the morality of doing their traditional professional programme launch, but they themselves are not angels. There have been plenty of hints dropped into interviews or press releases, including some which have been decietful at best. "No we are not doing a Blue Pullman," "AC electrics dont sell," etc. Or do we forget all that so quickly? Its also noteworthy that while Hornby Bashing became almost a sport, sticking your head above the parapet against Bachmann is more than risky.  

 

2. Duplication.

 

As I warned earlier the prospect of duplication is not good. It is fast turning the market into a Southern vs everyone else sinareo and thats not good. Those modelling elsewhere now are aghast that as a result we have 2 radials, 2 class 71s and 2 merchant navies. Thats a case of 3 engines that could have been made for elsewhere. Watch out Western region, your saddle tank is done twice, your king also. Some of us are disapointed that it means the market is skewed when programmes for production should be more balanced. Here I'd commend Bachmann. They have the broader range, and open up new fields such as MPV, AC electrics, EMUS. But with so much made deliberately for the Southern region alone which is useless elsewhere that is the main trigger for duplication - not as others think the companies choosing an engine for their own range.

 

3. The Original Merchant Navy itself...

Its fine that many want this. They rightly expect to be happy and Im glad they are pleased. While me and many others look on, the best hope now is that Hornby model a series 1, and Bachmann, if as now expected model the class they model series 2 and/or 3. Personally, its not my thing (no surprise there) but given that they were largely rebuilt before the main end of steam operation its perhaps starting to shift the ground away from transition period. Personally, i dont believe it is. I expect this is a lot more of Southern modellers wanting to compete a collection and the Original Merchant was a missing engine at the top of the list. They would happily run it slightly out of period, alongside others in their collection, but be happy that they had it to complete their locomotive allocation. The same goes for the radial. Considering they were limited to some rural backwater they are about to turn up everywhere, not accurate, but a nice engine to add to the fleet.

 

The Southern modellers, which is a large sector of the market should be happy in the knowledge that again they get their needs and attention are sorted, at the expense again of everyone else.

Edited February 28, 2015 by The Black Hat

[melmerby]

Not for the first time, I am intrigued. Not about the tactics of Hornby or Bachmann, or Wonky Models Ltd for that matter, but by the enormous interest in this sort of locomotive. After all, RMwebbers, by and large, are well-informed people who know what ran where and when.

 

So, do I not like MNs? Fine locos in my view, and I saw them all, albeit most of them rebuilt by then, no doubt.

 

My confusion is caused by the very narrow sphere of operations of these locos. After all, their Route Availability meant they didn't really venture beyond Exeter, hardly saw Sussex in service, seldom slummed-it on a secondary route, still less a single line. They were heavy express locos, and that's that.

 

So, do all those enthusing here really have substantial main line layouts, on which an MN might look at home with 10 or more on the back? And, if not, wouldn't the Light Pacific be a more appropriate choice?

Same applies to King, P2, LMS pacifics etc. they were all on the weight limit and/or restricted to certain lines.

(However the King did have a single line section it could wander down!)

They all sell.

 

Keith

[Multiple identity account]

Hornby's announcement offers fresh evidence of the sleaziness which seems to characterise the company's dealings with all and sundry.

You might being getting too caught up with things here.... Can surely tone down on that harshness. If Hornby are already in this advanced stage of CAD they have every right to announce it. They are after all competitors.

 

If you worried about the way Hornby act then it really bothers me that Hornby started facing supply issues with Kader/Sanda Kan after Bachmann bought Kader/Sanda Kan. 

[Dunsignalling]

 

 

 

 

 

The Southern modellers, which is a large sector of the market should be happy in the knowledge that again they get their needs and attention are sorted, at the expense again of everyone else.

I think that's a bit rich when, of the current release programme involves three are LNER classes (K1, J15, D16) and one Southern (700) 

 

OK, Hornby are, after several years since the last new SR loco, returning to their roots with the forthcoming S15 and now the air-smoothed MN but that is largely balanced out by the long standing antipathy of their main competitor who had, until recently, not produced a new SR loco since the N class the better part of two decades ago.

 

John     

Edited March 8, 2015 by Dunsignalling

[Wicor Models]

Not for the first time, I am intrigued. Not about the tactics of Hornby or Bachmann, or Wonky Models Ltd for that matter, but by the enormous interest in this sort of locomotive. After all, RMwebbers, by and large, are well-informed people who know what ran where and when.

 

So, do I not like MNs? Fine locos in my view, and I saw them all, albeit most of them rebuilt by then, no doubt.

 

My confusion is caused by the very narrow sphere of operations of these locos. After all, their Route Availability meant they didn't really venture beyond Exeter, hardly saw Sussex in service, seldom slummed-it on a secondary route, still less a single line. They were heavy express locos, and that's that.

 

So, do all those enthusing here really have substantial main line layouts, on which an MN might look at home with 10 or more on the back? And, if not, wouldn't the Light Pacific be a more appropriate choice?

The Merchant Navy was classed as a mixed traffic loco as it was the only way Bulleid could persuade the wartime authorities to allow him to build it.

[knapper]

'Surely this is just business.'

 

Wasn't that the Godfather's excuse?

For goodness sake, it's only a product announcement for a model locomotive. You'd think they had annonuced every one comes with a packet of cigerettes so children could produce smoke effects. Edited February 28, 2015 by knapper

[Forester]

If they are going to be based on the first ten produced, lets hope they avoid using the names Canadian Pacific and Blue Star - already used by Hornby in rebuilt form. 

 

I disagree. People will want to run Rebuilt and Original MNs side by side (although that would need a wedge cab version). Canadian Pacific along with P&O and Royal Mail would be good late-rebuild Series One candidates. The other late rebuild was Channel Packet but that loco will almost certainly be chosen as the as-built loco model, so it is probably covered anyway. 

 

Personally I avoided all the late Rebuild MNs in the Hornby catalogue for just this reason.

[Hroth]

You know, I really can't see a place for an unrebuilt MN on my layout.  Or a rebuilt one, or a West Country, or a BoB.  I haven't any of the currently/recently available ones, not even a Dapol kit or and old Triang version!

 

Of course, I don't have a place for an LNER P2 either, though I've got one.  And then theres the Olly connection too!

 

Oh well, we've had:

 

The wishlisting

The froth on the facebook "leak"

The denunciations of underhanded skulduggery and *shocked intake of breath* duplication...

We're now embarking on a period of wild speculation

to be followed by

Nitpicking the test productions(a la Oxford Models PO wagon) and criticism of prototype(s) chosen (shades of Hornby Adams Radial)

Complaints about slipping delivery dates

Vocal disappointment with some minor aspect of the finally delivered model.

 

All I want to know is, will Hornby be doing a Railroad version with TTS sound? 

[Black 5 Bear]

It will be really funny should Bachmann not announce an air smoothed M/N on Monday considering all the froth and rumour emanating from this subject....