locoholic

3 hours ago, Islesy said:

Guess you're going to be disappointed on at least several occasions this year then @jonnyuk 😀

We're used to disappointment by now. Five different goes at getting the Class 37 and 47 right, but we still can't buy an LNER J69, a Scottish 4-4-0 or a Southern U class.

Have Hornby ever done their most recent iteration of the King class in BR green, early emblem, with a single chimney, the state that they spent the majority of their BR careers in?

In fact, has this version ever been produced RTR - did Lima do it?

14 minutes ago, stewartingram said:

Every steam loco type available in 00? Get real, there are dozens if not hundreds not yet done.

My statement was so blatantly untrue that I assumed everyone would spot that I was being sarcastic...

It must be SO difficult for Hornby, now that every single British steam loco type is now available in RTR 00 gauge. What choice do they have other than to churn out ever more expensive A4 pacifics and models that other companies have already produced?

And how enjoyable it is to be expected to buy multiple Stephenson's Rocket models, just to obtain the one new L&M carriage that they include in each train pack!

Have I missed something or is the Planet Industrials Victory the only OO gauge RTR steam loco release of 2022 that is of a prototype never before available as a RTR model?

Very happy with my three, by the way. 

There is a loco that Bachmann USA make that I would quite like to buy, but I can't find a stockist in the UK either.

E-Z track does come up from UK sellers on ebay sometimes, so that might be an option.

Oh well...

For various reasons I didn't get the usual early start today, so when I approached the vicinity of the NEC on the M42 there was well over a mile of almost stationary traffic just trying to get off the motorway. I sat in the queue for ten minutes and hardly moved, before giving up, as I didn't fancy spending so long just getting to one of the most expensive car parks in the UK, to be followed by a lengthy hike to the exhibition itself. Even though I live deep in rural Herefordshire (hence not using the train - we don't have one), I suspect I was back home before I would have got in to see the models. Of course, I might have made a different decision had I bought an advance ticket.

I think I'll try one of the other big shows next time - one that doesn't have half the population of England trying to get into the venue at the same time.

Thanks to everyone who has posted photos, so I can see what I missed.

2 hours ago, wombatofludham said:

Because I would like to buy Hornby if they made the right product.  I have fond memories of buying Hornby and still have many Hornby items.  I'd like to buy more 87s and HSTs but unlike some it seems, I don't feel it is right to spend some of my quite large annual expenditure on model railway kit with a company who plays hot and cold with their retailers, on one hand welcoming their orders when they were in financial difficulties then deciding to prioritise their online sales outlet and cutting shop pre orders which ultimately disappoints people who in good faith pre-ordered their models with their local supplier.

I think it would be sad to see Hornby go under but the way they are going, that is a real prospect.  And sorry, if they are not making what I want to buy but others are, it is a problem for Hornby as my four figure model investment goes elsewhere and doesn't help replenish Hornby's debts.  The point is Bachmann don't sell online, and seem to be doing OK and have a more balanced model range.  Heljan have a limited online presence but mainly sell via retailers.  Other newcomers have a mixed online-retail model.  Hornby had a fantastic retail presence but are now unilaterally pulling the plug on it.  I struggle to understand why people think that isn't a problem.

I'd be careful if I were you - I got banned from a topic and told I should have kept my head down when I supported someone else's criticism of Hornby and their shabby treatment of retailers!

Reading through recent posts in this thread (and the Class 800 and Stadler Flirt ones) makes me wonder what procedure is or should be used to determine whether the benefits supposed to be delivered by such fantastically complex new trains and rail projects outweigh the now obvious costs in terms of both finance, delay and lack of resilience that accompanies them.

Gosh! Standard 2MT, Hush Hush and Thompson pacifics - can't wait.

Full set of Coronation Scot coaches, too...  I would have put money on the equivalent LNER set being made first.

Excellent news.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-50730763?fbclid=IwAR0iuwtN1cx8TxEdqDqLdw7tflAIGJb427Ra0DSi937V7M1IO6vThLjK7Kg

On the strength of the photos on here and the fact that the KR Models website now takes credit card payments, I have placed an order for GT3 and also expressed an interest in the Fell. Thanks to everyone who posted info from Warley - I wasn't able to visit this year.

32 minutes ago, ejstubbs said:

 

As for Mr J's waffle about "reversing Beeching", IMO it's simply designed to appeal to the "everything was better in the fifties" world view of certain elements of the British public (by no means solely confined to members and supporters of the his party, I would add, before I risk running foul of rule..er, where are the forum rules these days?)  This opinion would appear to be borne out by the discussion above about whether or not any new money would really be involved (and that's before you get on to what could actually be achieved with the sum of money proposed*).

 

* I have a personal theory which I call "the lie of the big number": politicians of all hues like to bandy big-sounding numbers around - preferably ones with an "illion" on the end - as absolute figures.  They almost never express things in percentage or proportional terms.  I believe the reason is that they know damn well that a non-trivial proportion of the public at large are readily impressed/shocked/frightened/outraged or otherwise misled by such big numbers, and almost never look further in to the detail behind them.  There are plenty of recent examples that I could cite, but probably shouldn't on account the Rule That Shall Not Be Numbered(!)

** For clarity, I accept that some people do genuinely have trouble dealing with numbers, but I suspect a far greater proportion are just lazy and/or resistant to awkward facts (see The Backfire Effect - and yes, we're all susceptible to it).

It's easy to be cynical - try living in a town that lost its trains due to Beeching and is left dozens of miles from any railway station, and access to the nearest stations is now awful due to traffic congestion and lack of parking. I do agree about the money, though, although it is galling to see shedloads of dosh being hurled at HS2, to benefit people who already have access to trains.

Please forgive if already mentioned (I spent many minutes trawling through previous pages to no avail). I finally decided to order a GT3, and got as far as the payment page on the KR website. The credit card option didn't work. Is paying by Paypal the only option, and if so, why?

2 minutes ago, tetsudofan said:

 

Surely its about time that building models of this calibre should not be dominated by the need to go round trainset points and curves.....

 

Keith

That's fine as long as you don't mind only selling a few of the models.

Over the last few years we have had some models that include design innovations which have led to problems. Generally, the simpler the concept, the less there is to go wrong. I would have thought that getting as much weight as possible over the driving wheels was an example of this.

1 minute ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

Surely, the prototype locomotive would suffer much the same problem. The issue for the model  is about how you fix and spring the pony so that is takes its fair share of the weight.

The issue is much more pronounced on a model, since the mass is proportional to the cube root of the scale. I would really be happier if the cab at least was a metal casting, instead of the smokebox.

Excellent. I'm a bit surprised that the whole boiler including smokebox is metal whilst the cab and splashers are plastic, since this will push the centre of mass well forward of the driving wheels - I hope traction tyres aren't involved.

13 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

What part of "the southern section of the WCML has run out of capacity" do you not understand!

 

 

What part of "So what" don't you understand? Rail travel is a minority activity. Travel on the WCML even more so. Doing nothing really IS an option!

The UK has a major housing crisis, and is on the verge of a major electricity supply crisis, and yet many millions of extra people expect to make their homes in the UK every decade. There are many, many more pressing issues to address, and that's without addressing the current political, economic and environmental issues.

12 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Remember what I said earlier - HS2 is not a religion!

 

Any physical project must be judged on FACTS - not what you imagine to be true. The lack of capacity on the WCML has been proven many times over and HS2 has been judged as the optimum way of fixing it.

 

If you 'believe HS2 is a waste of money then it is your duty to tell us how you intend to solve the problem. There are those that believe HS2 is too fast - which is absolutely fine, because unlike you the people advocating this can point to scientific research which backs up their stance.

 

Your proposed solution could include measure to suppress the demand for travel - but things like video conferencing, e-mail, smartphones, computers and virtual reality have made sod all difference so far and cannot be relied upon to do so in the future.

 

Much like 'believing the fires ravaging the Amazon at the moment will somehow go away of their own accord, or 'believing  the extreme weather the UK has been suffering from for a number of years will simply disappear because you want it too, 'Believing that the problem of WCML capacity will go away if you ignore it is total rubbish.

1. Some people definitely treat HS2 (& railways in general) as a religion.

2. You are assuming that the capacity issue on the WCML is a problem that deserves a solution. Given that only 3% of passenger journeys are made on trains, and that the rail network seems to grow ever more unreliable and inflexible, adding another, very expensive, line to the network does not seem to the general public and the politicians who represent them to be a sensible use of many billions of pounds of public money. Regarding projections of future demand and the costs of doing nothing as "facts" is also disingenuous, especially since many of these "facts" come from the vested interests.

1 hour ago, phil-b259 said:

 

 

Please explain to me how a HS2 train that goes to Liverpool from Euston via HS2, stops at Runcorn, Crewe Stafford as well as Birmingham Parkway for which I can book a through ticket from Burgess Hill is NOT fully integrated into the national rail network!

 

 

Because trains on HS2 have only two destinations south of the Trent Valley: Birmingham and London.

in BR days if a potential new traffic flow was identified like, say, Gatwick airport, through trains could be run without any engineering work. HS2 does not have that flexibility. Booking a through ticket is not the same as actually being a proper railway network - the latter word implies a complex system, not just one line with no junctions. HS2 replicates all the problems that Brunel created with the Broad Gauge. We have learned nothing.

3 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Because HS2 will also connect with the ECML

 

Last time I looked Birmingham - Sheffield (Midland) York and Newcastle trains were known as 'cross country services.

 

You like many others are choosing to ignore the fact that HS2 will be connected to the existing rail network at:-

 

The WCML at Litchfield Trent Valley

The WCML at Crewe

The WCML at Wigan

The MML at Sheffield (south)

The MML at Sheffield (North)

The ECML Church Fenton

 

These are in ADDITION to the city centre HS2 stations of London, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds - plus the intermediate stations at Birmingham Parkway, East Midlands Parkway and Manchester Airport

 

These allow for many services to be provided to destinations many miles away from HS2 proper (even more come into play if a fleet of HS2 bi-modes is eventually procured) - just as the French have been doing for decades with their TGVs - which initially spent more time running on the classic network than they did on the Paris to Lyon LGV

 

Personally I would have added a connection at Birmingham so that services from the likes of Bristol could gain access to HS2 in the Washford Heath area and another pair to allow trains to loop via Derby or terminate at Nottingham - however as these routes lack overhead electrification then I guess there is a certain amount of logic n leaving them out.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As you point out, HS2 is not going to be properly integrated into the national rail network. To me, that is a major design flaw. In a scheme with such a massive price tag, that is inexcusable.

3 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

Given the considerable overcrowding currently experienced on cross country services, particularly in the Birmingham - Leeds axis these extra trains will prove very useful..

 

How can the second phase of HS2 be described as "cross-country" when it stops dead in the city in the centre of the country, with no possibility of trains carrying on to other destinations?

12 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

I'm staggered that a member of this forum needs to even ask that question!

 

The answer is because since WW2 every single passenger railway system in a developed country has run at a loss!

 

If you want to see what happens when you demand its left to the private sector have a look at the USA - EVRY SINGLE RAILWAY COMPANY DITCHED PASSENGER OPERATIONS - those services do that remain are subsidised by individual states or by the Federal Government. AND in case you hadn't noticed the service you get out demands on how much you put in - do some research into just what repeated cuts have done to Amtrack!

 

The calculation is quite simple - subsidising railways, INCLUDING new railway infrastructure, keeps a significant number of cars off the roads and prevents the need for mass urban road building / demolition to make space to park the things.

 

If you can keep some cars off the roads then it not only creates space for people / business that have no alternative  but to use roads, but you help reduce air pollution - which not only causes the premature deaths of thousands of people every year - but is a massive drain on the NHS as it has to deal with repository illness that result.

 

HS2 exists because we are running out of rail capacity on the Southern WCML - what's your solution?

 

Widen the M1/ M6 / M40 / etc to  5, 6 .... 10 lanes in each direction and demolish vast swathes of housing to bring that traffic into the heart of London / Birmingham?

Continue to put money into the NHS treating respiratory problems which are entirely preventable?

Sit back and let thousands die every year from pollution related health problems?

Flatten everything next to the current WCML to and subject current users to a decade of misery while you add an extra 2 tracks all the way from London to Birmingham and Crewe?

 

Sticking your fingers in your ears and pretending there isn't a problem or that if you wish hard enough it will go away IS NOT AN OPTION!

 

 

But you are quite easily staggered. Please see my reply to Phil Parker for the reason why your comment is irrelevant.

12 hours ago, Phil Parker said:

 

Fair enough. So we won't be building any roads either (there are always protests), power stations (the same) or any infrastructure at all.

Some people don't think we should fund the Police. Others that the NHS is inefficient and shouldn't get any more money. I'm no fan of wars, so we can scrap all those battleships, tanks and expensive aircraft.

 

Taxpayers pay for stuff the private sector won't (police, fire, members of parliament, armies etc.), but is important to the country. It's why these things are called public services.

No, you are quite wrong: taxpayers don't pay for public services simply because the private sector won't. They pay for things that they will need or use, like the army, roads and hospitals, because there is a consensus that public funding for them is a good thing. Sadly for all the true believers on here, there is no public consensus that HS2 is a good thing (given its eye-watering cost), since only a tiny fraction of UK taxpayers will use it.

2 hours ago, Phil Parker said:

 

You keep banging on about this, but fail to understand that there are far more appealing places to put money than transport and there always will be. No votes are lost from chucking a few billion in the NHS, but there are in trying to tame it's need for cash. There never will be enough money even if you cancel or abandon every other public service in the UK. Electrify a railway of cure cute children? No contest.

 

My feeling is the cancellation will just prove, yet again, that the UK can't do infrastructure and never will again.

Your comment explains clearly why HS2 should be cancelled. It is public money, and therefore should be spent in a way that appeals to the people who paid the tax in the first place.

HS2 does not "appeal" to private investors because they would lose their shirts if they invested in it. Why should taxpayers lose their shirts instead?