Hroth

Thats modern "phonics" spelling for you! (The spelling is correct and I think we all kno what was meant so there's no point in getting into a spelin war...)

That's the pragmatic approach. But for the folk who worry about such things, they'd know it wasn't "right" and they'd fret. Ok. Now we know there's some niggles, what's it like from a 3 foot viewing distance? I'm thinking it'll DO.

The current equivalent of Connie/Nellie/Polly/No27 type "freelance" industrial locomotives seems to be R3496 and its ilk, which are loosely based (I believe) on a small class of South Wales colliery locos. They serve the purpose for which they were designed, small cheap rugged toy locos to play trains with, that don't completely lose touch with what a loco looks like. As for the "memory of the Polly", R355 in its various forms lasted in the catalogue for 10 years, from 1961 to 1971. It was the sort of thing produced over half a century ago, and I have fond memories of that little 0-4-0... The Pecketts, like the Sentinels, are something completely different, far more sophisticated in terms of detail, livery and mechanicals, that don't look out place on a model railway. It would be nice to see Hornby produce some Train Packs of both classes of loco, together with a trio of suitable wagons as a showcase of what they can do if they put their minds to it.

The theory is that as its presented in an "artless" manner on a blog, then its more real than a product photoshopped to within an inch of its life or blitzed under studio lighting. We also know that its part of the prototype sequence and that audience comments in places like RMWeb are a useful way to obtain feedback from a different perspective, we're not as close to the product as they are! I've a feeling that although The Engine Shed is presented as being "a blog written by the Hornby developers themselves". its firmly under the control of Marketing. Of course, poking at the exif data is lots of fun, and reveals that the images did pass through Photoshop, only if even to resize and crop for web use as a Canon EOS 7D MkII must produce stonkingly big source files! I think the "Origin" details are generated by Photoshop and a reminder that if you're going to publish images on the web its probably a good idea to pass the image through an exif data remover, or at least manually remove sensitive data! Given the image sensivitivity, the exposure time and aperture, it also suggests that the camera was on a tripod and either in Manual or Aperture Priority mode so the images are not just a collection of quick snapshots. Finally, although I don't know much about the Canon DSLR range (the only Canon camera I have is a G11 Powershot), I think the camera itself lies in the serious amature/semi-pro segment of their market. Its not a cheap body!

That MSC liveried Peckett is jaw-droppingly wonderful. I'm glad to see that the plastic wheel centre colour matches the body colour, unlike the gharstly green ones on the B12! And the size comparison with the 50p... Do we get a magnifying glass in the box to see it? Rovex: My layout is nowhere near Reading, but the H&P one is on order so the pulling power must be phenomenal!

Hurrah! But why is the LNER version a week or so later than the BR versions? Boo!

If concessions stock is returned, then it would probably be in Hornbys best interests to transfer it to smaller retailers at advantageous rates that are equal to (or even less than?) those that the big retailers got. For example, even though Hattons have shifted some lines completely, they are still offering many models with stock levels at "more than 10 in stock" and so will probably not take as many in any subsequent offering so the stock will need to be spread more widely. Hornby might also have to let the smaller retailers have the stock in lesser quantities, ie one or two rather than by the case. I know of one concession that bailed out before all this emerged into the light of day. I visited the shop after Hornby withdrew their stock, the amount of Hornby stock was a miniscule fraction of that available previously and I think that this is a reflection of stock availibility in most of the smaller retailers. Hornby do need to do more to support this retail route or they will vanish from the high street completely. Going back to the trumpeted popularity of the Flying Scotsman in the report, it looks like that might be based on the quantity Hattons took off their hands. R3086, R3250 and R3336 are all listed as "more than 10" in stock each.... edit for odd typo (or two).

So thats Hornby GROUP in the mire, sinking slowly (more quickly?) and having to do a balloon exercise to extricate itself. Is there any understanding on how the separate parts of the group are performing? Where do Hornby Railways feature in the league table of profit and loss and which members of the group are going to feel the most pain. Where, in fact, might the cuts fall the hardest? Is there any appreciation of how the International brands will be affected by "the vote" on Thursday? I've "flicked" through the report and being a bear of little brain where these things are concerned, It looks pretty contradictory in places. The only thing that is encouraging is that the auditors aren't the ones who gave the ok on the buyer for BHS! Lets not go all Chicken Little over this....

More like cruel and unusual punishment..... Given the Victorian heritage of the Radial, perhaps she could have been filmed tied to the track with a caped, tophatted villain twirling his mustaches alongside? Sidles off, whistling in an innocent manner.....

Yes, that "pinched" appearance, instead of a graceful curve. It actually reminds me more of the start of a beer belly, if you get my drift.... As for motor accommodation, bringing out the firebox profile would allow the interior to be eased too, preserving the thickness of the "wall", reducing the possibility of mis-shaping through excessive thickness and leaving more space around the motor!

Hmmmm.... What sort of collectors? The sort who buy things like the Great British Locomotives partwork? Or the sort who want a set of locos in all the liveries they wore when working? Or the sort who collect a precision engineered model because? Yes, Oxford make diecast models for collectors in other areas, and for people to buy who aren't collectors but want a keepsake of a day out (the IoM loco and tram for example) but those diecast models also have an application in the world of railway modelling and we don't buy model cars just to get a full set of 1:76 Ford Anglias! Collecting is a pretty broad church on its own, and yet is only part of the spectrum of railway modellers in general. And that just brought to mind another group of "collectors", all those "Rule 1" modellers who buy a loco because they like the appearance, even if it won't have an application for their layout. Hornby have lived on this group for years, after all how many people really need a CotN or a DoG for their layout? Personally I have the feeling that Oxford Rail are in the market of selling railway models to railway modellers, and it doesn't matter which category you want to pigeonhole yourself.

No point in repeating all your post! Thanks for taking the trouble to make personal contact to raise all the queries that have been buzzing around here like bluebottles, with Oxford Rail themselves. The responses you got are interesting and informative. The fact that the tooling suite is built to accommodate variants gives hope that the firebox profile issue can indeed be addressed, and the prompt nature of the response raises confidence that the Dean Goods will be rather better than some have feared! Fingers crossed. etc. etc......

Or you could just extend it slightly with a board leading to a quarry/coalmine/whatever that would benefit from some extra pulling "grunt". Or just invoke "Rule 1" and call the trips Cabbage Puller Specials or some such......

More GWR 4-6-0 locos would just be adding to an already flooded market. What might be considered is the "next step" from the Dean Goods, in other words a modern take on the Mogul wheel arrangement. It'd be nice to see a well made DCC ready 43xx or, for those who would prefer another Dean locomotive, an "Aberdare", which has the added "benefit" of OUTSIDE FRAMES!!! If you really, really wanted a 4-6-0, outside framed "Dean" loco that looked amazingly ugly, then the only option would be "Kruger" 2601. Just be careful for what you wish for.

Bring my rails of burnished steel Bring IKB to thought inspire Bring Fireflys and Iron Dukes Bring me my Chariots of Fire! Bridge Maidenhead with arch so flat And pierce Box Hill with elegance We'll build the GWR Through Englands Green and Pleasant Land! Ahem..... Perhaps things are getting a tad overwrought?

Sounds like a cue for a song... Theres a Temple, by a Meadow In Bristol by the Avon And its all full of engines, little engines all the same. There's some green ones, a few red ones, and even several black ones. And they all pull little boxes, little boxes all the time.

But that also means that Flying Scotsman is probably already a Small God. Which Will Not DO!

Om, possibly.....

Had a quick flick through the July Railway Modeller this afternoon. On pages 632-2 theres a spread on Oxford Rails progress and announcments. In the section dealing with the Dean Goods, there's mention of a number of revisions to be made before production approval. This might mean an attempt to deal with the lower firebox and the colour but all that is specifically mentioned is "the incorrectly placed cabside numberplates". We'll just have to wait and see...

Oh yes.... There's nothing like a few wall fruit to break the monotony.....

Well, apart from the extraneous pipework, fig 8 is the only sane loco in the lot and might almost be a... ummm... Dean Goods..... I pity the crew on the footplate of fig 7 however, I bet that lashed around something wicked! (And what in gods name is that dustbin on fig 6???)

So, if 2309 got the B4 in 1910 then it should have a painted dome, and the top feed dates it to post 1913 anyway. So if we want the pretty lined livery and the brass dome, then the top feed needs to go and the boiler needs to be pre 1910. What would it have B4 the B4? (Sorry, I just couldn't help it...) I'm supposing a round-topped boiler, but then again, would it be lined? Oh bugrit!

Well, Hattons are quoting the non-sound Goods as July - September, so if that holds then we're going to be stuck with a "Rare! Collectable!" (in ebay terms...) model for the first issue, and if everyone suddenly holds back on getting at least one, then there won't be any more. The Oxford Rail site is very coy about expected delivery dates for OR76DG001-3 so its a bit of a guess where they're up to and how much leeway there is between the painted samples and ok-ing for production. As for the handrails and firebox, the handrails need the fixing holes dropped by a mm or so (less than?) on the CADs and as mentioned above use a slightly angled stanchion. The firebox problem might also be solved by a quick tweak of the CADs and a run through the tooling to adjust the profile, it appears to be just a matter of removing a bit more metal to achieve the correct profile. Of course, at this stage even getting the tooling off the factory and back to the toolroom might be a bit of a faff! (This paragraph can be taken as a bit of optimistic handwaving, as I've no idea as to how do-able it would be in a production environment!) The Paint job? Well recent discussions in MREmag about colour balance problems might throw a (ahem) light on the brightness of the colour on the Dean Goods. It might just be an overenthusiastic digital camera modifying the appearance of the model. If it actually IS that virulent shade of green, then it might be changed, after all that's what a decoration sample is for! Finally, is it just me, or is that cabside numberplate, apart from being at a dodgy angle, a tad too large?

Oh come on chaps. The shape of the firebox has been clearly visible since the photos of the engineering prototypes were published (see posts 5, 49 and 50) back in late January. No one commented on the shape then but but many contributors seemed more concerned about the angle of the handrail stanchions. Having seen the photos of the preserved example, yes there is a considerable difference but it needs to be remembered that "as preserved" isn't the same as "in service", though I must admit that the only Dean Goods photo I have to hand at present (captioned as Oswestry based 2424 and undated other than it was withdrawn in 1946) does show a smooth curve to the lower firebox. Raising the problem back in January might have had some effect, but even so, I'll still be taking one. A bit of creative weathering might mask the sharp angle...

One things for sure, I won't be able to have the "old" and "new" B12s on the layout simultaneously. Its bad enough when an old one gets alongside the D16/3!