cctransuk

2 minutes ago, Ian Hargrave said:

These issues being the spade connectors between loco & tender and those lamps,I assume ? A conversation I had today with Hornby at the NEC leaves me with no cause for optimism on these matters I’m afraid.I had a distinct impression that they had to accept what their contracted factory has provided us with.Or am I missing something here ? Removing and changing the lamps seems to be a matter of serendipity and individual skill it would appear. 

Sounds like the tail wagging the dog!

I know that the UK market is not huge, but other producers seem to be able to get 'to spec' products from their factories in China. If Hornby's factory(ies) can't or won't supply what Hornby want - time to get a new factory!

...... or, Hornby are still adopting their longstanding "It'll do" attitude, and blaming the factory.

Hornby need to wake up and smell the coffee - they have hard-hitting competitors nowadays who are only too ready to grab their market!

CJI.

1 minute ago, GrumpyPenguin said:

If a flywheel is causing "noise & vibration" then there is something wrong with the ballance, either the flywheel itself or the motor/flywheel assembly.

Indeed - but, unless one has the facilities to correct the balance, the flywheel is best left off.

CJI.

17 minutes ago, Captain Slough said:

Somewhere on RMWeb theres a pic of a Farish 5 running with a Dublo castle chassis (early type with "half-inch" motor rather than Ringfield, a ringfield would never fit), and Dublo 8F tender

 

Which gets rid of all the metal fatigue and chassis problems, at least.

But is it then Farish?

CJI.

1 minute ago, YT-1300 said:

Great work!!!

 

My friend describes attempting to build MTK kits the model railway equivalent of self-harm!

So received wisdom - almost never at first-hand - would have us believe!

I cannot speak for their loco kits, but the DMUs are eminently buildable and, for their time, quite acceptable 'layout' models.

Perhaps your friend was only accustomed to Airfix kits?

CJI.

Having tried both flywheel and non-flywheel drive in otherwise identical kitbuilt locos, I am firmly of the opinion that flywheels add nothing to performance, and can cause additional noise and vibration.

CJI.

2 hours ago, maico said:

The traditionalist, or Luddites depending on your point of view, must be horrified at this loco which has water based smoke system, sound and LED lamps...!

 

 

Not keen on the sound or the lights - but the smoke effect is the best that I've seen.

CJI.

1 minute ago, Johann Marsbar said:

Proves someones awake out there 🙂 (unlike me at the moment - but you haven't had to contend with the unbelievable stupidity of Virgin Medias Contractors over the past 4 days!)

Not Virgin Media, but we have a contractor for Wildernet ripping up every street in and around Bodmin at present!

G*d knows why - Bodmin was the first place in Britain to get BT Highspeed Broadband, some twelve years ago, and we are now fully fibre connected.

I cannot believe that a significant proportion of users are suddenly going to switch suppliers to Wildernet, but the works going on must be costing a fortune!

CJI.

13 minutes ago, Johann Marsbar said:

...and the wheels have centre flanges!

 

Err ... the wheels are double-flanged.

Centre flanges run on tramway rail with a centre slot.

CJI.

1 hour ago, Darius43 said:

Hi John,

 

No need for the flowery language - that joint just keeps a poppin’.

 

How’s your modelling going?

 

Cheers

 

Darius

Those joints are a b*gger, aren't they? When I get on to my MTK Park Royal (Cl.103) kit, I'm considering reinforcing those joints with small countersunk screws, tapped into the whitemetal ends. It should be possible to 'lose' the screw heads with filing and filler.

I have now completed the pair of Southern Pride Eastern Region Car Transporters, and am well into an Anbrico GWR streamlined railcar - the chassis is operational, and I SHOULD now be embarking on the bodywork.

There's a kit for the unique GWR 'Lambourn Car', to fit the Lima chassis, to follow.

John Isherwood.

5 minutes ago, Roy Langridge said:

But you have no facts to back up those statements, and nor do I to counter them.
 

Hornby may be sitting there with the sales figures stunned at the complaints on here and, metaphorically, laughing all the way to the bank.

 

A few months from now, let’s see what is getting sold off cheaply, then we can make a better informed judgement. 

 

Roy

Indeed, hence the 'IMHO'; in such matters we can only use our own best judgement.

Time will tell!

CJI.

9 minutes ago, Darius43 said:

 

 

Could I, with the greatest of respect for your superb treatment of these ancient kits, suggest a little more attention to the solebar / bufferbeam interface of the leading car?

CJI.

1 minute ago, adb968008 said:

I might be wrong, but I reckon Hornby are munching extra popcorn and having a good laugh at this thread.

 

For me, this initial model has the bling thing not right. I’m hoping coupling and warping isnt a wider issue. The rest of it looks bob on.

 

My concern holding me back is the trend of the initial 10% off becoming a 25% off in 6-8 weeks… a £229 model being £210 suddenly being £170.. and then me painting another £50 off its resale some day means I be a £90 mug loser today, but waiting 6-8 weeks and losing only £50 isnt so bad, considering It maybe years before I ever get bored of it and consolidate that loss…

Ah - that's where we differ; for me, a loco is for life, not just my attention-span.

Unfortunately for my offspring, a mammoth task awaits on my demise - disposing of a lifetime's collection of model railway stock, and a mammoth library of railway books.

I will not, from wherever I find myself, blame them for dumping the lot on dealers and realising only a tiny fraction of their true resale value.

My model purchases must provide value for money IN MY LIFETIME - I will not see any personal financial return!

CJI.

1 minute ago, adb968008 said:

Whats aprototypical….?

 

A Black 5 probably carried every possible configuration possible of  [choose word of choice] (lamp/light/lantern/candle/flame/inflammable device).

 

No one would ever agree which one it should come out of the factory with, and until today the choice was none anyway.

 

I guess the real question is… should they have made the model with no lamps fitted, and left the modeller to do it themselves…

 

We all know the majority would never open the parts bag, so most models with lamps would be wasted.

 

But will it hurt sales ?

 

Its possible lamp objections might hurt retailer sales, but equally this polarising gizmo might be attracting customers into shops to look at it… But Hornbys customer is the retailer, and I bet right now they probably want a few to show those drawn in…

 

if the model has other issues, being suggested, thats a different story.

 

 

Aprototypical - not prototypical.

Should the model have no lamps - YES.

Will the novelty factor outweigh the negative polarising effect - I sincerely doubt it.

CJI.

1 minute ago, adb968008 said:

So remove the lights… they are supposedly configurable with lamp irons in the bag.

 

No doubt a good shop like TMC could probably do it for you.

 

 

 

Because they are aprototypical, and I shouldn't have too.

That's enough for me not to purchase several and to, reluctantly, proceed with my far more labour-intensive alternative Black Five projects.

Keep it simple - but well-detailed, I say!

CJI.

On 25/04/2024 at 10:23, Roy Langridge said:

And there in lies the conundrum for many businesses. Hornby’s financial position isn’t great, yet it wants to compete.
 

Just releasing “standard“ models may not be enough, but to fully develop the next initiative may not be financially viable.
 

What we see is probably the compromise that meets many of their customers’ needs. 
 

Roy

The question to answer is this - would the new Black Five have sold as well, or even better, WITHOUT working lamps, close-coupled(??) tender and 'bling' all over the place?

IMHO, a resounding 'better' - I have two or three Black Five projects that I would willing have sold on, if only I could have had an 'Accurascale' standard model, without gimmicks that I would then have to remove.

In this case (and others), Hornby are trying too hard - concentrate on producing quality models of popular prototypes, that are demonstrably superior to what is already on the market.

Ditch the gimmicks - they are more trouble than they are worth!

CJI.

19 minutes ago, E100 said:

 

Give them a couple of years and they will probably be smaller and they'll make the back one(s) removable as well. Maybe I'm too optimistic!

....... or, develop the concept for the additional couple of years BEFORE announcing it, and really wow the market with a proper system.

Releasing a half-*rsed product merely generates adverse publicity, and condemns the whole concept from the outset.

The rush to recoup the cost of development always triumphs, though - I can hear the bean-counters in the boardroom now - "When are we going to see a return on investment"?

CJI.

1 minute ago, 96701 said:

See what I did there?

Unfortunately, yes! 🥴

CJI.

13 minutes ago, gr.king said:

Well I've seen Vauclain/Baldwin locos (mostly compounds) with four outside cylinders, in "stacked" pairs with huge common crossheads, but nothing quite like those! Where the upper jackshafts on the real things linked up in some way to drive those small-looking coupled wheels too.  Factor of adhesion not a worry?

The lower one of the two would appear to be a rack loco, judging by the proximity of the pinions to railhead level - presumably the jackshafts drove the pinions.

CJI.

35 minutes ago, E100 said:

More generally, I would much prefer a manufacturer to show an EP but be honest about it by giving it a narrative of hey we are aware of problem xyz.

Precisely!!!

CJI.

1 hour ago, Colin_McLeod said:

I was watching a YouTube review today of a GT3 from one of the re runs. The author complained that the cab light did not come on.  When he raised the issue with KR he got a response along these lines ( and I quote) ;

 

"The rivet counters complained about the cab light on the first run so I discontinued it.  lt's the rivet counters whohave spoilt it for everyone else!"

 

 

Wow!

So, why not ignore the 'rivet counters'?

Exactly what I'd expect from KRM - it's always 'their' fault!

Not a nice character, by all accounts.

CJI.

1 minute ago, The Stationmaster said:

But was it down to them or someone at the factory producing an Ep who thought it would be a good idea or maybe thought that was how the English do such things?   It did at least show that all the lamp brackets were there!

At the end of the day, what is shown to the public as an EP is decided by Hornby in the UK.

If the factory make an 'ill-advised' EP, there is no obligation upon Hornby to publish it.

One can only assume that Hornby themselves were unaware of the defects.

CJI.

1 hour ago, gr.king said:

Contrary to the assurances of disaster issued by some, I've also used bubble wrap for years (not the pieces that have previously had sticky tape on them) and I have NEVER had any problems with it marking or adhering to properly dried paintwork.

I use rectangles cut from those ultra-thin food bags - on the basis that they seem to be made of much the same plastic as that used by the model manufacturers to protect models from rub marks on the paintwork.

CJI.

16 minutes ago, Deeps said:

I have been overwhelmed by the amount of TV coverage for the occasion.

BBC Southwest went out today,  looking to film a St. George's flag - it took them all day to find a single example flying.

We should be ashamed - not of the flag - but for its absence!

Some sixty years ago - when I was a Scout - there was a full military parade, on the Sunday nearest to St. George's Day, in every sizeable town and city in England.

CJI.

44 minutes ago, Paul Furner said:

While watching the following video about  railway development in Sheffield in the mid 1960's on You Tube 'Vintage railway film - Freight and a city - 1966' at around the 3minute 15 second point it shows a short clip where strip coils are being loaded onto plate wagons with 3 cradles pointing eye to the wagon end. 

 

As you can see from the attached snip they are labelled as Coil D but I haven't found any reference to them anywhere before.  The train (as shown in the second snip) was apparently a daily block train run to Birmingham and in the film is hauled by two class 31's. 

 

Can anyone shed any light on these conversions please?  Ideally when they were modified and or disposed of and were they used anywhere else. 

 

Thank you

Aren't these the former 2/001 ARM WE armour plate wagons?

John Isherwood.

52 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Oh they definitely do.

 

they just dont openly recognise it.

 

As an example It was recognised at EP stage that having royal train configuration of headlamps on the Black 5 wouldnt fly.

 

 

I think theyve listened a lot on the Black 5, but equally it depends where the model is in the production cycle as to how much they can modify. Visiting the exhibitions the Hornby team are very open to feedback and sharing what theyve changed and what they are planning.
 

Heljan, Bachmann etc are all very approachable and personable at the shows… their passions are clear, but they arent always at liberty to speak freely online. I do urge visiting them, talking to them at shows etc you learn much more and do listen to feedback.
 

I try to write my opinions and suggestions here knowing at shows they wont remember it all and it is nice to see they do improve models from collective opinions like forums to improve models, which is why I always suggest putting in constructive criticism here at EP stage… they might not act on it. but they see it… when they see a consensus / large feedback it adds weight to acting on it.

At days end, no one wants a bad model, especially not someone spending two-five years of their life designing it.
 

Thats why i’m waiting on 45157, those EP wheels are very black, cast and nothing like their predecessors, which I think is something they took feedback from on here too.

 

What I still fail to understand is, if Hornby's design team are as knowledgeable as we have been assured, why ANYONE thought that a fixed Royal Train headcode could possibly be acceptable. It should NOT need the members of this forum to point this out.

There was a time when forum members commented on the minutae of detail on new models; now, it seems, companies are putting out poorly researched EPs, relying on potential customers to identify the most basic of errors.

CJI.