Jump to content
Users will currently see a stripped down version of the site until an advertising issue is fixed. If you are seeing any suspect adverts please go to the bottom of the page and click on Themes and select IPS Default. ×
RMweb
 

Frond

Members
  • Posts

    62
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Frond

  1. It's always difficult to select the models to include I can see that, was the 24 from Bachmann so bad it needed updating or did SLW come in with something spectacular?

     

    The Hornby A4 is well regarded, did it need a Dapol Black Label version or was that simply a chance to try something different.

     

    All those years of wanting a new Dean Goods, did people get what they wanted, for some perhaps not, does that then mean it has to go back into the survey because I think you can bet there won't be another one along in the next decade.

     

    If I was modelling BR I'd be quite happy picking up people's offloaded Bachmann 24s over the price of an SLW - it's personal preference and that's where having a cut off works on this survey, it's a nice line in the sand we can all understand.

     

     

     

     

    Pardon my ignorance but who are SLW?

  2. Small point - my locos arrived promptly and in good fettle, but there was no paperwork. Is everyone getting a separate letter and spare chains regardless of whether they requested them or not....?

     

    They are sending out the envelope to everyone without having to request it. Mine arrived four days after the loco - hope this helps.

  3. Some of us have been posting for several months to encourage,coax and cajole Hornby into reinstating The Engine Shed as its former self. This latest issue appears to show that Hornby have listened and that our efforts have had the desired effect.

    Now this.......You seem blithely to ignore the obvious and that is that its purpose is to let us in to the model development process and to encourage comment on what we as enthusiasts see.Comment should ideally be constructive and take into account that these are NOT the finished articles soon to be arriving.This I am sure you already know but it has not stopped you from making an the injudicious declamation that they should not have released such an image and then loftily insinuating that your standards are higher than the experienced members of this forum who have recently posted.

    You must also be aware that Hornby read what is posted on RMWeb. Indeed one of their number is...bravely...A forum member of some 18 months standing. Your post is hardly an encouragement to continue a meaningful dialogue. If Hornby show us images not to your taste on The Engine Shed either accept what you see warts and all or else don't bother to look if it offends your sensibilities.

    Most of us don't want another period of poor communication.

     

     

    Well said!

  4. There was what looked to be a rather tatty Mk1 in the background of one of the 'Bittern' shots but - yeah - the rest was rather disappointing in that respect.

     

    ( What's more, there wasn't the slightest hint that anything new is likely to be announced in the foreseeable future.)

    y

     

     

    I took the comment in the Looking Ahead closing paragraph "and some we haven't even discussed yet" as a slight hint!

  5. Firstly apologies if this is being discussed in another post but I could not find it via the search.

     

     

    In the July issue of Hornby magazine there is an article about a project to build a rtr model of the English Electric GT3. Personally the GT3 would not on the top of my list of one off locomotives to model (l would be more interested in a LMS Turbomotive or LNER Hush- Hush) but it is an interesting prospect nevertheless.

     

    The article states that the project is being led by Keith Revell without any further information as to his background, perhaps the name should be familiar but l am afraid it means nothing to me.

     

    There is a Facebook page apparently which has more information but as l don't do Facebook l don't know what it says.

  6. ....but we don't have a model to photograph. The picture of an engineering prototype was taken at the last press briefing which Hornby held, it is therefore the most up to date image we have. (CJL)

     

    You don't have a model of Hornby's upcoming Lord Nelson or Bachmann's H1 and H2 either but the pictures you use look like manufacturers ones from their catalogues. Why can't you do the same for the B12?

  7. The B12 has never been reviewed in Model Rail. Hornby doesn't supply review samples so Hornby products only get reviewed if a member of staff buys the item. (CJL)

     

    Surely you could update the plcture to reflect the fact that this is an existing model and not a future release?

  8. There is a Great Eastern Area loco included in our G5 models. No 67322 [35-257Z] first went to Stratford shed in August 1938 as no 2093 becoming 7322 in 1946 and 67322 in March 1951. It stayed at Stratford until July 1951 when it moved to Cambridge. Whilst at Stratford its duties would have included working both the Epping - Ongar and Palace Gates - Seven Sisters services.

    All the best,

     

    Many thanks 257z it is then!

  9. I would like to order one of these but I was wondering if someone could clarify which, if any, of the proposed engines ran on the Epping and Ongar line. This is my nearest preserved line and I would prefer to get one of "their" engines if possible.

  10. Excellent news that the ROD Dean Goods is available without the gun.

     

    I don't see any sign of it (OR76DG009) on Hattons or any of the other major internet suppliers or indeed on the OR website. Are you reading about it in a printed catalog?

     

    I too have been checking the Oxford Rail website and the latest announcements don't appear to be on there, in fact the last update was on the 11th January. It seems strange, and somewhat unprofessional to me that a company does not bother to update their own site with their big news.

  11. In the last edition of The Engine Shed Hornby stated that they did not measure the Duchess of Hamilton at the NRM because it is not in original configuration. Not being particularly knowledgeable on the details I am curious as to what the differences are between the how she is now and how she was originally. Perhaps someone could enlighten me?

     

    Thank you in anticipation.

×
×
  • Create New...