WisTramwayMan

According to the review in the latest Hornby Magazine the 55's are fitted with a full suite of pipework at one end and a coupling at the other end, rest of the gubbins in the detail pack. Even worse than all the pipework on the Heljan 25 was the small cylindrical (air/vacuum ?) reservoir glued under each end that needed removing to allow the bogie to swing, great for static display, as much use as a chocolate teapot for anything else. Definitely a part that should have been included in the detailing pack - someone should have given it more thought.

Do hope it's not 55022. Last thing I read was it was owned by Jeremy Hoskings' LSL and being refurbished for a return to the main line, albeit later in the year than originally intended. 55002 is the one you mean, aka KOYLI. I can remember seeing a pic of it leaving Whitby in two tone green / full yellow ends on a special before retirement from BR - I suspect it was on two engines then else it likely would have been substituted on the railtour.

Indeed ! Given that LPs were 12 inches in diameter, then you'd actually fit one inside this box. Limited edition anyone ? Seriously, mine arrived today courtesy of Parcelforce - well impressed with both the packaging and the model, although it looks to be one that you only put together once if at all possible. The price too looks relatively good value - £407 with twin powered cars, with sound. Compare that to around £326 being asked for Hornby's HSTs due later this year, 1 power car, one dummy, no sound......

Latest from Rails is that they don't expect to get their hands on the class 55s until April.

I've got 2 of these new V2s - Green Arrow (nameplates already either side of smokebox) and 60845 un-named black. Listening to other people's issues regarding the fiddle involved in fitting the etched plates on other models, is it only me who thinks it is unacceptable (or lazy on behalf of the manufacturer) for a circa £200 (DC) loco to not only have to fit your own nameplates (no pre-printed version already on the model) and to work out how to actually mount them ? Granted, many people will be proficient modellers, and for these people it will be no great hassle, but there will be just as many, if not more, who are somewhat less able or confident .And for £200 I think Bachmann should be doing better.

Even the example of R3840 photographed on Kernow's website is faulty, with the steps behind the cylinders on the RH of the loco missing..... And then you hear Simon Kohler's comments on the current Hornby TV series; pity there isn't an extra episode about Hornby QA (or lack of it).

Been thinking of something very, very similar for some time now. I'll follow this one with interest.

Exactly the same problem with my 72004, except the lamp iron was floating about in the clear plastic packaging (although I almost didn't recognise it for what it was) and was reattached. If you look at the pic of 72004 on the Kernow website the top lamp iron on that loco is also missing.. Must be something to do with Hornby and top lamp irons, I believe on the A2/2s they went missing with monotonous regularity, and if I remember correctly on certain websites the issue was again displayed.

You're not the only one - mine arrived with one whistle broken off, not in packaging, so must have been done at the factory end. Already on its way back to Rails for replacement. One hopes this is not, or not to become, a common issue.

I put my hand up and admit it - I have now, and yes they were. Actually looked quickly earlier, couldn't see them, they were mixed up with the spokes. But why in that bag ? - I'd have thought it much more logical they were in with the other detailing parts, not the alternative wheelset. Still, they're there.

Looking at the various photos of the d-class, the real locos have rather prominent guard irons at the front. Check in the handbook that comes with the loco - yes, there are supposed to be optional guard irons for the owner to fit if required, and there's a diagram showing you how to do it. Looking in the accessory pack - are there any guard irons ? Nope. To me, particularly for people who intend to display the model as opposed to run it, this is a big clanger.

737 has now arrived. Looks as beautifully finished as 488, thankfully the finish and QA on these models appears comparable to the Moguls, which I thought were great, as opposed to a certain canine predecessor. Now roll on the Hattons Genesis coaches and get some 6-wheelers for them to haul, until then Bachmann birdcages it will be. Overall, well done Rails/Dapol. Currently looking for an excuse to consider another one....

488 has arrived this morning ex-Rails, 737 is on its way and due for delivery today from Locomotion. To settle all debate, having physically had one in my hand, the loco comes fitted with traction tyres on the leading set of drivers; there is a replacement set in the box without tyres. Now to get round to trying it out. Seems quite light, but I've thought that before and haulage power is still satisfactory.

Yes, my last ones went this afternoon as well - cancelled by Hattons. All were placed as soon as the respective models were announced. Thankfully, I appear to have managed to place all 3 elsewhere. Given it's an issue that only appears to be affecting Hatton's, at least to this degree of severity, I would be absolutely amazed if any new orders for Hornby get placed with them. It's just asking to be let down. I agree with what at least one other has said - something's going on between Hattons and Hornby - and out of respect for their customers we should be given at least a basic outline of what that is.

Try Derails or Bure Valley Models. Both offer good service, are extremely friendly and helpful, and test models before despatch. Like many people probably virtually all my preorders used to go to Hattons until they started letting me down, on only one occasion letting me know they were actually going to do so - so I moved my preorders elsewhere and now split them between four different suppliers including the two mentioned earlier.

I see the first of the Ethels is now showing in stock at Rails of Sheffield. Given that the model is un-motored, and that the units generally ran between the locomotive and the stock, you're going to need the couplings working both ends if you're going to run this in an authentic rake. Yet - still showing in the Rails pics (which I assume are correct) with full bufferbeam detail and air tank attached. All, or most, of which will need to be removed before the unit is run. Given it's effectively an item of rolling stock, rather than a locomotive, why ? I would think that most Ethels will be destined for use on layouts rather than display cabinets.....definitely for the detail pack. Perhaps, along with the absence of the motor and driveshafts, this may have allowed for a different strategy than pricing it the same as a full-fat motored 25....

After following (hopefully all, or most of) the previous comments, here's my tupenny worth. 1) I'm going to disregard the weathering issues. OK, ultimately it's Heljan's responsibility, as it's their name on the packaging and the loco, but it's just as obvious that the standard that has been supplied is not what was intended. Their past efforts on other classes have been much better. I would still be questioning why the two models concerned escaped Heljan in Denmark, whether the QA sampling missed it OR it picked it up and sent them anyway. 2) I've got one of these, a Tamworth Castle in two-tone green. It's had an extended run on the rolling road and a short run on the test track. I'm not enough of an expert on the class to pick up all the detail errors, but must admit it looks pretty good to me. Runs super smoothly as well. However, a couple of niggles. 3) As I read it, the lighting can only be altered via DCC. Not a lot of good if you're a DC user. Personally, Bachmann and their little switches is preferable. 4) The couplings. I totally agree with earlier comments in the thread that you should not have to take a Dremel (or a pair of pliers, as several seem to have done) to a new model to remove the (air ?) tank beneath the buffer beam to enable the couplings to operate satisfactorily. I've got used to pre-fitted bufferbeam detail, which is usually fairly easy to remove, but this tank ? I'm afraid it comes down to what a model should be for, running on a layout at the head of a rake of rolling stock or sitting in a display cabinet and looking pretty. The tank should have been supplied as a separate user-fit item. The best solution I've seen - and I think it was Dapol on the class 68 - was to fit full bufferbeam details one end and cut down hoses, allowing the couplers and NEM pockets full movement underneath them, at the other. So you could either display it or haul stock with it, your choice, without having to take pliers (etc) to the model. In summary, for me - great looking model, needs more thought on the details.

It would be very nice to match up with the Model Rail / Rapido J70s as well.

Different issue - the forthcoming weathered model 35-025A - certainly the initial photos of the model appear to show the rear bunker steps in the incorrect position for the number / livery. They're mounted under the bunker and facing sideways, whereas there's a period photo on the 'net of the same loco, same livery, they appear to be mounted on the rear buffer-beam facing to the rear. Search "GWR 9400 class wikipedia" and you'll see the photo - looks to be at Paddington. Given they only carried GWR livery for a very short time period, I would have thought it unlikely that the photo is inaccurate. Looking at later, BR liveried photos of the same loco the steps appear to have been changed at some point to side mounted. Hopefully the photo issued by Bachmann is just an early mock-up, not the finished article, but whilst it's accurate for BR livery it doesn't look to be for GWR. 9400 at the NRM is a different matter, being effectively a BR survivor being repainted in its original livery.

Perhaps it's the loco that's being cannibalised at the back of the shed to keep others moving.....

The photos of 60505 on the Kernow website currently show it as missing the lamp bracket on the top of the smokebox, plus missing the handrail on the right front of the tender......

Will be interesting to see what Hornby do with the P2s later in the year. On the A2/2s, A2/3s and P2 class in their day I would think it unlikely that tender first running occurred (and even, if so, a rarity). For 2007 Prince of Wales, however, the same is unlikely to be true - visits to preserved railways which have no turntables, and it will probably see considerable amounts of it.....

No- unless there's an extremely rare piece of footage out there with sound. The real odd ball, of course, was that it used sleeve valves; I've heard several IC engines with these running first hand (Bristol Centaurus - Sea Fury - and a straight configuration in a car - Voisin) and IMHO the beat is softer and quieter compared to a poppet-valved unit. I would guess taking the above into account that they'd sound more like a Bulleid with chain-drive gear than a conventional loco, but that is just a guess. Hopefully there's some very clever person out there who'll find a way of digitally producing it.

Have they specified what running numbers they will be ? The grey ones should be 36001 - an accurate combination of the only one to run + the only livery it carried - but given the black livery is fictitious and that the basic frames for 36002 + 36003 existed, isn't there a case for linking the black livery to one, or both, of these ? Might generate more sales for KRM too (ie, those who'd want more than one - it'd make me think).

I received my Thane of Fife recently. Took 2 attempts to get a reasonable one after parts missing from the original. At long range it looks good. Close up, however, a lot of the running plate mounted detail looks extremely plasticky, and not always aligned correctly. The cab fit is questionable. It certainly doesn't have the heavy, quality feel of certain recent Bachmann releases, ie, 1P, 94xx, or indeed the build quality and feel of the Dapol Mogul, which after the issues with the joint venture OO Terrier was a pleasant surprise. On the flipside, I suppose you could say the price is reasonable, especially when comparing with something like the latest Bachmann Atlantic releases, where around £186 is the best you'll pay. Downside is inferior build quality. I just hope they can do a little better with the W1 and revised P2 later in the year.