atom3624

It is true, in the interests of perfectionism, that no locomotives have 'arrived'. Let's hope whatever 'speed bumps' arrive don't delay too much, and those 'best intentions' remain. Al.

I hate to say this, particularly in such a bold project, but the build quality and QC does seem a little inconsistent. Al.

Hope the show is very successful for you. Al.

If Bachmann retool their 66 just to 'compete at the same level' as the Hattons' 66, it will both confirm that they accept their current 66 is inferior and also consign their current 66 to the 'half-price brigade' as they won't sell any more. I don't think it's that far off, it's a superb model, just that the Hattons' 66 has moved the level higher again. The Bachmann is definitely NOT Railroad grade. It's far better than that, just not as good as the Hattons' seems to be ... Al.

NOW? I hated the start - just ordered a Class 92 from DJ Models 3 hours before A-S announced theirs ... the rest is history!! I seriously admire their (A-S) genuine intentions, obvious talent - presentation, negotiating, model accuracy and intense attention to detail beyond what we've been accustomed to in the past - SUPERB .... I've a 55, a 37 and a Mk.5 set on order ... and still await ... something else!! Al.

Thanks for the information and reply. I suppose if investing that much in a limited edition locomotive, returning to correct costs won't be that much. Relatively easily renamed / renumbered to the experienced modeller. Al.

Did the 1:1 Bittern twin-tendered version ever have valances? Al.

As you say, digressing, and meddling to the extent of iron plates and magnets obviously works, but is a bit OTT - I suppose that is what our hobby is in the search of realism. I just found it disappointing when I had one, finding the Bachmann 66 had no problem with a big rake of bogie hoppers, but the so-called British-based railways powerhouse 70 couldn't touch it - so I sold it! Back to HATTONS' 66 - not long to go now, and can't wait - should be excellent by all accounts, and several 'unveiling video' could be interesting. If any of you out there do these, how about an 'independent comparison' between the 2, or more, particularly wrt performance - smoothness, slow, fast, load hauling? Al.

According to one well known source, it's: Technological Hierarchy for the Removal of Undesirables and the Subjugation of Humanity Al.

I thought Bachmann just about got it spot on - unlike the 70 which is WAY too light despite the detail - but this Hattons 66 has quite simply moved the ball quite a lot further up the pitch, ready for Harry Kane to net it, shall we say. Al.

Not mine ... Yet? Al.

A few problems with tunnels and stations, 'though there again ... no, that's bad taste. Class 40 is definitely one I would like to see within the available 'new age high definition UK hobby grade proprietary locomotives'. Al.

I still hope for 37's big brother, the 40. Al.

Just pre-ordered one - gone for a 37 001. Trying to 'blend' diesel and steam ... Could do with a modern one I suppose, I just like the old blue / yellow look. Al.

Maybe it's an A-S Pepsi Cola wagon ...... Al.

I always had room inside my Sir Winston, Flying Scottie, but agree it was tight inside the (probably closer to HO/HO) Princess Royal - with the X-04's used at the time. Scalextric was around, with smaller motors, with decent power, but perhaps there just wasn't that much choice 'back then'. It's all 'consigned' now ... pity. Al.

That's a very astute consideration, but cannot change anything now! I suppose most are finescale-enough NOW that it's generally the cylinders protruding most, so using 'modern standards' it could work. Explaining the 'Continental modellers' I think you are 100% correct - 60's Tri-ang valve motion - even Hornby Dublo's - was a tad 'heavy handed'. This could probably have caught on UK-style higher platforms, generally not present on the 'Continent'. Al.

When I first found out, as an OCD teenager 45 years ago, I wasn't best pleased!! To this day I still ask myself if it was a 'valvegear consideration' how come 'Continental' HO modellers - let's call them HO/HO (it's nearly Christmas after all!!) - can purchase HO scale / HO gauge models, yet 'we' have to put up with imperfectly proportioned OO/HO .... broken record to all of us no doubt. MOVIN' ON .... !! Let's see what the Warley Surprise will be. Al.

I was just thinking that - with the Deltic, and now the 37 .... !! Al.

OO is the SCALE, NOT the GAUGE. HO is - unfortunately - our Gauge. Were we to be OO scale / OO gauge - it would not be called OO / HO. OO Gauge = P4 = 18.83mm gauge. HO Gauge = 'Normal OO/HO' whereby 'we' use HO gauge, with 16.5mm between the rails - unfortunately. An incorrect application which can never be corrected, unfortunately, unless you've the patience of a saint, and the funds of a lottery winner, and run P4. Al.

Sorry Roy, have to disagree! Did not say 'OO Gauge', just said 'OO'. This means that OO9 is 100% relevant. Judging from previous A-S comments, I really don't think it's a market they'll go for, so I DO agree it's not going to happen. Al.

OO9 is OO - just narrow gauge. Didn't say OO/HO as 'we' have them. Al.

When a small boy, I always liked 'the big nosed diesels'. When a larger small boy, I started 'getting into' model railways, and elder brother at one stage purchased a Tri-ang green 37 - which I thought was great. When an early teenager I realised these 'big nosed diesels' on local railways weren't 37's, but my real favourite, the 40 ... That's when I stopped liking the 37 as much! REALLY wanted an A-S 40!! Al.

How about narrow gauge? OO9? Al.