Roy L S

SK commented on a recent You-Tube channel (can't remember name) that 08s will arrive April, then changed it to April May (kinda maybe?) however the info I had from the Hornby Customer Service Team was that the 08 would arrive end May/early June. Issue 2 of the TT120 Club mag said it should have been with us by the time the mag was published!!! SK is a salesperson, he will want to put the best "spin" he can on things which is all fine and dandy until inconsistencies start to emerge and things don't arrive. There is an old adage which is that it is better to under-promise and over-deliver...

Hi Les True, but for me the TT120 venture is a side project and on a limited budget. I don't really want to spend money on alternatives that aren't prototypically British. Thanks for the suggestion though. Roy

Based on what other manufacturers openly tell us about lead times I wouldn't have thought early 2024 looks even remotely realistic. Looking at it practically, if the tooling for Duchess isn't even due to be started for a few months yet, then by the time that has been completed, test-shots produced and evaluated, corrections made and further evaluation/sign off, livery samples produced and evaluated, corrections made, final sign off, allocation a production slot, production undertaken and products shipped (about 6 weeks by sea), I would suggest late 2024 if not early 2025 looks more realistic.

Thanks for the "Heads Up" I have registered my interest but a lot will depend on pricing as the TT`120 layout is only a limited budget side-project in my case. Roy

Yes, he has certainly said that with regard to TT120 but then SK is a salesman and so will I think adapt the narrative to suit a given situation, and would hardly be likely to want to dismiss such layouts as a potential option, even if the initial product range is really targeted elsewhere.

I haven't really followed Social Media with regard to TT120, but it doesn't really surprise me that it is more the trainset market that is attracted given how it has been promoted so far. I am sure you are right that a majority of layouts across the spectrum in established scales will be continuous run (my N one is for example) but I think the percentage split between that and end-to end types is likely to vary from scale to scale with significantly more continuous runs in N, 009 and OO and less in O. I am not unduly bothered, what I have already acquired can be kept and I will make a decision sometime in the future about whether I proceed with a layout or sell it on and that will depend on how things progress TT120 wise. Roy

While what Les says is unquestionably true, perhaps this should have been a consideration in the timing of the launch as it has been the case for some time now. I purchased the "Easterner" set as a taster and being pleased with the overall quality thought a little TT120 branch terminus/shunting layout would be nice project. I now have my first three wagons with a few more plus a blue 08 on order, have purchased a board from Grainge and Hodder, some Peco TT120 track. Some short radius points and other track bits should arrive today. However I have now belatedly realised looking at the range in PH1-4 that aside from the 08 (which ideally I would have preferred in early BR black or green) there is pretty much nothing else suitable in the announced range until Phase 4 when the J94 and 57xx will arrive. Looking at the projected timing for even Phase 2 products, realistically these Phase 4 "launch" locos look unlikely to be available for some considerable time (possibly 2025?). I would be very happy to be proved wrong but that is how it looks. The attraction of building a layout for which I will have just one suitable loco for (from what I can gather) could be two or more years, has put a bit of a damper on things for me, coupled to which Hornby's focus really seems to be mainly on big locos with nothing middle-sized like a small tender loco or Bo-Bo diesel (OK there will be a 31 in PH 4 but that's still physically quite large). My conclusion is therefore that I will still purchase the 08 and remaining wagons but otherwise park the BLT idea for the foreseeable future and concentrate on my primary modelling scale (N). From what I am reading others are reaching similar conclusions. Now it could be that Hornby are content to let people like me fall away, as it seems as if they are more targeting people who will be happy with a big loco and three coaches on a layout based around developing a trainset oval. If that's the case that's fine by me, after all it is their (or should that be their investor's) cash at risk and their vision. I just wish I had realised a bit sooner before going beyond the basic set, but that's on me really for not realising lead times are likely to be so long for the launch range. The basic items bought will still be there if and when things turn out to be more favourable, it just means I'll not commit any more cash to TT120 for now. Roy

I totally agree but I think Accurascale were initially seeking suggestions only as far as their existing R&D for the OO range is concerned. Regards Roy

Accurascale were asking for N suggestions derived from their OO range not so long ago, could this have potential to go through the "Shrink Ray"? Roy

If you look at the number of individually fitted parts that go into the wagon it is anything but basic, the wire stays on the sides and straps over the top of the wagon are all separate as is a lot of the underframe detail - not a single moulded item like all but the newest PECO. You can buy the wagon discounted in many places typically by 15% which brings the £25.95 down to a shade over £22.00, but given the cost of assembly never mind increases in material costs that is now the going rate and nobody is profiting obscenely at those prices. Regards Roy

Hi Ben Thank you for responding and sharing your thoughts about the railbus, your points are all well made. What I would say though is that from the data Tom has provided there would certainly appear to be a market for a first gen 4 wheel railcar, and if the AC one came top of the "Railcars" category then that would look like the one to go for. In terms of regional spread, as they were designed to fulfil a specific purpose (i.e. to provide cost effective transport on less heavily used lines) it is inevitable that the different variants would have been confined to certain specific areas. However, my thinking is that this will be very much a "Rule 1" purchase for a lot of people anyway and hopefully a competitive price-point for such a simple design would enable that, so both the regional limitation v's the specific version chosen may not actually be that critical. Also, a number being used on preservation lines widens the appeal even further. I actually agree with you as far as "what if" liveries are concerned, but I was trying to factor out my own "prejudices" and look at the bigger picture as it has been cited as a way to make a model more viable (by another manufacturer whose name also begins with "R") but I accept that business principles and models are inevitably different between companies. Anyway, I'll leave it there, I appreciate only a few ideas can ever be taken forward. Regards Roy

Hi Tom Thanks for the poll info, it would appear then that the general idea of such a Railbus carries a lot of support which is encouraging. Roy

A thought I have had more than once is the possibility of producing a first generation railbus in N. This would represent a tiny complete train in itself, potentially at reasonably low cost given the simple 4 wheel design, yet with space for DCC/DCC sound given the recent generation of micro-sound decoders and "microcube" speakers. There were a number of different manufacturers of the prototypes whose products were all subtly different, each produced only a small number. They could be found in different parts of the UK, and while lasting only 10 or so years in BR traffic, a fair number found their way into preservation and survive to this day. I had the pleasure of going on one (AC Cars from memory) on the North Norfolk Railway, and with the driver's little cab set off to the side sat right at the front, recording the whole journey unobstructed. To take two examples of which five each were manufactured we have the German built Waggon und Maschinenbau ones (done by Heljan in OO). These appeal because they have buffers and drawgear, and I can visualise under "Rule 1" some people hooking a single fitted van to them. WMD Railbus (railcar.co.uk) Or the AC Cars one which have a more rudimentary buffer arrangement and no drawgear: - AC Cars Railbus (railcar.co.uk) Dapol do a former Kitmaster/Airfix kit of this model, and again I think it has been done as a RTR model in OO and O by Heljan. Liveries were BR Green, either with speed-whiskers or small yellow panel, I think I saw a Heljan W&R one in a departmental livery too, but don't know if this is prototypical. I guess as a "what if" livery BR blue with full yellow end might well be an attractive option too. They could seat nearly 50 people and were in many ways the forerunner of "pacer" type units BR developed subsequently. Many would I think see this as a "Rule 1" purchase but it would also be a perfect model to use on "micro" layouts in N. Slight disadvantage would be no opportunity to upscale to OO, but as Heljan have stated often that they have no interest in N there seems little prospect of a mainstream manufacturer otherwise making one in N. It certainly sems to fit the "niche" criteria that RevolutioN have carved out for their products. Thoughts?? Roy

Do you mean Richard Proudman?

As one with only limited knowledge of the prototype it looks very nice. Something like the Palbrick would have seemed like a good N Gauge proposition as a "toe in the water" rather than a focus on the more quirky of locos. Roy

Simply and succinctly I would welcome a bang up to date Class 37 with Next 18 socket and fitted speaker. True, the Farish model is OK and continues to be produced, but it remains in 6 pin form and without any provision for sound. Duplication is always a risk, but the Farish one is also quite an old model now to add to the other reasons above. Roy

My experience of the Bachmann spares dept has been excellent.

I reached out to Hornby's customer support desk to determine if "Spring" could be defined a little more accurately in terms of delivery of my pre-ordered BR Blue 08. They have just responded: - "Thank you for your e-mail, I have looked into your purchase, and it looks to be in-between end on May to early June". This seems to contradict what was put in the second edition of Hornby's TT120 magazine which said the 08s should have been arriving as the magazine landed on people's doorsteps. I am assuming what I have just been told is correct and more up to date which suggests schedules/deliveries are slipping. I have already ordered a baseboard flat pack for my planned TT120 "micro" layout, but I guess I'll put off buying anything else as I'll need a suitable test loco and the A4 I have ain't gonna fit! Such is life I guess... Roy

I appreciate that this is an issue where opinions are very different and in many cases strongly held, most having been aired to the Nth degree on this thread. The simple truth is that we don't know what impact TT120 will have on other scales at all yet and there are many factors that influence that. Having mulled things over a fair bit, my personal thinking is that as far as existing OO and N modellers go, TT120 will have a very marginal impact if any, A few will inevitably find reason to convert and some, like me will see it as a bit of a "side hustle" to their main interest scale wise. As far as newcomers are concerned I think that with sufficient depth of product range TT120 represents a very viable choice to those who would otherwise be OO modellers and I personally believe it will draw new modellers away from that scale. Most things you can achieve in OO can be achieved in TT120 in a smaller space so there are very good reasons to think this will be so. However I do not personally see N being so badly impacted because it is much less a "train set" and much more a modeller's scale. Newcomers who want realistic length trains in a small space will see the benefits of N over TT120 in the sense of this and modelling the landscape. Having looked at micro-layout designs for TT120 I can already see that in the same area you could get a lot more N in. I am not saying I am right, the fact is we simply don't know at this point. However what I am much more sure of is that TT120 will not begin to have any significant impact on other scales at all until (unless) a viable range is established and looking at some of Hornby's projected release dates that is going to take a long time. If anything I predict TT120 establishing itself as more of a minority interest scale in the UK but with potential for much more growth abroad given the scale parity with other TT120 models of different country's prototypes. Here I believe it will have a chunk of market all to itself and potential is significant. Roy

DCC, and in particular sound fitted locos, depend very much on reliable pick up and squeezing in "stay alive" to such tiny models only provides some limited mitigation against a very temporary loss of track power. So yes dead-frogs on shunting layouts are something to avoid at all costs. Roy

The 4ft x 1ft (well OK 1200mm x 400mm) "micro" is exactly what I am exploring for TT120 and have been scribbling plan ideas for. It is definitely possible to do something which will provide sufficient operating interest that goes beyond an "inglenook". I plan to use PECO track for this and an immediate restriction is caused by their 16cm long 36 inch radius points. Dare I say it but a shorter 18 inch radius point would work much better for the more restricted places. Even still I seem to have managed something that includes a run round loop that will accommodate three or four short wheelbase wagons. On a similar vein, there are those who have said no point in selecting the R1 curves in the Hornby range, however these alone facilitate a "roundy-roundy" on a 2ft wide board so for the very space strapped who are looking at a continuous run and are happy with smaller locos and stock I actually think it is a really good choice. Roy

Isn't is the second tranche of Scotsman sets to sell out rather than the third with current pre-orders being for said third set? It is good going either way, but I would still suggest not too much is read into these figures just yet as I suspect many sets are being bought by modellers from other scales who see somewhere less than £200 for an entire set (after club discount - £165 for the Easterner) as a price they are prepared to pay to take a look. Let's face it, it is way less that the cost of a plain DCC ready Bachmann V2 alone, even after discount! Roy

Me neither Les The real issue is availability of suitably sized transfers for the cabside numbers and smaller items of lettering (cycling lions are not such an issues as the "large" Fox N gauge ones will work OK I think). Commissioning bespoke transfers from Fox is a possibility but it isn't cheap and will understandably take time. Another factor even before that is how easy the loco is to disassemble sufficiently (including glazing removal) if a "smart" design and things clip together it may not be a problem, but if loads of glue is involved it will be. As an N modeller and used to painting much smaller models to a fairly reasonable standard the thought doesn't daunt me, but no repaint is really a "shake a rattle can" job, it requires much more care and finesse, and even a "plain" black loco involves different colours in places, plus a decent varnish layer. All very easy to do badly...... Roy

Is it just me, or does anyone else think that if the demographic is an as yet untapped market of "new" modellers with limited space it might be an idea to produce a more entry level set with R1 curves and 08 and say three wagons? I have checked the dimensions of the TT120 08 and at about 85cms long, it and a few wagons on a simple small oval with siding would seem to fit the smaller home concept far better than an A4 three coaches and a large oval using R3 track.... Roy

Better than 666 in that case 😁