Legend

Well done Hornby . Can't help feeling that they unintentionally gave the game away in the Adams Radial Engineshed blog which is why we've got this announcement so shortly after the Colletts . No matter it seems it's a good choice . As to what is announced in December, well I think it would be unreasonable to expect much more, unless of course it's an announcement for that forgotten outpost.........Scotland!

Just in case of confusion, the reference to the shop as MAC models that used to be in Helensburgh. The proprietors retired and sold business to someone I think in Kirriemuir. The shop in Helensburgh was closed and much missed. This is distinct from International Models who moved to Helensburgh and is now shutting down. I don't think they ever had a shop up here.

Absolutely. Still miss it!

These do look very nice. I've been building up some BR (W) stock , but these are making me contemplate back dating to GWR. I even just like saying Chocolate and Cream! Hornby have been under a bit of stick recently over not sending out review samples and lack of communication. But I think it's now clear they intend communicating directly with their customers through internet and relying on mags to subsequently publish details . There is certainly more information coming from them than we have seen for a long time. Well done them! Keep it up please

Well done Sandra!

But there is a difference in buying tube train coaches ,London Buses , taxis and buying a £280 4 car multiple unit. It's not a trainset either so not self contained, it relies on already having a layout or presumably a display cabinet. Hell of an expensive ornament though. I can't believe that casual visitors to the museum will buy this. It must be targeted at the enthusiast surely. Are there that many people really able to run an LT unit? . Can only assume that as it's a commission there is no risk for Bachmann and that LT museum are willing to take on the inventory costs of holding these until they are sold. As I've mentioned before it's a steep price for a 4 car unit in comparison to the APT which is a similar museum commission. Seems the Network Rail 150 was some sort of a leg pull. Fell for it hook line and sinker!

Do LT museum have retail outlets other than their museum at Covent Garden?

4 car mu commissioned by museum ( profits to museum) made in China for sale in UK. Bachmann £280 , Rapido £225. Both have lights, the APT possibly all sorts of gee whiz gizmo lights in test car and of course a working tilt mechanism . You could argue that the S stock is more mainstream , although I think that's debatable. If the markets heading that way it's because Bachmann are spearheading it

Was that the spoof one with an underground layout under the floor boards? What happened to the Network a Rail 150 . Any details as I note the original thread is locked? Collectors model ? Price?

Good morning all. Beautifull morning up here in Glasgow. Whatever you do with it, have a great day

Nice . Will look forward to following this. I remember Aviemore being modelled before in "oo". I think it might have been by East Kilbride model railway club, and probably about 20 years ago. Great quality layout but I was also struck by the operation of it. Really very interesting layout with 2 routes to Inverness and I think banking up Slochd.

I'd quite like one . I'd go for a five car unit.Probably I could extend it by one or two coaches but I wouldn't have space for more than that. It doesn't need to be symmetrical both sides of power car(s). Takes me back to my College days when took the train Paisley- Glasgow. The APT-P was usually to be seen on Shields Road. Then of course I remember the disasterous 1981 runs, in one of the coldest winters for years. Still think its a shame we didn't persevere . Buying the model does depend on cost, though. My nostalgia has its limits. Isn't there a danger, that Rapido brings it out and Hornby counter with a re released version, having suddenly been able to find the tooling? I did see an old Hornby one selling second hand recently @£150

You forgot my speciality....Huge price increase winge, moan! You must admit though, even a glass half full guy would be seriously challenged in these circumstances

What people don't realise is it cost a few hundred pounds to ship a container from China to UK . As you say it probably costs more from Port to Warehouse! One of the side effects of these huge Containerships. It's also relatively easy to track them.

I'd prepare yourself for a disappointment Ron !

A couple of points Bachmann are making lots of additional labour costs. You would therefore wonder why they don't make better use of common components. Yes I know there is a logistics cost of producing components that are not needed immediately, but surely at the design stage it makes sense to design a component that can have multiple uses, I'm not sure I buy the "each model is designed from scratch" argument , either. Examples have been given of the Hall which clearly has a common chassis . Triang Hornby used to use components that had multiple uses to reduce overall cost. Maybe instead of constantly reminding us of increase costs , Bachmann are missing a trick here. And No, I'm not advocating going back to common chassis for Jinties and 08 shunters, but it occurs to me there must be some commonalities eg on 0-6-0 locos and indeed on Marsh/ Ivatt Atlantics Secondly . There's an assumption that a C2 would follow the production of a C1. While they are different locos , I for one would be extremely hacked off if I just bought a C1 at a Premium price only to find an equivalent in the main range. Although I suspect one of the benefits of dealing with Locomotion is that they stuck with original price , while with Bachmann it would have increased 15% (more or less ) in March. I really wonder what price the Marsh Atlantic will end up at . Given the longevity of production process I could bet it might actually be more than my limited edition!

Well I've just spent afternoon running my LNER C1 . I stuck a bit of tape over the open smokebox , then peeled it off hoping there would be enough adhesive transfer that would keep the smokebox door shut without permanently glueing it. Seems to have worked. But really wonder why they've seen the need to incorporate a gimmick in this model? Operates well hauling my 6 rake of old Hornby Gresleys . Really nice just watching her run. Runs through 2nd radius points as well, no derailments on my undulating track. Nice lining on it too . Overall reasonably happy . Only reasonably? Well yes part of me is still smarting over the £178 price tag. Its a nice model , but running in the other loop was my recently purchased Olton Hall. Yes I know its Railroad, its painted red, not a real livery, I'm a phillistine for running the two of them together. But she is equally a sweet runner , and bought at £47, so the Atlantic cost 3.78 times more . Yep better decoration (although the Hall has some very fine boiler lining) and its a model of something I've always wanted , but I have to admit still being 50/50 on whether I should have splashed the cash. Just my view , though, If your an LNER fan , I suppose you really must have this loco . She is a beaut!

Ironically the Bachmann advert on the inside cover of Model Rail shows the defect perfectly. Highlighted by the lighting, now that I know there is a defect. Picture in review shows it well too. It is quite a difference right enough

Mine arrived too. The most expensive loco I've ever bought! It's a nice looker and runs well. I've tried it with 6 older Hornby Gresleys with no problems. The only issue I have is my smokebox door keeps coming open . It's something I could do without . I'll figure out a way of keeping it shut . A touch of blue tack perhaps

Having not seen the mag, it worked for me.

I think you need to get this in context. I accept that if you are a GWR specialist , this defect will be reasonably obvious to you. And indeed we have heard from people who have spotted the real thing saying they immediately noticed it was wrong. Also when Dibber contemplates attacking the Mazak , you think well he's not doing that for the sheer hell of it , there must be something wrong. However on the other side , I certainly wouldn't have known there was an issue. More expert than me, Ben Jones didn't notice it . Also if you look at album pictures, the area is often in shadow and its not at all obvious that there is an issue. So is it critical overall? If you are that GWR officionado then probably your eyes are drawn to it , but for the rest of us probably not. So talk of holding it back and not releasing it I think is a bit over the top. Comparison with the V2 is not the same. Here there is a very visible fault in that the dome is way too flat and doesn't stand out as much as it should. To me that is immediately obvious and its most definitely not in shadow. Yet this model has sold , probably relatively well, given its longevity in the catalogue and the fact they deem it worthwhile redoing. So while the Modified Hall is not Bachmanns best model its not their worst either. And if it doesn't sell well, maybe I'll pick up one at a discount in 6 months time

Thanks for explanation Rembrow The BRM review only shows the front from a low angle so you cannot discern whether the area between plate frame extensions is curved or straight. Looking at pictures of the real thing, while the curved footplate of unmodified Halls is obvious , for modified ones the plate frame extensions leave that area in shadow, so again not obvious for me, although I believe the experts . Oh dear, but still not sure its fundamental (speaking as someone who has never seen the real thing and would have been unaware if hadn't seen above posts)

I'm a bit puzzled by this, not subscribing to MR and having seen review. What exactly is the issue with the footplate? I'm referring to pics in May BRM of Formarke Hall. There is a review there by Ben Jones that doesn't pick up on any points on footplate " The front end arrangement with plate frame extensions projecting beyond the smokebox towards the bufferbeam. plate frame bogie design and revised outside steam pipes is well modelled. The "face" is utterly convincing" further "Overall , the model conveys the outline of the prototype perfectly, from the utterly convincing face......." I know we can get caught up in rivet counting , and I initially thought that the issue was not severe, but if we are talking about cutting into Mazak chassis it appears to me that its something fairly critical and spoiling the look of it, but for the life of me comparing BRM pics with pics in a GW steam portfolio I can't see it. What am I missing?

I can't see a new tooled Class 91. If you were going to do this you would need to similarly upgrade the Mk4s and DVT. That's a large investment , for what would become an expensive train to buy and I just can't see it would make a return. What might make more sense is a limited upgrade to model with front/rear lights. I'm rather struck by the new Virgin East Coast "coke can" livery. I think that would make an ideal flagship for a revamped Railroad range, Along with their existing 66 with TTS and maybe the 156 in a myriad of colourful liveries. Attract youngsters into the hobby with models they can see on the current railway rather than superannuated steamers (excepting Tornado , of course)