Mark Dickerson

Is it that odd a choice though, really? It's not that different from the N2, only on original duties for a few years more and a RTR favourite. (To me the Dublo N2 had a faint nod to things like the A5.) Large freight tanks are rarer in RTR. (Waiting patiently for mine.)

Presumably the pre-order disappears from the pre-orders page once it's processed? (Mine is still there.) (Something?) listed as "in stock" on main page, but status still "on order", so presumably everything will update in the next few days.

Oh, but could we? Please? You could do a simulation of What Would Happen at Warley if people saying "it's just for kids" about the starter set found out that the latest (say) "definitive" Class 37 was 1 micron out. 😘

Of course not. Hornby is clearly a multi-billion-dollar shadowy corporation run by Elvis and the space aliens[*]. I just don't think that the show reflects that. [* They should've pitched to Blaze.]

Unfortunately, the B4 bit might have been "entertaining TV", but to me it didn't present their planning process in a very good light, what with the 30-day jeopardy (but time to do alterations), sudden appearance of a new motor, plonking the 3D print next to an actual model at the end rather than another plan earlier on, presumably using the original (rather than a revised?) print with the new mechanism. Tongue-in-cheek snarky editing might be two-edged...

Your bets on whether "Oxford overspill" ends up "Reading-London commuters" or somesuch, though.

The thing is, the last last time there was a new starter 0-4-0 it went to market oversize. BTW I'm not hoping for scale, just "sane", although I'd point out smaller toys like Matchbox cars were deemed suitable for 3-years-old and above - and while comparable in size to Smokey Joe, the various US HO Little Joes and side tanks managed shorter wheel bases and smaller wheels.

Didn't they also mention platform clearances, too (but NB: the Bagnall is very wide)? It'd be great if they put a smaller motor in to fit the existing dimensions, but I'm still expecting another Frankenloco.

Why does Hornby think that "starter" means "grossly out of scale"? They even showed a smaller motor being offered to the designer at one point. The B4 even dwarfed a Jinty. Such a pity.

It would explain the B4 in the trailer - although I can't see the prominent couplings(?) being on a static plastic these days, even though ones were provided on the old Airfix Pug kit. Maybe a TT set for e.g. Argos? If so, disappointing for me, but it would at least offer a new 0-4-0 chassis for NG...

Now, now. 🙂 Let's alternatively have a theory that in an ideal world they want something that might reflect something representing the constituents of each of the Big 4, and they're not afraid to stretch or simplify. This is the "Southern" one, replacing not-Th*mas, nor-E2, and they've decided not to do a C14 again. Ironside is seen as too much like the Pug, so that can get the SR livery if needed. "LMS" gets the Caley Pug (forever), GWR (rightly, or less face it, wrongly) keeps 101, and "LNER" gets a Y6 tram engine somewhere down the line. If the do-an-06-in-Blue-Pullman-livery humour returns, the George V tank gets outside cylinders and is numbered as a GWR 1101 or LNER Y4 Class, and appears with a circle of track and a couple of wagons in a retro clockwork-style set box. Give me a minute and I'm sure I can work Elvis and JFK into it. 🤔

Presumably the CDC resin bodies on (incorrect wheelbase! *Faints*) Terrier chassis sell to someone...

The Bagnall was fairly recent. Maybe not-Th*mas looks a little too much like Th*mas. People talk nostalgically about Nellie/Polly/whatever, and this is perhaps a little closer. Something else to do on rotation. Or just: why not? Just imagine if it had been a Railroad 57xx though...

But apparently serious enough to make. Maybe the future isn't just units? (Gotta lure them onto the Pecketts 🧐)

I thought the orange blob to right was a (prominent) NEM pocket - but who knows? It's not a tension lock.

Thank you for getting that! I half-registered it and was waiting for the advert again - I thought B4 on the Railroad 0-4-0 mech (so, OO). I've a sinking feeling it might be overscale for anything OO like the Bagnall though. [Get the negative comments in early, that's what I say. It's Christmas. 😀] Second glance...smaller wheels? New chassis? Ooh.

I agree that the kit would be useful, I don't think a RTR version would wholly negate demand - just make it less of a priority (I'd guess at a Quint-Art as more likely in RTR rather than 2 4-coach Quad-Arts, for the full formation, either way I'd hate to see PPP partly hit). You can of course make the Kirk kits to a more basic standard and I have both low- and full-fat...

I thought the J72 body has been used with the Toy Story 4-4-0 to do the smaller sibling of the D50, but as yours is working I've seen articles on making a J60 and a J65 (move dome, alter cab). [Edit: D50 not the one I thought it was...]

NB: Phoenix are asking for people's priorities for production. (Of course, now will be when we see the RTR Quad-Art announcement).

CrossCountry still does the route (from Southampton to Manchester) with reversal at Reading, but you have to make do with gawping at the 57s in the sidings instead...

Not entirely against this, I'm a little surprised to see the latter never appears to be something that people crave, but with its lineage variants and liveries is it really niche? I've assumed that the 2F just hasn't appeared because of a duplication Cold War. 🤔

They could of course remember that a Quint-Art would also go with the Oxford Rail N7. I will suggest that there won't be "Some industrial thing" on the basis that every time I've suggested they've reached their limit, Hornby have done another one. On that superstitious basis I'm also suggesting they won't announce "Some tunnel-based nonsense train from That London". I could see a new Railroad Deltic - it might work well in a set with their Mk.1 stock.

What was the gearbox and (perhaps to the point), roughly how much was it? Is it cost rather than convention why they're not as common?

I suspect I will wait for the second round and see if 68088 shows up rather than alter 68089 - the latter will just have to have a spurious reallocation. There's just something about a mid-C20th. 0-4-0t passenger loco... 😉

Thanks - the first to really promote one might therefore make a kiiling?