What About The Bee

As of Friday, close of business, Hornby have not answered Ntp's questions, nor mine on Locomotion. Now I am attempting to follow established procedure. I have waited more than a week, and as I asked my questions after Ntp did, he has waited the requisite time as well. These questions / reviews should get a ticket number, just as email queries do. A simple acknowledgment, a 'pending in queue' message from Hornby with that number would go a long way towards calming aggitatition. If my questions were about a purchase, Hornby's apparent lack of interest would likely dissuade me. This is Hornby's online presence, their virtual store front. Is nobody minding the store? Bee

Son of Triangman I do not know if you get the Rapido newsletter. I've just perused their latest. What they have to say about Warley is directly applicable to you. I will clip the pertinent section, in the event you do not. Italics added: ÷÷÷ The announcement that the Warley Model Railway Exhibition would cease was quite a blow. We understand that in the model railway world we are quite fresh faces and that the Warley Club, through their show, has been instrumental in Rapido Trains UK building a name for itself.... Because of the show, thousands of people now know who we are. Bee

Great fun Alberto! Always a pleasure to see a running session on one of your layouts. Bee

I have just received my prints of the livestock wagon from Shapeways. This is the one most commonly used, given its appearance many times, across many aquatints, drawings, authors & etc. A quick recap. Convert a flatbed into a Livestock Wagon. A desired feature is that the slat sides would be removable. A test of how robust the slat sides are, questioning how fragile they might be. Results The floor snapped right onto the chassis. It is a near perfect fit. The integral clips to hold the ends onto the chassis functioned properly. The slat sides function as designed. There is enough clearance to readily put the stakes into the sub-floor bolsters. The slat sides are far more robust than expected. There will be no need for metal. The rivets came out beautifully. They will be a breeze to paint. Self Critique There two bosses on the underside of the floor, each with a central bore to accept the retaining cross head screws. I sized the bore to the minor diameter of the thread. This was a mistake. The Shapeways 'tan fine detail plastic' is far too brittle. The screws did not self tap, as expected, rather, I heard brittle plastic fracturing. The bore will be larger next time. If you look slightly to the right of the top screw, a bit of broken plastic can be observed. The long slat sides are slightly warped. I did expect the parts to be flat. The warp isn't enough to deny the fit, but I can definitely feel resistance, taking up all the built in tolerance. I need to increase the fit tolerance, making it slightly more open. Overall, I'm happy! I've learned a few things. Paint is next. Bee

Thank you for the report back Simon. If you wish to further pursue your quest, I think the next step is Hooper themselves. As I have articulated before, a firm making bespoke carriages for rich people would very likely keep good records. The moment that carriage is for royalty, the game changes. Records would be meticulous. It is definitely worth an email Bee

Hi LT&SR_NSE You wrote: "....result in the most income." Bing! Good answer. This is a business. A business' first priority is to break even / turn a profit. To continue in business, to preserve the revenue stream. +++ Vespa, There are specific carriages and wagons that I want too. Hornby may make them. I'm not waiting around for that. I'm making them myself. If Hornby surprises me, that's okay, Hornby will probably do a better job of it. Several others here are making the choice to make their own, as well. Dip your toes, the water is fine Bee

Now arriving at station R30161 Bee

From the Facebook Post by the Friends of the Stockton and Darlington Railway Bee

I wrote to the Friends of the Stockton and Darlington Railway, sharing the link to this thread. I have heard back from them and this is what they had to say ÷÷÷÷ The new replica Experiment is built and being painted at present. We've tried to make it look as accurate as possible but for modern use it has had to have side opening doors (concealed) and a slightly later design of wheel. (it also hides air brakes and variety of other things underneath the original never had!). Metal roof rails for guard and baggage which can be discerned in the Backhouse/Dobbin images may not make the final build sadly for practical reasons. No official photos of it yet, but one of our members spotted it during an open day at the A1 trust workshops where it is being painted after being built by North Bay Engineering in Darlington. ÷÷÷÷ You will note: The Backhouse and Dobbin images, the 1st hand spectators. The researcher has independently arrived at the same conclusion I have. Further, this link was shared, of the current state of the build for the S&DR 200th Anniversary. https://www.facebook.com/groups/sdr1825/permalink/2676405032497776 The researcher went on to say: Great if Hornby could turn out an accurate Experiment and chaldrons for 2025, North Bay Engineering do have CAD drawings for the replicas and I'm sure would be happy to help if needs be. ÷÷÷ MODERATORS: Can you somehow get this in to Martyn and or Carl? This is an amazing offer. The CAD drawings of the replicas will make any Engineering work at Hornby lighter. The Friends of the S&DR are making a wonderful offer. Bee

Hornby, if they make the locomotives, will provide them to you at the price agreed upon. Unquestionably so. Bee

And that is a Good Thing! Demand is strong and Hornby sells out. They make their profit, and get to stick around for another day. Hornby may take note that inexpensive models sell out, and offer similarly priced items, in similar quantities. No sense in boatloads sitting on a shelf. And next time, do not sit around pondering a purchase. Pounce! Bee

Hello Vespa, You asked: "How can a loco be £250 on release and then end up at £110 to shift them?" There is a difference between retail price and wholesale price. Typically keystone, or 2x markup. So a £250 retail MSRP costs a retailer £125. But the cost to manufacture that unit CANNOT be £125. The manufacturer must also make a profit. Perhaps 10%. Making the cost basis ~£112.50 I'd rather sell remainders at a loss, than to have dead stock sitting on my shelf. Voila. £110 Bee

Wapples You need a way to precisely form the "water" to match the hull. Otherwise, you will end up with unsightly gaps. So the method is to mold the void in the "water" to match the hull. Releasing the mold is the tricky part, as you correctly ascertain. In other projects, I've considered molding for small batch manufacturing. Silicon molds allow you to peel away the mold. Here is how I would approach the problem, noting that this is not from experience. 1) cast the hull in silicon. Your boat sits in a pool of silicon, forming the negative of the hull. 2) peel the negative mold. 3) cast a dummy hull, using the negative mold. 4) peel the negative mold, providing a positive mold of the hull. 5) Firmly position the positive mold on the layout. You will have braces, boards, & etc, holding it exactly on position. 6) pour the "water" up to the waterline of your positive mold, which should also be where you want the water to come up to on your layout¹ 7) peel the positive mold from the "water". This should result in a fairly good match of model hull to water. Bee ¹That is going to be a significant amount of epoxy resin. Be very sure that you have enough on hand before you start AND that you can properly mix it and pour it before it goes off.

I had no idea what "effluxion of time" meant. Was it the usual 1800s literary flourish? I looked it up. To save others the effort, here is the legal definition: "Effluxion of time is the expiration of a lease term due to a natural passing of time rather than from a specific action or event. This phrase can also be used to indicate the conclusion or expiration of an agreement in simple writing when the conclusion or expiration occurs through a natural course of events. " So, rereading the legal notice in the London Gazette, it appears that the firm Adams and Hooper ends in 1845, as their contract concluded. Simon, Are you inferring that the Saloon could not have a Hooper maker's plate, since Adams and Hooper terminated in 1845? The most simple way to explain this is service. After construction, the carriage may need service, for whatever reason. The successor firm Hooper, formerly Adams and Hooper, replaces the old tag with the new one at time of service. I would think this normal practice. My mechanic changes his service tag out on my vehicle upon every visit. Another way. The Science Museum abbreviated the carriage maker description. It is a tiny phrase in long description, the writer was sloppy. It refers to the firm by the modern name, instead of the predecessor. If so, shame on the museum. I am not dying on this hill. I'm just going by what the Science Museum states, 1842. Bee

Agreed LT&SR_NSE, staff that cares does a better job. We are on the same page. I think the only disagreement may be where the error arises. It is unfair to blame the lad who carefully installs the number he or she has been provided. Sure, it they had more knowledge, they might question it. But even an in-house web team cannot be held responsible. It would be a good idea for the responsible parties at Hornby, who specify the data, to be responsible for it. For heavens sake, do the sheep wagons really require R3? Who thought that? Someone specified that. And it was approved. By in house staff. I think I fixed my post, I must really stop copying Hornby statements and pasting them here. Nothing but trouble Bee

Hi 96RAF That is all good for moderators. You approve your own images, making the process quite straightforward. For those of us without such privileges, there is the unavoidable wait for approval. The image finally appears. Its 90° out. So what am I to do? Delete it and resubmit after editing. Sure, I can do that. And wait again for approval. That plays havoc in a spirited conversation. Or I can remember to pass every image through my photo tools, saving every image yet again. Using the newly saved image in the post. Then deleting the edited image copy, because it has no other real use. Wasn't the photograph enough? Or I can beg for succor. Plead for help, requesting a moderator do it. As moderators are unpaid and simply have other things to do, I feel bad about this. I would prefer being able to do this myself. Fix the orientation of an approved image. Bee

Hello LT&SR_NSE For the record, I have heard back from a Hornby representative, who said: "Thank you for sending this over. I will forward this to our online team." I will now patiently wait to see if they do something / anything with the information. I think the GIGO principle is at work here. Garbage In Garbage Out. Data supplied by Hornby to the online team, remarkably, appears on line. Whilst incongruities may jump off the page to some, the requirement to accurately reflect the data Hornby provided will take precedence. It is not the job of the online team to ensure the data is technically correct, rather, it is their job to ensure the data on the website matches the data provided. GIGO. When a locomotive, carriage or wagon is assigned, there should be a definition of the radius the stock is intended to go around. That definition may either come from Engineering or Marketing, but certainly, someone should specify that. As many models are shown in Range Release before Engineering designs them, this means Marketing specifies the radius for new models. For models which have historical precedence, like Era 1 rolling stock using the same chassis, the minimum radius is defined by prior Engineering efforts. All of this leads me to the conclusion that internal Hornby communications could use a bit of improvement. There is absolutely no reason that, after 4 years, the minimum radius for Era 1 is not fixed, known and defined. Bee

Hi Simon From the web page: https://collection.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/objects/co205850/queen-adelaides-saloon-no-2-railway-carriage "... bodywork being by Hooper..." From the webpage: https://www.hooperinternational.com/history-hooper-co/ "The company was founded as Adams and Hooper in 1805 and held a royal warrant from 1830..." For those who do not know https://www.royal.uk/royal-warrants So we have Hooper, making the body (not the chassis) of the Saloon, because they possessed a royal warrant. That is, the London and Birmingham Railway turned to Hooper to make the carriage body, because Hooper had the royal warrant. It is extremely likely that there is a Hooper maker's plate on the Saloon, which would tie directly into Hooper's records. Again, I expect Hooper to keep immaculate records of goods provided to the royal family. I look forward to any response you may receive from the Museum. It will be amusing to see how terribly I have that wrong!! Bee

Hello Kasper Welcome aboard. About delivery. If the address is incorrect, it cannot be delivered. The package will likely return to Hornby. I suggest you contact customer service at your next convenience, and provide the tracking number and the order number. Provide the exact address upon request. They will be able to straighten the error out and get you on your way. It's a minor kerfuffle. Do not panic!! Bee

Hello Three Link I have not seen the Saloon in real life. It is on my list though! The photographs show no inter-compartment communication or passageway. What we do see is 4 inside seating in the two aft compartments. 2 inside in the front compartment. That takes up the full width. Unless the seat backs remove to reveal a secret passageway, like the extension in the rear compartment for the bed into the boot, there would be no room for a passageway. As to staff, I think they would follow in other carriages, likely a glass carriage. In this period image of the LBR at Euston, you may observe one, on the left. There are other times when members of the Royal family travel in compartments inaccessible. The horse drawn carriages spring to mind. Certainly, that horse drawn carriage could be stopped, should staff need to do something. But so could a locomotive. The only alternative would be for staff to ride in the compartment with Adelaide. I have no familiarity with Royal protocol, particularly to understand if that is acceptable or not. Bee

Hello Simon One of the reasons I do not participate on RMweb is the constant negativity by a very small group of individuals. Queen Adelaide's Saloon was a bespoke carriage body placed onto a railway chassis by Hooper. Hooper has possessed a Royal Warrant since 1830. Hooper is still in business. You may contact them here https://www.hooperinternational.com/contact/ Now perhaps it is just me, but I would think any work for a member of the Royal family would be very well recorded by Hooper. Further, my expectation is that the Science Museum have already thought to ask Hooper, and received the date the Science Museum states, to wit: 1842. In the end, I am not overly fussed by this. The Saloon does exist at the Museum. The Hornby model is fairly faithful to it. It isn't LMR so it was a stretch for me in any event. Bee

It would be ever so nice to have a "rotate image" button, under edits. It would provide a 90° edit to an already approved image. Let Hornby pick the direction, clockwise or counter clockwise. I do not need control over the direction. I simply press the button the desired number of times. And this issue would never, ever return. Alleviates moderator work. If only it could be requested for the next iteration, whenever that might be. Bee

Thank you Going Spare. I have just sent that off to the address you specified. I thought that perhaps this was the proper venue. The day I hit the lottery, and buy the company known as Hornby, there may be just a few tiny changes in culture. Bee

Hi Son of Triangman If it were me, I would consider a well edited, professionally shot series of youTube videos. I would show the product operational, and ease of installation videos, especially for the fence sitters. youTube is a good venue for this type of thing. Its a free repository for corporate videos. Now usually, when I think of "influencer", I giggle. It's kind of silly. But for a niche product, exposure is the key. We all look on youTube to enjoy what other modelers are doing. I would attempt to get as many "influencers" as possible to try my product. So it can be shown. So other modelers can see it. I would send FREE samples to folks like Charley at Chadwick Model Railways and Jennifer Kirk and ask them to review the product. I would be exceptionally careful to put a well tested, ready to go product in their hands. DC / DCC, ready to go. I would absolutely not ask for it back, it is theirs to keep. Yes, that costs me money. I trust that my product is good, and that I will get a fair review. I would offer an affiliate sponsorship for referrals, to coax the reviewer into doing the review. Jennifer does this, as does Sam. Essentially, a fee for a referral through a link I provide¹. I would not expect a sugar coated review. Both youTubers have shown that they will call out bad products. But a good review will get me on the map. I would consider magazines. The thing to consider with magazines is that the advert would need be in every issue for several years to be effective. Not a single ad, repeated ads. I would offer a small discount if they use a code, which is only associated with that magazine. In this way I can measure sales versus advertising; but the thing I am buying is exposure, which may or may not result in direct sales. Magazines are a toss up for me, I wonder if they offer a large enough audience anymore. Trade shows may be considered. A working model, shown to thousands, is reasonable marketing exposure. Put it on a big screen TV, let folks see it as they walk on by. Not all will stop, but many will look. I would not count on in-show sales to fund my effort, although that would be nice. I just want to be seen. I would make absolutely sure to have several working models ready to go. Level crossing gates beating like a drum may not last forever. But a quick replacement, in view of the public, will convince them of the ease of installation. Maybe even a display of the installation, again, for the fence sitters. While the romanticism of the local model shop runs thick through the veins of many, this will be the least likely venue for exposure. The LMS guy is not going to push my product. It will be an effort to just put 10 units on his shelf, out of which he will make a meager amount of money, not a terrific incentive. To an audience that is his client base. It will be nice to generate sales this way, but they will be all at keystone² and not the exposure I need. Lastly, I would consider that all of this is to be rolled into my cost of doing business. The advertising campaign is part of the budget. Part of putting the product into the customer's hands at a price he or she wants to pay. Bee ¹Which means a professional website. I would make it as slick as could be, and reference my professional youTube videos. ²in the US, keystone is considered to be 50% of the retail price. A retailer is expected to mark my product up by a factor of 2. If I sell my product to a retailer at 5USD, keystone suggests he will sell it at 10USD. And I need to make it for less than 5USD to be profitable. This may preclude me from marketing through the LMS or retailers.

Era 1 Rolling stock R40102 R1 R40357 R2 <<<<< R40436 R1 R40437 R1 R40438 R1 R40439 R1 R40445 R2 <<<<< R60014 R1 R60164 R3 <<<<< R60165 R3 <<<<< R60166 R3 <<<<< R60275 R1 R60276 R1 Since the vast majority of the Era 1 rolling stock is based on the same chassis, there should be one specification for minimum radius. It should not be R3, in any event. The coal cagon, and possibly Adelaide's Saloon, have a different chassis, but are equivalent in size and likely have the same minimum radius. Further, items that come in both sets of three and a single carriage, the specification should agree betwixt them. R40436 is specified to come with a NEM pocket. Yet R40357, with identical Adelaide's Saloon is specified with chains. R40437 is specified to come with a NEM pocket. Yet the Royal Mail carriage also came in R3956, and has chains. R30346 Locomotion is specified to come with chains. Yet Carl, Hornby Head of Development, said during the Q&A video that it would "work with Accurascale" chaldrons. While I have made such an adaptor, it would seem that this locomotive should have a NEM pocket. But chains is specified on the webpage. Hopefully, this makes it into the hands of the Hornby Webmaster for correction. Bee