A couple of weeks ago I was engaged in some fascinating online discussions about TPO vehicles in the blue/grey era. Nigel Emery (one of many D&E modellers haemorrhaged to the greener grasses of Europe in recent years, as quality UK products failed to appear) was building a model and wasn't convinced by some of the accepted wisdom on liveries. Pretty soon a whole host of folk were chirruping away over the chat channels and it quickly became apparent that I'm not the only one who remembers blue solebars as opposed to the black or brown normally mentioned in texts.
Memory is a slippery customer, I'll grant you that, and I wouldn't want to quote chapter and verse on such a complex subject as liveries. But at least some of these vehicles did have blue solebars, as peering at the original hi-res scan from which the above photo comes was able to demonstrate.
What we found more quickly, unfortunately, was the sad fact that most of us hadn't really bothered to photograph these everyday (or everynight) vehicles when they were commonplace. I can't even muster half a dozen from amongst tens of thousands of loco shots. Now I know money was tighter for me back then and I couldn't afford to burn film in the same way that I now do electrons, but boy, do I wish I'd had the gumption to walk the length of these trains recording the individual vehicles. I'm sure a little less money spent on B-E-E-R would easily have covered the costs.
Of course, I've no shortage of photographs like this one. Mail trains became briefly fashionable amongst enthusiasts in recent times, as corporate shenanigans, avarice and greed sought to decant services onto the nation's roads. I joined the panicking hordes on platforms up and down the country, frantically snapping away at something that we'd largely ignored for decades, as history did what history does best. I know yesterday starts today, not tomorrow, but I still didn't get off my lazy *rse and photograph it until it was too late. Guilty as charged, m'lud.
Don't be a last week of service droid...
(Link for this specific entry...)
Having had my hands on a few friend's Choppers, as it were, I wasn't in any rush to acquire any of Bachmann's recent Class 20s, but the fleet has started to grow somewhat earlier than expected - largely due to the unavailability of certain other items I'd planned to buy first. The Class 20 is a loco that I'll probably end up with quite a few of ultimately, if only because a couple of dozen Lamer items could be replaced, liberating a lifetime's supply of Ultrascales, Mashimas and sprung buffers. Don't get the idea that I'm in any way impressed with this loco, I'm not, but the typical amalgam of Bachmann compromises, sloppiness and shodiness does at least manage to be somewhat less obtrusive to my eyes than in most of their previous releases. Where their abysmal Deltic looks like a cartoon charicature no matter how I look at it, the 20s do seem to look commendably 20-like from 'normal viewing distances'. SFX: sound of coins rattling in the RM swear-box.
Some of my boiler-bunny associates, being used to better things and wanting some green diesels to sit alongside their kettles, have already taken to hacking the Bachmann model around in an effort to minimise some of it's errors. Me? I'm a UK D&E modeller and thus a card-carrying second-class citizen - I can't afford to be too fussy. Whilst recognising the failings of this release and lamenting, once again, it's minimal quality compared to the products the rest of the world enjoys, practicality is the order of the day. I'll never have the time to rebuild fleet quantities of these things - it's a matter of take it or leave it. Fortunately this is something I can live with, if not actually get excited about...
...although I am looking forward to modelling my good friend 20075 for the third time!
Here it is, the leading contender for the Worst-Thing-To-Ever-Appear-On-A-Toy-Train award. I've never understood the fascination with sticking questionable oddments to a perfectly good model and claiming it's super detailed. What about accurately detailed? Doesn't that count for anything? Whilst real locos do indeed have bl**dy great holes in the roof under which twirly-whirly things lurk, they look absolutely nothing like this. A pair of old fishnets and some cheap plastic more normally used to produce Christmas cracker novelties aren't the best ingredients for a feature that demands a delicate touch, especially when the resultant mess is as poorly fitting as this. You could build several starter homes in that gap.
After decades of pancake motors, it's pleasing to know that entry-level products, especially at this low price, now have drive systems that are fit for purpose, but what about the rest of the market? Collectors will collect pretty much anything - that's a given. The detailers will, presumably, be just as happy detailing this as they were the outgoing Lamer offering. But if you've got US/European modelling mates who regularly take the p*ss out of your cheesey UK stock, is something like this going to take the wind out of their sails? Is something like this going to grow the market, attract the more demanding buyers, or help stop the constant haemorrhaging of more discerning modellers to overseas prototypes? Nope.
Whatever happened to that revolution in UK RTR diesels that somebody mentioned?
(Link for this specific entry...)
It's human nature to gather together in groups that you share interests with and feel comfortable within - this works for hobbies just as much as it does for bigger issues such as politics or religion. No suprise, then, that when leisure time permits, I'll be chewing the fat with people who have similar model railway aims and aspirations as myself. People who are aware of what the prototype looks like and want to either buy or make models that are closer to this, the hallowed real thing.
This works very well as you can have grown-up discussions about how to tackle issues with model X without having to stop every 2 minutes when a collector starts to squeal like a stuck pig or some numpty tries to tell you that it's only your opinion that the prototype looks like it does. I get a lot of constructive ideas and advice this way, from people who're actually tackling the same modelling tasks as myself, but are better at it than I'll ever be. As far as I'm concerned, with the internet as part of the process this is information sharing at it's best, however much some of the magazines might resent it. The downside is that it can be something of a culture shock when you stray back into the more diverse range of interests that constitute the real world.
Now I don't have any particular beef about Bachmann's recent Class 20. It doesn't make me fear for the future of the hobby as their 37 or Deltic did, I just don't have the urge to buy any. It's not a completely awful model, but neither is it a particularly good one. It's just cheap'n'cheerful - something that I'm sure the collector and train set markets can benefit hugely from, but not something I've any great use for myself. It's not that I won't buy any at some point in the future, just that there are a lot better things to spend my cash on right now. The likes of Bratchell, DC Kits, Parkside, etc, are putting far more effort into their products and are thus more worthy of my support. It's my money and I spend it how I want - seems entirely reasonable to me. I've always done things this way. Gather information, make choices, spend the cash - job done, as they say.
Pretty scary, then, to come across the ritual disembowling of someone yesterday, just for having the temerity to enquire about the different relative heights of the Bachmann and Lima offerings. All the normal craziness ensued, I won't bore you with the details, but suffice to say comparisons with the Lima model rather than the real thing were the order of the day. The collectors want their new toy fix and woe betide anyone who doesn't share this craving. There's nothing wrong with the first half of that sentence, of course, but there's something deeply disturbing about the latter part. I never have been a great fan of religious fervour and intolerance, so I'd hoped the tribalism of the Lima collector would die out with the demise of that company. Unfortunately the Bachmann Apologists are the new cult in town and are already rehearsing those long sentences that claim models are 'excellent' whilst including at least a dozen excuses.
Not people I want to have sects with...
Currently On My Stereo: Rush - Hemispheres.
(Link for this specific entry...)
The May issue of "Model Rail" magazine is worthy of the D&E modeller's consideration, including, as it does, a fair spread of material on the wonderful Woodhead line. A popular prototype amongst enthusiasts, but not the easiest to model given that it's 'signature' loco isn't available in ready-to-run form. There are a couple of kits available (I was disappointed to find the most recent etched-brass offering had a roof profile that didn't resemble the real thing) but given the quantity of these normally paired machines needed for even a basic Woodhead layout, there's little chance of my ambitions becoming reality any time soon. I have a selection of photos of the real things available online, though, which helps during dreamtime.
The latest "Model Rail" is also noteworthy for a much more thorough review of the latest Bachmann Class 20 than their editorial policy would normally seem to permit - I do hope this is the shape of things to come. For those wondering why the Class 20 hasn't featured in my gibberings here, it's purely down to the fact that I've not been persuaded to buy any - even though it's probably fair to say it's not as bad as their previous releases. 'Hey! Here's something a little less dreadful than our previous efforts! Give us your money!' isn't a marketing ploy that's going to get anyone into my wallet these days, I'm afraid.
Interesting to note in "Model Rail" that Bachmann are claiming their Class 20 is supposed to match the English Electric drawings rather than the real loco. Sheesh! Do these people not think to check their data first? Do they honestly think that the real locos match drawings, or is this just some more spin? I don't know about you, but I can't remember the last time I walked into a shop and asked for a model of some English Electric drawings...
Currently On My Stereo: Arena - Contagion.
(Link for this specific entry...)
The much 'Respected' Class 47 Gallery has had one if it's infrequent updates, including over 100 new photos. As always, thanks are due to the many individuals who take the trouble to contribute the photographs, especially those who's work has languished on one of my dead PCs for many months, pending the installation of a new motherboard. All is now up to date.
Nothing much to report on the modelling front, although Athearn's recent CF7s are proving tempting - as are Kato's AC4400CW beasts!
Currently On My Stereo: Rush - In Rio.
(Link for this specific entry...)
Having been invited to join an operating session for a few hours yesterday, on a friend-of-a-friend's US N gauge layout, I came away suitably impressed. The quality and performance of most of his kit was first rate, easily putting most 4mm D&E offerings to shame, and I wasn't the only one to notice. The inevitable discussion/rant ensued, concerning the generally poor state of affairs over here, and some interesting insights into how people were dealing with the various deficiencies emerged. Errors in models are matters of fact and tend to be documented rather quickly these days, but whether they bother an individual is obviously down to opinion. Personally I find I need to live with a faulty model for a while before I really know if I can put up it, so perhaps now is a good time to sum up living with last year's lumps:
The infamous Bachmann Deltic (first featured here) hasn't got any better with the passage of time. The grossly distorted nose and the high windows look worse everytime I see it - teetering on those awful bogies it reminds me too much of the ancient Lima N gauge model rather than a Deltic. Personally I'd rate this model as the worst Bachmann have produced to date, as not only does it have virtually insurmountable errors in the general body shape (like their Class 37) it adds the tinplate concept of printed on detail and misses out lighting entirely. But whether it's poorer than the 37 or not in the individual's eyes is somewhat acedemic for me - it's so far beneath what I'd consider to be the minimum standard for a model that I just can't live with it.
On the other hand, Bachmann's Class 44 (first featured here) is one that I've found I can live with. I'm not attempting to excuse the faults (such shodiness in this day and age just isn't on) but it doesn't seem to destroy the illusion for me in the same way that the Deltic does. This might be because my layout is mainly viewed along the tracks and thus the squashed-up nose blends into the squashed-up perspective effect, I don't know, but I can get by with a handful of these lacklustre offerings.
Similarly, Bachmann's 25/1 (first featured here) is another I can live with. This has always perplexed me, as the face of the loco is so very wrong that I would have expected to hate it with a vengeance, but I've got about 2 dozen Type 2s now and run them quite happily. This is exactly why I object to reviewers who try to give me their opinions rather than the facts - how an individual reacts to a model is obviously going to vary, so one man's rushed opinion in a review is going to be of little value at best, and no value at all when the basic facts aren't there. If I don't know exactly why I can live with something, how is a reviewer going to?
Finally on the Bachmann front we have the Super Voyager (first featured here) which is, as is often remarked, several orders of magnitude better than the same manufacturer's diesel locos. I've bought a good few Voyagers and Super Voyagers now, despite not needing them for any layout, which surely demonstrates that a better quality product will generally shift more units. They're not perfect (indeed I had a few more errors that I hadn't noticed pointed out to me yesterday) but they're sufficiently beyond the comedy-charicature level that living with them just isn't an issue.
Switching to the competition, first up is the Hornby Class 50 (featured here and here) that was one of the first releases to try and significantly raise the stakes for D&E modellers. After my initial rush of enthusiasm for these I've found I just can't put up with them - I utterly loathe those windows! This is no doubt exacerbated by my end-on-view layout, and many people will certainly feel differently, but it illustrates the point nicely. In most areas this is a fine model, but for one or two personal reasons I just can't get on with it - yet I can live with significantly inferior items such as the 44 and the 25. That's my decision and nobody else's - I'll make my own mind up based on the facts.
Next is the Heljan Hymek (see here) which, in terms of prototype fidelity, is unrivalled. That it's been denigrated in some of the monthly comics for not having some of the out-of-scale play features found on the Class 50 says more about their target market than the product, I suspect. There's no question of whether I can live with this quality offering, but unfortunately it's not a prototype I've got any great need for - sod's law, I suppose.
Last of all is the Hornby Class 92 (see here) which, strictly speaking, wasn't a new model at all. I've included it here, however, as it was the first 'useful' Hornby D&E model to feature the 5-pole version of their pancake motor, and I did a fair bit of fiddling to see if I could live with that from a mechanical point of view. In short, the answer was no. Whilst much, much smoother than their 3-pole version, it's underpowered - even when double-motored and fitted with replacement wheels the Class 92 is a poor comparison with any Bachmann loco from a price/performance perspective. I wish Hornby would pull their collective fingers out and stop p*ss*ng around with these little tweaks - there's a completely untapped market out there for D&E models to the standard of their kettles...
Currently On My Stereo: Porcupine Tree - In Absentia.
(Link for this specific entry...)
I sometimes think I should be working in some kind of quality control capacity. I can walk into any shop and unerringly pick up only products that are broken, scratched or past their sell-by dates. At my peak I can even find the one rogue piece of straight timber at my local DIY superstore. I'm a veritable cr*p magnet - surely someone, somewhere would pay me mega-bucks for this? While I'm waiting for the corporate execs with the large sacks of cash to arrive, I can take solace from Nigel Burkin's On My Workbench - it seems I'm not the only person who suffers from shoddy products and FOAD customer service, after all.
If I'm honest I've not actually painted anything significant for a good while (my airbrush gear hasn't seen the light of day since we last moved house in 1998 and I've got a lot of finished models sealed into ice-cream tubs to keep the dust off pending painting) but I can sympathise. This weekend we bought a new vacuum cleaner to replace a wholly unmerchandable product that refused to carry out it's routine, daily function. A lot of thought had obviously gone into design as in "odd-shaped purple bits" as opposed to "fit for purpose" and the product simply didn't work. You'd think that a vacuum that overheated and cut-out in under a minute, even with brand new filters, was "faulty" - but apparently not. It would seem that we've got the "wrong kind of dust." I can't tell you how relieved we were to be told this, as a friend's diagnosis of "bunch of no-good, lying m*******g b******s" had a certain ring of legal costs to it - but then he's a solicitor and was probably just touting for business...
Currently On My Stereo: Arena - Contagium EP.
(Link for this specific entry...)
One of my most rewarding purchases in recent times has been this year's edition of Model Railroader's layout planning special, currently on the shelves of my local WH Smith for the princely sum of £2.95 and very highly recommended. There's much of interest to us Brits between these covers, indeed it's monthly parent has more to offer the UK D&E modeller (as opposed to collector) than all 3 of our home-grown comics rolled into one - which presumably explains it's equal prominence on the shelves over here.
Bear in mind, though, that this is not a book of track-plans (whatever the cover might suggest!) but is about layout planning. Operation and the logistics of building the damned thing are at least as important as doodling the track-plan, and the emphasis is very firmly on layouts as part of a rail system as opposed to the animated diorama approach more prominent in the UK. These layouts are more than convenient backdrops for displaying the odd item of rolling stock. The perverse badge-of-honour-seeking through trying to make a Bachima Class 69 look marginally less dreadful is refreshingly absent - products are assumed to be fit for purpose as supplied and enhancement is not confused with repair. This is about getting on with the job.
There's a common UK belief that "it's alright for them over there" and that "they've all got massive basements for huge layouts" which is completely wide of the mark. Thousands of appartment-dwelling American enthusiasts would certainly disagree with that, and even those who have the space must face the task of filling it. The key factor, obviously, is available modelling time and not available floorspace. Our cousins across the pond have a sporting chance of filling any larger spaces they might find simply because they can devote more time to that part of the project. They don't have to contend with rebuilding defective products before they can get up and running. They've got the right tools for the job and we haven't - that's the bottom line.
What reading this publication really shows, however, is not the differences in the hobby across the Atlantic but the differences in the hobby's magazines. The editorial values are obviously much, much higher, giving a far more professional product. While, superficially, the old "balanced coverage" angle has seen the required inclusion of both N and O in a mainly HO market, it doesn't seem to matter in practical terms - all articles seem to be useful for all scales. There's no filler in there (none of the padding we get, or those dreadful scribblings from someone who wants to be in print but hasn't really got anything to say) just solid content. Every word counts. There seems to be a clear editorial direction and the balance comes from a combination of articles that skillfully cover a wide range of layout design aspects. Make no mistake, this is a very well-planned publication - there's a firm hand on the editorial rudder here.
Refreshingly absent, too, is the dominance of exhibition layouts. Now obviously the continental scale of the US precludes an exhibition scene similar to ours, but I know I'm not alone in finding our constant brown-nosing to the club and exhibition circuit somewhat wearisome. Don't get me wrong, I love going to exhibitions, but they're just one facet of the hobby. With the exception of Model Rail's "Layouts That Never Leave Home" angle, the UK press is pretty much built around exhibition layouts, which unfortunately the majority of us just don't build. The trials and tribulations of fitting a shunting plank into the back of a hatchback are much further removed from my hobby than what the Americans are doing, which is why I rate this Kalmbach publication so highly...
Currently On My Stereo: Jethro Tull - Bursting Out.
(Link for this specific entry...)
Excellent! Just when I'd almost given up hope a brace of packages from DC Kits arrived this morning, one of which was the much anticipated Class 120 DMU. I shall be having a good look at this later, but initial inspection shows all three roof sections to be perfectly straight, which is encouraging.
Newly added to the site are a selection of pages containing photos of various prototypes that I'm regularly asked for. Included is Freightliner's 08585, as modelled by Bachmann, and everybody's favourite brake van - ADS56299 to it's friends.
Currently On My Stereo: Arena - Contagion.
(Link for this specific entry...)
Container modelling seems to be all the rage at the moment, with C-Rail's transfers and paints having given a whole new lease of life to this neglected area. As I've been pestered to death for photos of the real thing lately, I've taken the liberty of adding some new pages here so the pictures can be accessed online.
Excellent examples of model containers can be found online at both Nigel Burkin and Nick Gurney's sites. There's also a very good article on container weathering techniques in the latest issue of "Model Railway Journal" and Nigel's column in "British Railway Modelling" offers further coverage - both magazines can be recommended for D&E modellers this month.
Currently On My Stereo: Arena - Contagious EP.
(Link for this specific entry...)
I have a pretty good idea what a Class 40 looks like, as a result of a complicated technical procedure that we self-appointed experts on the internet like to refer to as "having seen one". I will thus be approaching the forthcoming Bachmann release with the preconceived idea (rogue that I am) that the model should look like the real thing. Perhaps one of the most distinctive features of this type 4 is the trademark English Electric profile of the roof which gives the impression of being almost a semi-circle, although obviously it's not. A profile that the sibling Class 37 modelled by the same manufacturer so spectacularly failed to replicate. Note also the distinctive shape of the nose and the way that the loco hunkers down low on it's bogies - both key areas where careless errors by manufacturers will stand out like the proverbial sore thumb.
I'm just scratching the surface here, but suffice to say the human brain can recognise shapes and movement (even in the periphery of your vision) almost instantly without you even having to consciously make the effort. This is why a poorly-drawn sketch of your partner, for example, just won't look right, even though you might not be able to quantify exactly what's wrong and quote detailed measurements. If something doesn't look right then that's almost certainly because it isn't right. If a model looks wrong and a reviewer is telling you it matches his published drawing, then (assuming there's no hidden agenda) it simply means that the drawing is wrong. On occasions when the spin-o-matic is cranked all the way up to 11, of course, the related and rather fanciful claim that a model matches all known drawings means, presumably, that it's made out of f*ck*ng elastic...
Actually, the real reason for my use of this wonderful shot of Lichfield Trent Valley station being rebuilt in the early 60s is that a fair proportion of this site has been rebuilt in the last 24 hours. One consequence is that this OMWB page has moved - so if you've bookmarked it in the past you'll need to update things. The other obvious change is the addition of specific links to items on pages such as this, enabling you to go directly to individual entries.
Currently On My Stereo: Various Artists - Tales From Yesterday.
(Link for this specific entry...)
It's been apparent for many, many, months now that a goodly number of the scribes in our monthly comics are extremely unhappy about the advent of this inter-webby thingy. Hardly suprising, I suppose, as everyday electronic communication in the home has effectively destroyed the magazines' ability to control the channel. Gone are the days when a magazine could print any old rubbish, secure in the knowledge that the only redress the enthusiast had was a heavily censored letters page, two months after the event. These days the internet is a prime source of information for many of us, and if a magazine has published something that is woefully inaccurate then better informed comment will appear online before the majority of a magazine's readership have even got their hands on a copy of the offending item.
The depth of loathing for anything that gives an independant voice to consumers-at-large is well illustrated by Chris Leigh's editorial in this month's "Model Rail" magazine. A major rant that seems to have little direction other than to say "only that which we write should matter," the piece in question is peppered with inaccuracies and logical pratfalls that are, at best, ill-considered if you're scared of what those nasty people on the internet might say. Some of the wilder bits include:
Of course, it doesn't take much reading between the lines to see that Model Rail isn't just uneasy with the internet, but with some of their colleagues in the publishing business too - many of whom, coincidentally, seem to have embraced the internet rather more eagerly. Flick to page 121 and you'll find some barbed comments about their competitors, which I'm concerned might be "read and taken on board by the unsuspecting, thus giving credence to personal opinion and, sometimes, outright bias as being 'gospel'". So, in the interest of avoiding this unpleasant state of affairs, which obviously troubles Chris and I equally, I think I should point out that:
Comparisons with the competition are interesting. Have a look at Tim Shackleton's coverage of the Heljan Hymek on page 76 of the latest issue (#149) of Model Railway Journal and compare it with Model Rail's equivalent in their February edition. The MRJ article (note the opening lines in particular) displays an awareness of the prototype and an appreciation of it's translation into a model that just isn't there in the Model Rail review. You might also like to look at the review in the December 2003 issue of Rail Express and Nigel Burkin's comments on page 70 of the latest (April) BRM. All of these rate the Hymek very highly, as do I, and seem at odds with the rather uninspired Model Rail article which tends to play it down without actually giving a clear idea of why. The "lukewarm reception" alluded to in the header has no basis in fact as far as I can tell, and the "various errors" claimed seem to be unsubstantiated apart from minor details and a complete falsehood about wrongly fitted windscreen wipers. To suggest that the finely moulded roof grille is in anyway inferior to the coarse and crude toy features found elsewhere is absurd, and I personally felt that the deployment of the word "unsaleable" was suspiciously underhand.
In fairness I should point out that a review in the March 2004 BRM was equally sloppy, but as the same reviewer compares it unfavourably with the Deltic he glowingly and inaccurately reviewed in the previous issue, with, in his own words, an "obvious lack of really thorough research" I think that can be discounted. Indeed, if it wasn't for the BRM's new mega-excellent-double-superlative-squared style of reviews (and why, exactly, wasn't Nigel Burkin or someone else who actually knows their job reviewing the Hymek in the first place?) Model Rail would have been out of step with not just the internet's self-appointed experts (or customers as we're still known in some parts) but all of their industry colleagues as well. A far cry from the picture of one or two "sideline commentators" that Chris Leigh's editorial trys to paint.
Model Rail has an unenviable reputation amongst many modellers for poorly researched, inconsistent and contradictory reviews in a field already not noted for excellence. Take a look for yourself - the February 2003 issue features an absolutely glowing review of the Bachmann Class 37, with no criticisms whatsoever as far as I can tell. It even singles out the "correct body profile" for praise (it's most glaringly error!) yet this is unquestionably one of the least accurate models of our time, a fact that even the most reluctant sources will now begrudgingly recognise. However, by the October 2003 issue they were desperately trying to rewrite history, claiming they'd been "quite disappointed" with the model and the "problems with aspects of the body" - get these issues out and have a look for yourself, it's incredible. Not only was this deception rounded upon by many private individuals, it was singled out for direct criticism online by Phil Sutton, editor of rival magazine Rail Express, who'd had the decency to carry a proper review at the time that seemed to pretty much capture the feelings of many consumers. Rail Express, as well as lending their expertise to Heljan when it comes to bringing better products such as the Hymek to these shores, is also stepping up it's modern modelling content and nailing it's colours to the mast as regards greater integrity in product reviews compared to some of the mainstream magazines.
The problem this gives Model Rail (or indeed any magazine) is that if they continue to gloss over the faults of the majority of products whilst printing decidedly more critical reviews of that rare minority of more accurate releases (such as the Heljan Hymek) then more and more people are going to notice. If the disproportionately aggressive reviews with questionable factual content seem to concern products with a link to a competitor, or people who've been critical of Model Rail, eyebrows are going to be raised and there will be mutterings. Mutterings that probably won't include the words "independent" or "unbiased" no matter how many times they're repeated in editorials. Fortunately this won't happen while Model Rail has the "benefit of an editor to hold their wilder excesses in check"...
Currently On My Stereo: T. Rex - Bolan Boogie.
(Link for this specific entry...)
The news that Hornby is trying to buy parts of the moribund empire to which Lamer belongs has, predictably, already provoked speculation, much of it fueled by fantasy. There never was much of value to the serious UK modeller in the Lamer range, and this has been diminished still further in recent years by releases from Hornby and Bachmann - to imagine that a host of upgraded Lamer items would flood onto the market by a week next Wednesday is delusional in the extreme.
Lamer Myth #1 is that there's a goldmine of useful products in the range that the modeller is currently being denied. Leaving aside the fact that most of it is readily available second-hand, this simply isn't true. Off the top of my head there's the Class 60, Class 73, Class 101, Class 156, a couple of coaches and the odd wagon. I might have missed one, but generally the products are either unspeakably awful (Class 37, Class 66,) already part of somebody else's catalogue (Class 20, Class 40, Class 47, etc,) or in some cases both. The Bachmann Class 37 might be a very poor model, but at least it's a very poor model with a vaguely useful chassis.
Lamer Myth #2 is that the products were a good, cheap option for beginners. That's utter rubbish as they were famously over-priced and under-specified, indeed the ability of the likes of Bachmann to produce substantially better products for less money shouldn't be overlooked in the context of Lamer's financial troubles. Even if you assume that a manufacturer such as Hornby would switch production to the far east, you'd have to expect that the resultant prices would be similar to comparable products in their existing range. So whilst Hornby's Hymek and Class 47 do indeed come in a fair bit cheaper than the atypical Danish equivalent, the bulk of the product line is head-to-head with the comparably priced Bachmann range. So you'd be looking at a significantly inferior product for the same money.
Lamer Myth #3 is that a new owner would suddenly release nice, upgraded versions of the products. Yeah, right! Hornby already has a vast array of bought-in products from the Airfix/Mainline/Dapol product lines and has had them for years. It has done absolutely nothing to enhance any of these beyond minor tweeks, so why should this suddenly change if the Lamer tooling was acquired? Bizzare! Similarly, when Hornby has already shown marked reluctance to expand it's Mark 3 coach range, why should it suddenly want to release a Lamer TGS when it doesn't match it's existing vehicles at all?
No, for my money the obsolete Lamer range is best left to rot. If you want cheap'n'cheerful and aren't too fussed about accuracy then Bachmann have already got it covered rather more adequately, and even with their somewhat optimistic approach to release dates they churn out new models faster than Lamer ever did. All it needs is for Hornby to produce a Mark 3 TGS and sleeper, Bachmann to produce a Sealion or Seacow and the most significant problem areas are covered. Some folk will bemoan the lack of a Class 60 (and I can't believe one of the players won't produce one of these before long) along with the 156, but these have already been produced in quantity. Why didn't people buy them when they were available? I did - on the basis that I don't expect a manufacturer to build a business plan around me if I'm all mouth and no wallet.
Of course, the smart money seems to be on Hornby's interest being in the overseas ranges rather than the lowly UK product line. While this seems entirely sensible financially, it's still not good news for the struggling UK D&E modeller. No matter what the Hornby spin-machine might say, this represents a substantial amount of time, effort and money going elsewhere, as with the recent live-steam range. Hornby does not give the impression of being very D&E friendly at all. How about a high quality first generation DMU release? One that's not too limited geographically as the 110 was and is a little more kit-bashable than the 101. These would be equally at home on steam and diesel layouts and a high-density variant such as the Class 116 above would be especially welcome, with the DC Kits range including nothing of that ilk. I'd favour a 116 personally, not just because it's an ideal Midlands unit, but because it's easier for the modeller to fit a larger headcode box to it if taking the 117 route than it is to remove one and get a nice rounded end. Don't even think about mentioning the aged Lamer offering - it's not remotely DMU shaped. If you haven't noticed it's 'individuality' then keep visiting here until you can see it!
Currently On My Stereo: Martin Barre - Stage Left.
(Link for this specific entry...)
Class 304 EMU by DC Kits. Precision "I can do this blindfolded" roof-cutting by me. B*gg*r! Where's the plastikard?
(Link for this specific entry...)
<<< Older OMWB entries | Newer OMWB entries >>>