Guest Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 35028 Clan Line, the only one to get a late crest (which beautifully matched the shape of the nameplate), would be another. Stumbled across this: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_cciDhgEMpUM/TSkHyCE7KGI/AAAAAAAAAu4/PJCKTxlZbv8/s1600/coaling_plant.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium newbryford Posted February 28, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 28, 2015 I reckon they're about the produce the Fell diesel-mechanical and are trying to put us off the scent by showing a MN chassis. Maybe not too far off the mark - there were similarities between the two. Both were capable of catching fire............. Cheers, Mick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium melmerby Posted February 28, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 28, 2015 (edited) There have been quite a few comments around in this post about which coaches are suitable for going behind an early MN. Bulleid's ?(bit too early in 1941), or Maunsell's ? Plenty of Pullmans have come from Hornby in the last few years. (More on the way) Aren't they typical? There were several Pullman trains with MNs on the front. Keith EDIT Mind you this is wartime. No Pullman service until the end of hostilities? What state would the MNs be at the resumption? Edited February 28, 2015 by melmerby Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Oldddudders Posted February 28, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 28, 2015 Stumbled across this: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_cciDhgEMpUM/TSkHyCE7KGI/AAAAAAAAAu4/PJCKTxlZbv8/s1600/coaling_plant.jpg Stew Lane. That's the South London Line, between Battersea Park and Wandsworth Road, on the viaduct. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium melmerby Posted February 28, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 28, 2015 I believe there were plans to restore one of the preserved Rebuilt Merchant Navy's to an Un-rebuilt condition, but it was dropped due to a lack of interest. Network Rail would probably have banned it from the main line due to the propensity of it lubricating the track amongst other things! Keith 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandwich station Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 Has Bachmann ever mentioned doing a MN in 00? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozexpatriate Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 Has Bachmann ever mentioned doing a MN in 00? Not specifically. We'll see what happens on Monday. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold ruggedpeak Posted February 28, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 28, 2015 Has Bachmann ever mentioned doing a MN in 00? No. Got 8 pages out of it so far though, with references to cigarettes, North Korea and the Godfather! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmcg Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 (edited) I am very pleased that Hornby plan for 2016 a first series MN 21C1-10 with various bodywork choices, also, presumably 21C11-30, all of which I think will sell very well because Hornby are so good at making such models, and recent new models like the K1 show they are back at or near their best. I and many others buy some models because they are beautiful and evocative things, we do not all have or need layouts, we might have or plan dioramas, or just enjoy owning superb models. As to timing, it is perfectly reasonable, and maybe Bachmann have plans, maybe not. Equally the Hornby King class for later this year will be very nice, as might a DJM version. It's all good, says I. Thank you Muz for your link and explanation of Hornby's plans. Rob Edited February 28, 2015 by robmcg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozexpatriate Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 (edited) Now I am worried, can the expected release be regarded as an original 'spam can' or a modified 'spam can' (quickly looking at an unopened can of spam for guidance)? This question has been answered - in the CADs and in the Grahammuz blog here. Edited February 28, 2015 by Ozexpatriate Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted February 28, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 28, 2015 Now I am worried, can the expected release be regarded as an original 'spam can' or a modified 'spam can' (quickly looking at an unopened can of spam for guidance)? Just carry on making the fritters Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozexpatriate Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 (edited) Just carry on making the fritters With rice and macaroni salad it becomes a "Hawaiian plate". Spam is very popular in Hawai'i - but not to the Haole. Edited February 28, 2015 by Ozexpatriate Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted February 28, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 28, 2015 I really doubt Bachmann do more than basic research before announcing models, and I cite the Stanier 2-6-0 as evidence of this. I appreciate Bachmann probably have already CADs from developing there n gauge version but the reality is that unless they accelerate development Hornby must steel a march here if their model appears in 2016. There is a big assumption that Bachmann are doing an unrebuilt MN . But if they are, and even if the catalogues are already printed, I'd pull the plug and go and do something else instead. In the past I'd say the Bachmann one might be less expensive but their last price increases probably mean they lost this advantage However best to wait until Monday. It maybe that Hornby have just announced the MN to steel some publicity from Bachmann ahead of their announcement on Monday which may or may not include an MN. It's not usual Bachmann territory The N Gauge Farish models 35011 to 30. If Bachmann do announce one,I would think it will follow suit in OO Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted February 28, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 28, 2015 untitled.pngAnd in blue! What a wonderful marketing ploy for Barwell ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted February 28, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 28, 2015 Having handled an engineering sample of an N gauge Farish MN last year,I was mightily impressed.Thus if Bachmann do decide to run with it in OO I am optimistic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold farren Posted February 28, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 28, 2015 Thats a small tin of spam. I thought we were on about MN not WC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted February 28, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 28, 2015 I am very pleased that Hornby plan for 2016 a first series MN 21C1-10 with various bodywork choices, also, presumably 21C11-30, all of which I think will sell very well because Hornby are so good at making such models, and recent new models like the K1 show they are back at or near their best. I and many others buy some models because they are beautiful and evocative things, we do not all have or need layouts, we might have or plan dioramas, or just enjoy owning superb models. As to timing, it is perfectly reasonable, and maybe Bachmann have plans, maybe not. Equally the Hornby King class for later this year will be very nice, as might a DJM version. It's all good, says I. Thank you Muz for your link and explanation of Hornby's plans. Rob Glad you drew attention to Graham's part in this.It is something that should not be overlooked and we are all of us in his debt for it.His is surely a safe pair of hands and all must feel reassured. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold RFS Posted February 28, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 28, 2015 The original MN looks superb with the right set of coaches, eg - http://railphotoprints.zenfolio.com/p762907361/h4e95124#h4e95124 But perhaps not these! - http://railphotoprints.zenfolio.com/p762907361/h2b545cb9#h2b545cb9 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forester Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 The original MN looks superb with the right set of coaches, eg - http://railphotoprints.zenfolio.com/p762907361/h4e95124#h4e95124 But perhaps not these! - http://railphotoprints.zenfolio.com/p762907361/h2b545cb9#h2b545cb9 The decision to cut down the tender of Channel Packet ranks with the rebuilding of Great Northern in the vandalism charts in my view. Stewarts Lane obviously thought so too as they rarely let it out in daylight. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 No. Got 8 pages out of it so far though, with references to cigarettes, North Korea and the Godfather! An offer that many people clearly can't refuse. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmcg Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 Here are three pics of mine, edited of course, showing original MNs 21C9 and 35021. https://www.facebook.com/brsteamphotos/photos/pcb.431192190379785/431191700379834/?type=1&theater Cheers, Rob 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Hroth Posted February 28, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 28, 2015 I wonder if everyone's got the wrong end of the stick re: Bachmann, after all there's a pretty strong clue in the 2015 Bachmann calendar of a Bulleid no one has yet made, if you take my "lead" I don't see Bachmann doing one of those, but Heljan might if you could convince them - its the right shape - that it contained a diesel engine....... Another thing, I was just thinking - Hornby could get Airfix to make MN body and tender kits, just the superstructure to clip onto the respective chassis, complete with a few pots of humbrol acrylic, a little brush, some transfers and a tube of glue. You could then have whatever combination of body shape, tender and livery you desired. What could possibly go wrong? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold farren Posted February 28, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 28, 2015 (edited) Here are three pics of mine, edited of course, showing original MNs 21C9 and 35021. I wouldn't mind a war time black one very nice https://www.facebook.com/brsteamphotos/photos/pcb.431192190379785/431191700379834/?type=1&theater Cheers, Rob Edited February 28, 2015 by farren Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 .....Hornby could get Airfix to make MN body and tender kits, just the superstructure to clip onto the respective chassis, complete with a few pots of humbrol acrylic, a little brush, some transfers and a tube of glue. You could then have whatever combination of body shape, tender and livery you desired. What could possibly go wrong? That's never going to happen, for a start. More chance of North Korea becoming a multi-party democracy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ceptic Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 (edited) This post might help answer that question: Hmmmmmm...... Hopefully ?.... ..... .....Hornby's model of the rebuilt MN, back in 1999 was, by all accounts, partly based on the observations / measurements / records / recommendations of a well respected modeller of his day, one Albert Goodall.* However, when marketed, the loco appeared, to me, to be of an inaccurate portrayal of the prototype, and missing out many of those, accurate, observations made by Albert G. * P.S. Edit No disrespect intended Muz and Oz. All the best. Edited February 28, 2015 by Ceptic Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now