A3 Book Law

[manna]

G'day Gents

I have been watching your comments about this loco, and haven't commented as I don't intend to buy one of these loco's, (I've got more than enough) but I'm wondering why there has been such a B**** up with this loco, it's not as if Hornby has never made a Gresley Pacific before (did they sub contract before !!) or is it a new factory (nobody's mentioned which factory, built it ) or it maybe, new workers, I know there is a regular turnover of staff, such a pity, they've mucked it up.

manna

[mick b]

Hi Everyone

I can now join in the discussion on Book Law. Mine arrived here in South Australia yesterday from Rails.

Firstly let me say how much I have been looking forward to an LNER green A3 to run with my 3 A1s. I suggested that Hornby produce Book Law way back in about 2006 soon after the arrival of the A1s.

Now for comments on what has arrived! I opened the box with some trepidation having read all the comments on this thread. The first thing was the reversing level fell out of the box. Secondly I noticed the loco body was not correctly located at the rear as the cab end was floating free from the chassis, also the tender was floating free at its front end with the front lug not located in the slot in the chassis.

Then the rocking grate lever fell off - that was good as it needs to be placed on the RHS!

Examination of the loco body revealed, as reported previously by others, that the footplate is bent up at the front and also poorly assembled out of alignment at the firebox/cab end. The tender front plate was leaning forward and loose at the top and the left hand side of the tender was not glued to the front plate in any fashion.

I removed the loco body and found the clear plastic washer that is located in the slot for the front screw - not sure yet whether this is part of the cause of the issues at the front end or not. I placed the chassis and the tender on the track and tested it - it ran fine so the most critical aspect appears to be ok!

I have to state I have never received a model that has been so appalling assembled! Should I send it back? Why what guarantee is there that I will get anything better?

So over the next few days I'll seek to rectify the issues - the gluing of the smokebox/boiler/firebox and cab is poor and hopefully will separate relatively easily so I can refit the units together correctly. I had contemplated fitting a Flying Fox cab to it so I could easily have the shorter cuts in the cab but have turned the spare Flying Fox I had into Tracery with a streamlined non-corridor tender - maybe I'll add some plastic and reduce the cutouts?




As reported by others, I note that the number on the cab and tender lettering do not line up - something I took up with Simon Kohler by email nearly 12 months ago after studying the image on the Hornby website. I will probably remove the number on the cab and place it slightly higher to reduce the difference in height.

Something no one seems to have commented on is that not only are the washout plugs black but also the splasher tops (like the Bachmann/Locomotion C1) - why? surely this required a separate painting operation and it has been correctly green on all previous incarnations of the LNER green A1 and Flying Scotsman?

I have great difficulty understanding why we get a model like this when, apart from the handrail issue, the J15 was such a delightful model!

Woodcock29

At around £150 plus postage I wouldn't touch it , simply return for a refund.

Hornby should not have put them on the market in such a deplorable condition. Unless people return them they will not bother in the future to produce decent products. This is becoming a long line of models with defects e.g K1 bent footplate, J15 & SR 700 class incorrect handrails on both and prominent casting marks on the 700 smokebox. Most of the problems are poor assembly and finishing. Hornby either cant find better factories, or they are willing to take anything to keep the money rolling in ?.
I have no idea why people, because its a Model train put up with such quality. Anything else would go back the same day !! if they were cheap then make them better, but not at these prices !.

[Cullercoats]

All the thread comments on the poor quality and fidelity of Book Law have persuaded me, despite being quite happy previously, to take a lump hammer to it.
I apologise for lacking critical judgement in the past and will be sure to find some reason to dislike all toy train products in future.

[S.A.C. Martin]

All the thread comments on the poor quality and fidelity of Book Law have persuaded me, despite being quite happy previously, to take a lump hammer to it.
I apologise for lacking critical judgement in the past and will be sure to find some reason to dislike all toy train products in future.

There is nothing wrong with being informed consumers and I am sure there will be very many people perfectly happy with their purchase.

I however and others like me are discerning and it's also a case of time/effort for modelling if the intention was for Book Law to be used to model other class members.

The constant and wearying "you're not allowed to be negative, it's all toy trains" attitude prevalent in the hobby must stop. You do not see this sort of almost anti-consumerism in other hobbies who are far more discerning than us, so why is it such a problem now?

Actually, I know the answer to this one but I must hold my tongue for fear of being polite with intent once more...

[Cullercoats]

You seem to assume my comment was a criticism of your stance, it was not.
I do not a agree with your views which you seem to hold very strongly, you are entitled to them as I, and I suggest the bulk of the hobby, are equally entitled to a different viewpoint.
You are to be commended in your quest for a very high standard in toy manufacture, the quality you seek is actually available from such companies as Golden Age Models but at a commensurate price.
This is my final comment on the matter, I hope it was polite enough.

[Seagull]

...or is it a new factory (nobody's mentioned which factory, built it ) or it maybe, new workers, I know there is a regular turnover of staff, such a pity, they've mucked it up.

Forgetting the earlier Ramsgate models and the Chinese made tender drive models.

From loco drive [R2338] 4901 Sir Charles Newton/[R2339] 4468 Mallard, through to [R3099] 4472 NRM Flying Scotsman, all seem to have been made by Sandakan.
This is indicated by the code SK, though some of the early [R2339] Mallards have nothing. This may appear on the instruction leaflet in the box, on the outside of the box, or on the outside of the outer picture sleeve that they put on some of the special issue models. The boxed 'train packs' (Flying Fox, Gladiateur & Kingfisher) varied in the same way.

I'm not exactly sure about the changeover as there were two models issued which I don't have details on [R3100] 103 NRM Flying Scotsman in black and [R3103] 60019 Bittern.
The next one I have [R3131] 4462 Great Snipe, came from Refined Models identified by the letters REF. Which you will always find on the outside of the box, or outer sleeve.
From there onwards, they all appear to have been made by Refined. And nearly all the LNER period ones have been the subject of some sort of complaint, either with regard to livery defects or assembly defects. Anyone have similar experience of the BR period models?

Against that the P2 models were all made by Refined and apart from the odd niggle I have seen little in the way of complaints.

Alan

[S.A.C. Martin]

You seem to assume my comment was a criticism of your stance, it was not.
I do not a agree with your views which you seem to hold very strongly, you are entitled to them as I, and I suggest the bulk of the hobby, are equally entitled to a different viewpoint.
You are to be commended in your quest for a very high standard in toy manufacture, the quality you seek is actually available from such companies as Golden Age Models but at a commensurate price.
This is my final comment on the matter, I hope it was polite enough.

And yet still the underlying implication is that my view - and others like it - are in some way being unrealistic.

Polite? Perhaps if I were to ignore the sarcasm, but you are misinformed and certainly missing the point.

[mick b]

You seem to assume my comment was a criticism of your stance, it was not.
I do not a agree with your views which you seem to hold very strongly, you are entitled to them as I, and I suggest the bulk of the hobby, are equally entitled to a different viewpoint.
You are to be commended in your quest for a very high standard in toy manufacture, the quality you seek is actually available from such companies as Golden Age Models but at a commensurate price.
This is my final comment on the matter, I hope it was polite enough.

Sadly you not correct, just look at Hornby's earlier efforts , the superdetail models over thee last ten years or so e.g Gladiateur, Flying Fox , Mallard etc none have the problems blighting Book Law and other recent releases.
Golden Age in general might look good, as to running that is another matter as is the price .

p.s.

Its a Forum no need for sarcasm etc by anybody ,everybody is entitled to their viewpoint . We don't need to go the way of other Forums thanks.

[Atlantic 3279]

Maybe some general stepping back and cooling off would be in order? Most of us on here are regulars who know what to expect of one another, but it's still all too easy to fall out.

[52D]

Maybe some general stepping back and cooling off would be in order? Most of us on here are regulars who know what to expect of one another, but it's still all to easy to fall out.

I echo my fellow moderators comments.

[Hatfield Shed]

Hi Everyone
...I have great difficulty understanding why we get a model like this when, apart from the handrail issue, the J15 was such a delightful model...

I have an opinion - firmly held - gained from lifetime experience, mostly in light high tech manufacturing. Every design and manufacturing shop evolves its own custom and practise. Relocating tooling from operation A to operation B does not result in the same product emerging from operation B as was previously obtained from operation A. It is that simple. It needs a book to explain all the reasons, but significant detailed understanding in how the product is documented and tooled gets 'lost in translation'. When standards have to be maintained across multiple design and manufacturing shops, it requires heavyweight conformance effort. Just not affordable for the low added value scale of manufacturing for model railway product.

One of the interesting features of Hornby's move from Sanda Kan to the half dozen or more smaller outfits they presently use, is spotting the finger prints that indicate where those on the design side of the new outfits likely gained their experience. Very clear on the Hornby K1: that mechanism was designed by someone previously working for Kader/Bachmann.

[mick b]

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/R3132-Hornby- ... 2516.l5255

[davidwest]

Ouch pricey. Weathering never looks great on apple green

[S.A.C. Martin]

Personal opinion but I don't much like that weathering. Shame that Book Law hasn't come out the way we'd like it. When you think of the original 4470 Great Northern release from a few years back, Hornby were in their element there.

[Sea Eagle]

I suspect we won't see another apple green A3 with a single chimney from Hornby until 2018. It should have a diag 94a boiler and a corridor tender, but will of course have green cylinder covers and a superfluous water tender. I doubt Hornby will be able to resist the 50th Anniversary of Alan Pegler's non stop attempt to roll out the second tender again as part of another special edition. That gives them more than two years to sort out the assembly problems with the A3.