Exclusive 'Golden Arrow' Class 71s

[Colin_McLeod]

There is no need to publish pictures of these reject locos. It would have been different had they been released into the market, but they were quite correctly rejected by the supplier and the commissioning model shop. I look forward to getting a correct one in due course.

[No Decorum]

Out of pure curiosity, I’d like to see what is considered unacceptable. However, going by the furore which greets engineering prototypes, Hatton’s and DJM would be wise to keep the pictures to themselves.

[Colin_McLeod]

Curiosity killed the cat.

[Ian Hargrave]

Out of pure curiosity, I’d like to see what is considered unacceptable. However, going by the furore which greets engineering prototypes, Hatton’s and DJM would be wise to keep the pictures to themselves.

And that would open the mother of a can of worms.The images doubtlessly taken will have winged their way in the appropriate direction.

[DJM Dave]

Out of pure curiosity, I’d like to see what is considered unacceptable. However, going by the furore which greets engineering prototypes, Hatton’s and DJM would be wise to keep the pictures to themselves.

Well, whilst I understand the curiosity, I can categorically say that no, no pictures of the problems will be released. But you need to take it on trust that neither Hattons or myself are pleased to have come his far, and have the models fall at the final hurdle so badly.

The problems (plural) were something that could have and should have been picked up at at least a few of the QC checks as construction went on.

 

Why they didn't and what the h.e. double hockey sticks China are going to do about it, should come aparrent over the next few days.

 

Cheers

Dave

[JSpencer]

I fully agree and understand why they are not posting pictures and certainly agree that if DJM and Hattons are not satisfied then that is a very responsible action to their credit to refuse them and not release them onto the general public.

 

We have been advised that they were not up to scratch which means none of our cards have been debited, none of us have received a poor model, none of us are on here with pictures showing how bad they are, none of us are going back to the post office to send it back for change or refund, nor none of us are having to put it right ourselves.

 

For me, the choice of action chosen, from a customer perspective is the right one. Thank you Dave & Dave for what must have been a hard decision, and I wish you all the best to get it resolved with the supplier which we hope will be an easy and painless task. And we look forwards to good tidings.

[Ian Hargrave]

It is now a couple of weeks since the release of the DJM 71 direct via Kernow's distribution.It is widely praised for its finish,detail and slow speed control,all of which I can vouch for myself.However there are issues with its haulage capacity which I also acknowledge.One forum member has posted concern with its inability to adequately haul a prototypical "Golden Arrow" load and has challenged as to whether it is fit for this purpose.It certainly IS slow and sluggish with my test train of baggage van and 7 lit Hornby Pullmans.This on Gaugemaster DC only. Hattons are marketing these models as "Golden Arrow " locos. I'm afraid the obvious issue is will there be similar difficulties with these when they eventually and belatedly reach our shores ? I do not think it unreasonable that proper tests of a prototypical load be carried out before they reach the point of sale.Is there not now a time slot to ensure that this special model actually CAN haul the Arrow in model form ? I do have a genuine concern,sorry.

[JSpencer]

Mechanically, I don,t think Hattons had any issues there. It was primarily body work finish and the application of the arrows.

So I suspect corrective work will be just exchanging the bodies.

 

More grunt - read as extra weight, bigger motor and maybe gear ratio differences - would require re-design work and modified tooling. Which would put up costs and increase delay. So I cannot see that happening.

 

As an aside, Currently there are only 3 GA coaches out there. Hornby may eventually do a U type GA pack to compliment it which would add just another few. The model copes with 6 coaches at 60 or so scale mph. However I agree that, as is, the model will struggle with a full prototype GA trains which very few people will have. On the other hand, there is a choice in this.

 

One of my bug bears is trying to find photos of 71s on GA trains in coach green colour. So far, I have seen only 3 locos:

E5015 (no rain stripes)

E5004 (no rain stripes)

E5010 (with rain stripes)

Yet quite a lot of locos carried brackets for the arrows (I have seen E5022 in coach green, no rain stripes with the brackets at London Bridge for example).

Conversely In blue days, I,ve seen lots of members on this train.

Edited June 3, 2017 by JSpencer

[dibber25]

It is now a couple of weeks since the release of the DJM 71 direct via Kernow's distribution.It is widely praised for its finish,detail and slow speed control,all of which I can vouch for myself.However there are issues with its haulage capacity which I also acknowledge.One forum member has posted concern with its inability to adequately haul a prototypical "Golden Arrow" load and has challenged as to whether it is fit for this purpose.It certainly IS slow and sluggish with my test train of baggage van and 7 lit Hornby Pullmans.This on Gaugemaster DC only. Hattons are marketing these models as "Golden Arrow " locos. I'm afraid the obvious issue is will there be similar difficulties with these when they eventually and belatedly reach our shores ? I do not think it unreasonable that proper tests of a prototypical load be carried out before they reach the point of sale.Is there not now a time slot to ensure that this special model actually CAN haul the Arrow in model form ? I do have a genuine concern,sorry.

I hesitate to enter this debate but I think we should consider what is being asked. The dynamics of haulage do not necessarily reduce proportionally 1:76 or any other scale. Where do we stop? If the loco will haul a scale 'Golden Arrow' (and model coaches don't have the proportional weight and rollabillity of the real thing) why not ask for it to haul a scale 'Night Ferry', the heaviest UK passenger train at times (I understand) loading to 22 vehicles (though probably not in Class 71 days)? Anyway, who has a layout large enough to accommodate a full-length 'Golden Arrow'? 'Fitness for purpose' is a phrase bandied about from Trade Descriptions law but I suspect that in this instance the judgement would be that if it's capable of hauling a typical model train it is fit for purpose - and the Class 71 does that with ease. I can't see how a delay to rectify a faulty finish could possibly be used to increase haulage power (if that were deemed necessary) as to increase adhesion or power would require changes to motor, or gearing, or weight or new wheelsets with traction tyres. 

I've tested the capacity of dozens of locos over the years and we've come from dodgy tender drives, through pancake motors and traction tyres and the Mainline 4MT which could haul only about 3 coaches. I found that the 71 performed perfectly well within the parameters of what I'd expect a model locomotive to do. (My review in the August issue of Model Rail). But I wouldn't expect it to take a sizeable prototype-length train over a miniature Kent Coast main line because there might only be one modeller in 10,000 who has such a layout.(CJL).

[Ian Hargrave]

I hesitate to enter this debate but I think we should consider what is being asked. The dynamics of haulage do not necessarily reduce proportionally 1:76 or any other scale. Where do we stop? If the loco will haul a scale 'Golden Arrow' (and model coaches don't have the proportional weight and rollabillity of the real thing) why not ask for it to haul a scale 'Night Ferry', the heaviest UK passenger train at times (I understand) loading to 22 vehicles (though probably not in Class 71 days)? Anyway, who has a layout large enough to accommodate a full-length 'Golden Arrow'? 'Fitness for purpose' is a phrase bandied about from Trade Descriptions law but I suspect that in this instance the judgement would be that if it's capable of hauling a typical model train it is fit for purpose - and the Class 71 does that with ease. I can't see how a delay to rectify a faulty finish could possibly be used to increase haulage power (if that were deemed necessary) as to increase adhesion or power would require changes to motor, or gearing, or weight or new wheelsets with traction tyres. 

I've tested the capacity of dozens of locos over the years and we've come from dodgy tender drives, through pancake motors and traction tyres and the Mainline 4MT which could haul only about 3 coaches. I found that the 71 performed perfectly well within the parameters of what I'd expect a model locomotive to do. (My review in the August issue of Model Rail). But I wouldn't expect it to take a sizeable prototype-length train over a miniature Kent Coast main line because there might only be one modeller in 10,000 who has such a layout.(CJL).

 

Fair enough...but one member does,not me,I hasten to add.To put matters in perspective,on my DC Gaugemaster,I need to use maximum current to achieve a reasonably acceptable speed.I have just spoken with DC Kits at DEMU.They have a71 on sound demo which seems to run faultlessly .This apparently had needed tweaking to achieve maximum efficiency on DCC and it appears that the design and circuitry favour DCC operation.It was in fact suggested ( make of this what you will ) that I installed a chip at set it to favour DC operation in order to improve performance.I do not believe there is anything inherently wrong with the model...perhaps nothing that a bit of fine tuning with its circuitry could not cure.I am certainly not suggesting either remotoring or adding weight but of one thing I am certain and that is that Hattons should thoroughly test both on DC and DCC before bringing it to market.It is a beautiful model and I for one...having invested in it.....would like to see it achieve its full potential

[woodenhead]

Sadly, all the posts about tweaking this model for operation, re-wiring to get lights working as some want it and other complications have swayed me away from purchasing one, i looked at one at DEMU today, they are exquisite models but I'm put off by the need to tweak the model for operation.

 

Maybe i am looking at this wrong but rtr to me is just that, not install a chip and tune the CVs when i don't have the foggiest idea about DCC.

[dibber25]

Fair enough...but one member does,not me,I hasten to add.To put matters in perspective,on my DC Gaugemaster,I need to use maximum current to achieve a reasonably acceptable speed.I have just spoken with DC Kits at DEMU.They have a71 on sound demo which seems to run faultlessly .This apparently had needed tweaking to achieve maximum efficiency on DCC and it appears that the design and circuitry favour DCC operation.It was in fact suggested ( make of this what you will ) that I installed a chip at set it to favour DC operation in order to improve performance.I do not believe there is anything inherently wrong with the model...perhaps nothing that a bit of fine tuning with its circuitry could not cure.I am certainly not suggesting either remotoring or adding weight but of one thing I am certain and that is that Hattons should thoroughly test both on DC and DCC before bringing it to market.It is a beautiful model and I for one...having invested in it.....would like to see it achieve its full potential

I'm not sure how you fine-tune circuitry but I bet there's a cost involved. 

 

Sadly, all the posts about tweaking this model for operation, re-wiring to get lights working as some want it and other complications have swayed me away from purchasing one, i looked at one at DEMU today, they are exquisite models but I'm put off by the need to tweak the model for operation.

 

Maybe i am looking at this wrong but rtr to me is just that, not install a chip and tune the CVs when i don't have the foggiest idea about DCC.

If you plan to run it at the kind of speeds that are reasonable round model curves and with the length of train that most modellers will see as their maximum (6-7 bogie coaches) I don't believe you'll have any problems. It's only if you have a layout big enough for long scale-length trains, and curves wide enough to take them at a scale 80mph, you might find that you need some extra performance. 

[tetsudofan]

Amongst all this waffle about the DJ Cl.71 not having any oomph thought I would have a play with mine this evening. Started off with five original not that free-running lighted Pullmans which E5004 had no problem taking up the incline round my layout.

 

Gradually added three Northern Belle Pullmans one-by-one making a train of eight coaches which climbed the gradient but I felt that was the safe limit without doing any damage to the loco.

 

 

 

Normally I run trains not exceeding 5 or 6 coaches (due to platform lengths) so I'm happy that my DJ Cl.71 can manage trains of this length up the gradients on my layout. If there were no gradients then I could easily run longer trains..... but there would not be any station platforms long enough to take them.

 

Keith

[stovepipe]

One of my bug bears is trying to find photos of 71s on GA trains in coach green colour. So far, I have seen only 3 locos:

E5015 (no rain stripes)

E5004 (no rain stripes)

E5010 (with rain stripes)

Yet quite a lot of locos carried brackets for the arrows (I have seen E5022 in coach green, no rain stripes with the brackets at London Bridge for example).

Conversely In blue days, I,ve seen lots of members on this train.

 

E5001 here

http://www.nrm.org.uk/OurCollection/LocomotivesAndRollingStock/CollectionItem?objid=1978-7006

 

E5005 here

http://www.rail-online.co.uk/p740193379/hd9d9055#h29d49ff

 

and E5013 here, might be the later green though

http://www.rail-online.co.uk/p740193379/hd9d9055#h47e29b8

Edited June 4, 2017 by stovepipe

[Ian Hargrave]

Sadly, all the posts about tweaking this model for operation, re-wiring to get lights working as some want it and other complications have swayed me away from purchasing one, i looked at one at DEMU today, they are exquisite models but I'm put off by the need to tweak the model for operation.

 

Maybe i am looking at this wrong but rtr to me is just that, not install a chip and tune the CVs when i don't have the foggiest idea about DCC.

I appreciate what you say but my order for this stands.Despite concerns that I have...not "waffle" Keith...it is a beautiful model.I just wish it were more ......and here I'm struggling for a word.....responsive on my analogue Gaugemaster...slow speed control excepted .It just runs out of juice higher up the range.Early days,I know,but it seems more at home with slow speed control and I have a strong impression that this is maybe designed primarily with DCC in mind.We shall see. Edited June 4, 2017 by Ian Hargrave

[woodenhead]

I appreciate what you say but my order for this stands.Despite concerns that I have...not "waffle" Keith...it is a beautiful model.I just wish it were more ......and here I'm struggling for a word.....responsive on my analogue Gaugemaster...slow speed control excepted .It just runs out of juice higher up the range.Early days,I know,but it seems more at home with slow speed control and I have a strong impression that this is maybe designed primarily with DCC in mind.We shall see.

It won't put me off other DJM purchases, I already have three and slow speed control on a tank engine is paramount and I was swayed towards purchasing in the first place because there were models available which i wasn't expecting with it being crowdfunded. 

[jjb1970]

If people are worried about haulage capacity then the Hornby model sounds like the better bet. My opinion is that the two models are quite well matched overall. The DJM looks to have better bogies and is more DCC friendly while I think aspects of the shape are better on the Hornby model and it does not lack haulage capcity. In appearance it's swings and roundabouts. If you want sound get the DJM, if you want haulage get the Hornby would be my advice.

[Ian Hargrave]

If people are worried about haulage capacity then the Hornby model sounds like the better bet. My opinion is that the two models are quite well matched overall. The DJM looks to have better bogies and is more DCC friendly while I think aspects of the shape are better on the Hornby model and it does not lack haulage capcity. In appearance it's swings and roundabouts. If you want sound get the DJM, if you want haulage get the Hornby would be my advice.

In general yes but it's not quite as simple as that. The DJM wiil haul but ...at least on DC....struggles to reach a reasonable top end speed and needs maximum power to do so. Mine wiil pull 8 lit Pullmans + baggage van. Control.."but not as we know it"  Down to a matter of personal preference,ultimately.

[DoverPriory]

Is there ANY news of the Hattons 'Golden Arrow' class 71s? Are they going to be marketed ANY idea of time frame? 

Or are we obliged to 'create ' our own. Some 'news' of the project would be nice.

[JSpencer]

Is there ANY news of the Hattons 'Golden Arrow' class 71s? Are they going to be marketed ANY idea of time frame?

Or are we obliged to 'create ' our own. Some 'news' of the project would be nice.

I guess that is going to depend a lot on the factory.

 

This is speculation on my behalf but:

Hattons rejects the entire batch after checking many samples.

The factory is contacted

The factory will review it. The result of that review can be anyone's guess. It could be, send the all back, we don,t agree they are wrong, please open all boxes to see how many are nath, etc etc

That part of the discussion, decision process will take time and has to fit within various management schedules.

 

Eventually, something is decided.

Let's assume they decide to produce new bodies and ship them over to uk for Dave to fit himself.

That will need to be slotted in.

The bodies once made will need to be checked

And so on....

 

So I suspect the first bit of news won,t happen until at least 2 months after.

Edited June 10, 2017 by JSpencer

[rembrow]

Is there ANY news of the Hattons 'Golden Arrow' class 71s? Are they going to be marketed ANY idea of time frame?

Or are we obliged to 'create ' our own. Some 'news' of the project would be nice.

[rembrow]

If it's anything to go by, Hattons rejected one of their limited DJ J94s, late BR weathered, when it arrived last September. This was due to the fitting of the wrong style of buffers. The corrected models were returned in mid March this year, 6 months later. That was a relatively simple correction, but would require new parts to be made and production time to remove old and fit new buffers

I've had both these models on order so am anticipating at least 6 months to correct.

[charliepetty]

Sadly, all the posts about tweaking this model for operation, re-wiring to get lights working as some want it and other complications have swayed me away from purchasing one, i looked at one at DEMU today, they are exquisite models but I'm put off by the need to tweak the model for operation.

 

Maybe i am looking at this wrong but rtr to me is just that, not install a chip and tune the CVs when i don't have the foggiest idea about DCC.

 

IF you get the DJ Class 71 & fit the Legomanbiffo sound decoder, NO TWEEKING is required, as the decoder has been set up to run the model, the loco runs faultlessly as designed, as I have a batch of them here, all are very good with spot on paint finishes and it has the big bonus of being specifically designed for digital sound, a brilliant innovation for a UK designed loco.

 

This model & Dave needs supporting as 'Who Know' what delights this guy can bring.  

 

I compare the overall design of this to be Rolls Royce compared to the Hornby 71, which I would put into the mass produced Ford bracket.

 

Charlie

[Ian Hargrave]

IF you get the DJ Class 71 & fit the Legomanbiffo sound decoder, NO TWEEKING is required, as the decoder has been set up to run the model, the loco runs faultlessly as designed, as I have a batch of them here, all are very good with spot on paint finishes and it has the big bonus of being specifically designed for digital sound, a brilliant innovation for a UK designed loco.

 

This model & Dave needs supporting as 'Who Know' what delights this guy can bring.  

 

I compare the overall design of this to be Rolls Royce compared to the Hornby 71, which I would put into the mass produced Ford bracket.

 

Charlie

Er...didn't he say he didn't know the foggiest thing about DCC ...I which case a sound chip would be of little use ?

[DJM Dave]

Er...didn't he say he didn't know the foggiest thing about DCC ...I which case a sound chip would be of little use ?

Who me?