Jump to content

lochlongside

Members
  • Content Count

    140
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

101 Good

Recent Profile Visitors

180 profile views
  1. What ........ !!!! (McEnroe moment here !!!)
  2. Just to clarify please As per a number of your other models, will there be any difference livery-wise between your version of Boxhill and Rails' version of Boxhill e.g. will yours be a hi-gloss version, or will they be absolutely identical ? Thanks
  3. Try Hornby service sheet HSS276H off their web site - its got an exploded diagram which you can expand on screen until you can see whats what - its what I used to pull the bogies apart - good luck. PS. The white glue masquerading as grease Hornby used around 2008 in their diesels is just awful. I had a Class 56 which had locked up completely while sitting on the shelf -I ended up using pliers and a rubber jawed vice to break the grip of this white so-called grease between worm shaft and the bearings - it was more like Loctite. I cleaned the whole lot out with meths and paper towel and used electrolube and now, like you, I have a smooth running loco pulling 20+ coaches on around 300mA ......as the designers intended.
  4. Quick question - Which/whose track are you using it on - presumably one of the code 75 brands? Just asking before I buy (or not!!)
  5. Hi C - I think you just need to persevere on this - your situation is virtually identical to what mine was a few weeks ago when I had mentally written the money off as a crowd funding "fail".. I followed the advice on this forum - relevant posters are almost too many to mention but they posted at some length earlier in this forum. It would be invidious to pick one out but you can see who they are and in passing thank you very much to all those who offered advice - I could not have come out with a success without it. So to my experience - ....... I found the approach of polite but persistent reasonableness paid off for me. Following card company telephone notification pushback, I first of all registered as a creditor with the liquidators I then reverted to royal mail and sent the Card company an explanatory covering letter and a mass of documentation that covered the key points.... 1. A copy of the payment out of my credit card account 2. Proof this was a deposit for items in excess of £100 (invoice, receipt and website proof) 3. Proof that DJM were bullish on development (newsletters) right up to the point they went into liquidation - hence timescale between payment and claim 4. That I wasn't going to get the items because DJM had gone into liquidation without warning, and that there was little chance of a refund because his debts and assets were disproportionate (Receiver documentation) and therefore I was asking for Sect 75 repayment to be applied There was then a bit of multiple to-ing and fro-ing ( including a card company questionnaire) over the following 4 weeks in which I pointed out answers to their questions were mostly in the relevant parts of the documentation that I had sent them by Royal mail, (apart from having to add that I paid direct from my C/Card to DJM via his Paypal business account because that was the only way at the time we could pay.) The final comment to me was that paying up front for something not yet in production was a bit risky - to which I explained that in the current era of small scale runs for specialist items of limited interest it was now actually quite common in this industry for manufacturers to take deposits to ensure that there was commitment from customers and that some quite well-known national organisations (not a million miles from northern England?) were now doing this. Following this they paid me (some 4 weeks after my initial royal mail letter) - TBH I am still unclear as to whether this was a good-will payment or Sect 75 - the actual wording was hazy but the result was essentially the same - so I thanked them accordingly. So follow the advice of this forum - and for goodness sake do not muddy the waters by mentioning crowd-funding -(TBH IMO FWIW this wasn't really crowd funding as is normally accepted it was DJM taking staged deposits for the final product as he (potentially) achieved milestones). I hope that helps - keep fighting.... but politely !!
  6. Just come across this - (must be plenty like me - occasional accessors !! ) Have entered my 2x Cl 92 deposits. Thank you for that - and progress ?? - well still negotiating with my C/C coy (having got a verbal brushoff - I went snail mail with masses of documentation - response was via "secure Email " !! asking for all the stuff I had sent them via snail mail - I await their response to my cross-referenced response with almost unbounded and eager anticipation :-) )
  7. Good day, I approached MBNA today regarding a Section 75 claim (my payment in CC statement was marked Paypal *DJModelsLtd - as I expect several hundred others were) ready with all your advice to date (Thank you for that - most helpful) - and they initially said they cannnot payout until the company is formally liquidated, but in the subsequent discussion also said they basically needed the documented answer to 2 Qns: 1. Is there any likelihood of the product being delivered 2. Is there any likelihood of the deposit being repaid. I have emailed CG-Recovery with these two questions explaining why I need the answers - and also suggested that they could save an awful lot of bother if they put the answers up on the DJModels website as it will save us all flooding them with Emails. I await the response with bated breath but I guess that when presented with the probably unpalatable answer the CC discussion will then move onto the Paypal reference !!
  8. Hi Damo666 Thank you for that - it really was most informative. Much appreciated as I had mentally written off the deposit but now..... Can you just clarify/confirm before I go down what is hopefully the same route - I and probably several others who paid Cl92 deposits at the same time as you (Jan/Feb 2017) will have paid by credit card but at that time DJ Models only had a Paypal account - and many of us I guess would have received a receipt that came via Paypal stating along the lines of the following ..... You sent a payment of £60.00 GBP to DJModels Ltd..... Dear xxxxxxxx, This charge will appear on your statement as payment to PAYPAL *DJMODELSLTD. etc etc To my (rather simplistic!!) mind this is a payment to DJM not to Paypal - they were just acting as his bank account holder (and at that time there was no other way of paying anyway) - however were you also in this position or had you formalised (possibly at a later date?) the original transaction with DJM such that you had a separate direct transaction with DJM without Paypal as his account holder? I too am anticipating possible pushback from my credit card company (also owned by Lloyds) and just want to get my case prepared in advance.!! (Incidentally I now note some other quite wellknown online model suppliers also use this paypal facility - although they haven't done a DJM.... to date).
  9. Hi Roy beg to differ .....in politest sort of way As I said previously - I am getting a typical PPTC type failure on DC -I have had this with DC controllers in past - It is just I have never noticed PPTCs being installed in locos. (Pretty sure there isnt one in the Kernow Bulleid or it would have failed when I tested with 34 coaches!!) However I advised Kernow when I had the original problem that this was my tentative diagnosis. Thanks to Richard getting the lid off we can see the component - Looking at designation/component it appears to be a Through Hole, PolySwitch RXEF Series, 500 mA, 1 A, 72 VDC, -40 °C - trip current 1A and hold current 0.5A possibly a Raychem Littlefuse? My understanding having investigated PPTC failure in past (apologies for stating something you are probably aware of but other readers may not) is that hold current (0.5A in this case) is the current at which it is guaranteed not to trip, and trip current of 1A is current at which it will definitely trip; and when they trip they do so open circuit. What happens in between 0.5A and 1A is "within tolerance"!!, and once they have failed they literally have to cool down before they work again. In my view they are effective but they are not a precision device !! What is causing the tripping in my 12V DC case is the trailing load - 12 or more heavy Bachmann coaches. It does not happen with 10. The fact that Ark Royal is ok with 14 just means that the specific PPTC whilst probably in spec is more tolerant of the current drawn (there is after all at least 0.5A to play with). Having replaced polyswitches in the past they are dirt cheap from some-one like Rapid ( around 26p each from memory - but problem is because they are so cheap you have to buy a minimum quantity - [5 for Rapid and 10 for Farnell] which bumps the price up - so perhaps those with the problem (me included) should buy another 3 or 4 Warships to make a buy cost -effective! As Richard found out dissing it cuts current to loco as they are an in-series (current) component. - As I get the same issue with DC only with more coaches before cutting out it indicates to me that these components are possibly on the electrical input side (track pickup) side of the circuitry, and they are in possibly to specifically protect the coreless motor from an over voltage/current, I also emphasise this is only a a supposition based on my understanding that although their previous diesel had lights, a chip socket etc, that this is the first big diesel produced by Kernow with a coreless motor . As my locos run primarily on DC I am very tempted just to put in an 0.65A hold/1.3A Trip PPTC which is the next "Littlefuse" value up - but if anyone else follows this advice they do so at their own risk especially if it is followed by a DCC chip.. Putting it in is however probably a better idea than simply shorting it out and relying purely on the controller cutout if operating on DC. (My H&M is quite capable of powering 4 big Heljan Westerns simultaneously so it will probably deliver multiple amps to a coreless motor before tripping!) Incidentally given the reports that the fault appears to happen on DCC with only 6 coaches trailing it also means that the DCC chips are fair chomping through the power - i.e. the equivalent of a trailing load of 4-6 Bachmann Mark 1s !! I had not realised they were that power hungry.
  10. Now that is interesting...... I have not been running my two warships on DCC but with D604 Cossack I get a virtually identical result to you but on DC. Following a bad experience with Hornby's class 71 lights I automatically measure max volts on my layout and limit it to 12V. Put simply D601 Ark Royal runs perfectly on 12V pulling 14 coaches any time for any period Once warmed up for about 20 mins, D604 Cossack will then only pull 10 coaches on 12V - any more than 10 coaches e.g. 12 and it comes to a stop and all the lights go out. The first time it happened after about 4-5 mins of 12V high speed running. This is not a short cct situation as 12V still appears on the track and If I put D601 or any other loco on the same track w/o adjusting anything else they run whilst D604 just sits there. If I then just lift D601 off, then turn the power off and then back onto 12V, D604 restarts runs for a few seconds with 12 coaches and then dies again, If I tip D604 momentarily on its side to break contact it starts and then stops within seconds, if I push the loco there is little resistance but again it refuses to light up or run. If I leave it for say 30 mins it will run for a short period at 12V with 12 coaches before failing again. This is repeatable over and again. If I cut the load to 10 coaches or cut the volts to a lower figure D604 runs ok ad infinitum. I have used a Safety Minor, a Gaugemaster H/H, and the DA Cole controller and the fault is consistent. I sent it back to Kernow who were very good - they replaced it w/o question just like that but the replacement has exactly the same problem . My solution was cowardice - I accept that at 12V Cossack will pull 10 coaches but Ark Royal is reserved for the 12+ coach trains, and in general I do not run locos for that duration and normally my trains are limited to 8-9 coaches so it is not a major issue. I only found the problem as part of my running in process, but if it was on the garden layout ??. Thinking the problem thro it is unlikely to be a dry joint as it is an identical fault on 2 locos, it is unlikely to be component failure because it recovers, the only cause I can think of is that there is current sensitive device on the loco PCB - e.g. something like a polyswitch (PPTC) which heats up and only restores power once it cools. This could have been put in to protect the coreless motor from the robust voltages put out by some of the more primitive controllers (if not limited the H&M will pump out 16+Volts and even the GM PSU and H/H will push out well over 12v !!), and that this component was possibly changed during manufacturing process from the original type in D601 to one from a batch that is less tolerant in D604. This would also explain why it takes less and less time to fail after the first time, unless left to recover, and it would also explain why reducing the load reduces failure as this would reduce the current demand of the motor and hence the heat within the component. I did think of bypassing all the circuitry and connecting the motor direct to the wheel pickups but leaving the PCB connected in parallel to power the lights, to see if that made a difference but chickened out as the damage in getting the loco apart could well have negated the warranty - it really was very stiff to get apart, and as it was/is not a priority I parked doing this until the warranty expires !. It would be interesting however to get an experienced electronic engineer's take on this problem.
  11. On reading his initial announcement - as an investor in two 00 Class 92 and having paid the initial deposit - my first thought was oh s**t there goes my cash again (I lost some to the original K**n P***s failure several decades (70s) ago); and the follow-up was no better. My second thought was hmmm not unexpected - but thank God I did not put any cash into APT (I actually wanted one, I really was severely tempted but nearly two years of non-performance waiting for Class 92 progress was off-putting... hence the thanks ( I only wish I had read the N gauge King thread - I would have even saved my £60) and I do feel for those who put significantly more cash into APT as I fear it is either MS&L or GC(R) - it is not a happy feeling especially if it was a significant proportion of their annual budget. Being supportive of DJM for a moment (possibly not popular I know but....) losing a parent is no joke, and it obviously knocked him sideways - as a one man band the pressure has pushed him off course, but even before this - in the past - he has come across as well-meaning but has always promised more than he can deliver. Despite the hype my 02 and 14xx are not outstandingly runners especially c.f. Hattons P or Hornby Peckett/H. My Cl 71 is limited to parcels and freight - it is hopeless for express passenger workings (I use the Hornby Cl71 for that), and only DJM's promise that the Cl 92 motor would be better persuaded me to invest in it. I agree with those above that if he really can see a way ahead he needs to come clean, produce an update, advise a plan and then actually show tangible progress. Talk is not going to fix this, but product progress based on current funding and hitting new advised deadlines will. The only other alternative I see for him is to sell up to someone with a track record of delivery but who will probably want more cash than originally proposed from us to complete the projects and even that will only happen if work to date is viable. I fear however that realistically any money in projects is now sunk. Having read here how some got project refunds and some did not on other transactions (no proportionality as far as I could see) it indicates to me a level of financial disorder (in my opinion I emphasise !); and I just feel that asking for it back on what is an ad-hoc crowd-funding model type investment runs counter to the concept and is unlikely to happen. A small court claim (cost £25 plus) is also probably going to be a waste of time and possibly money/effort. The other possibly more significant factor is that this poisons the well not only for other crowd fundings but for follow-on funding to complete the DJM current projects. I cannot be the only person who although trying in my own mind to minimise the potential loss by rationalising it as "merely the equivalent of a Bachmann coach"(!!) at the same time now has little intention of pouring more cash into the DJM Cl 92 project without some tangible indication of genuine product progress. Accurascale beckons !!
  12. An interesting beginner's article on DCC by Phil. Really pleased he referred to Fn limitations of systems. I am a relative novice in DCC and I was caught out about 2 years ago by Dynamis only addressing 20 fns (SLW Class 24 uses all fns up to F28 and noise level is on F27/28 !!). I even rang Bachmann technical (to see if they were planning to upgrade - the answer then was.... No....., however looking at the possible contenders that I should not bother looking at to replace it, it included the GM Prodigy Express - is that correct - their instruction sheet clearly says up to F28 but will only display the first 12 ?, whilst Bachmannn E-Z command actually appears even more limited than normal - to only 10 Fns ? (their manual includes what I can only call a "get-out" note that alludes to function limitations - not sure I would be happy to find that even the commonly used (even by Bachmann themselves) F11- F20 were all unobtainable. Perhaps a follow-up article with a comparative table of key characteristics/limitations and possible work-arounds could be considered.
  13. Received Hornby Lord Rodney yesterday (from Rails - they maintained the vg offer price so really well done to them - usual disclaimer) Post running in, I loaded it up to 10Bachmann Mk1s and 2 Hornby Maunsells - just a trace of slipping on around 1 in 80 and an average scale cct speed of around 65mph with that load on at 12v. I too had the tight sleeve problem (but first time for me) - I tried running a ruler round inside sleeve just in case it was "stiction" but without success - so (a tip for next time) I got a smaller box (e.g. earlier Bachmann), dampened fingers (improves friction), hold Hornby sleeve and use one's stomach to press the smaller box onto end of inner box and into sleeve. (no it isn't dignified - the mind boggles at the image but it works !!) That presses the inner thro the sleeve and once it is about 1/3 out you can pull it the rest of the way as per normal.
  14. Received my two (MR202/3) over last two days and have now run them both in. I have got to congratulate both Rapido and Model Rail - they really do run well straight from box - one is virtually silent, the other has a slight whiffle but well within acceptable limits. My initial impression was of watchmaker quality - and for their size they do feel heavy - at 170gms much heavier than I expected and this tends to contribute to their impression of quality. Once run in and on clean track they started moving at approx 0.5v, and on slightly dirtier track (i.e. my norm !!) they ran steadily on just under 1v. At 12v approx they each towed 10 Bachmann Mk1 coaches at a steady 40+ scale mph I have a perceptible minor but unmeasured gradient due to sloping floor possibly around 1 in 80 - they will take 8 with no slipping - will start 12 on the level but slipped at on starting 8 on the uphill bit, however once moving will shift 10 coaches consistently. Interestingly although they ran well over all my Peco/C&L code 75 track and turnouts (straight and curved), not derailing at any time during their 90 min running in , if watched carefully they do actually highlight any variation in track-laying i.e. slight twitches at discontinuities/variations in level etc which I had noticed before with other locos - probably as a result of the very short 6-coupled wheelbase. For those who have not yet ordered either, both (202 and 203) came with the side chains and autocouplers fitted, and one (68225) came with the bufferbeam safety chains fitted. In the other (68222) the bufferbeam safety chains were an optional fitting in the separate accessory pack. Screw couplings and alternative cow-catchers(?) are also supplied as part of the accessory pack plus sets of cab end doors and window frames to enable you to model the doors/windows open and closed as well as a set of etched brass maker plates and some etched metal straps which will require a steady hand to fit. Highly recommended (and when are they going to do some J69s !!).
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.