sparaxis

I would offer that the problem is poor design. Given the space constraints it is sometimes a trick to get it right. I have many locomotives from Roco, Brawa, Fleischmann and others where it works just fine. Many (most) of the manufacturers of British outline seem to have a slapdash approach to NEM coupler pockets and kinematic mechanisms. The kinematic mechanism is intended to operate INDEPENDENTLY of any bogies etc. In my experience, the earlier generations of European models with bogie driven mechanisms are the only ones that give problems. Designed to the specification, everything from short and long wheelbase four wheelers to rigid frame locos and tenders work fine. Perhaps it is because no-one offers a true close coupling for the British market. Kinematic mechanisms are designed to work with rigid couplings, which a tension lock is most assuredly not.

Those of us of a certain age will remember the introduction of the RG4 in the late 1970s. They were anything but cheap. My DJH class 5 that I built with the 1616 version in the early 1980s still runs like a dream. "Cheap" coreless motors are a relatively recent phenomenon. While conventional motors have progressed from the old open framed types like the X04, coreless motors still have the following advantages: Higher efficiency, lack of magnetic locking/cogging, higher power density. The superior low speed control goes without saying (given a high quality gear train), and the power density allows tiny models that would not have been possible before. Undersized motors of any sort are a recipe for tears. I have an old heavy diecast Liliput 2-6-0 tank loco that had a cheapy open frame Mabuchi motor like that fitted to the Dapol/Hornby pug. The poor thing could barely pull itself around the layout. Replacing it with the open frame motor used in smaller Fleischmann HO locos cured that problem. A.N.Other's Bo-Bo was fitted with a ridiculously small motor. It would have been just as sad with a small N-scale "conventional" motor. It runs very nicely, light engine, at speeds of up to about 40 mph!

M.B. Klein is still a great place to buy stuff and is apparently one of the larger US mail order retailers. If you live in the area you can arrange to pick up your order in person. At some level, this doesn't really surprise me as the owner of the business died in mid-2020. See the attached obituary from the Baltimore Sun. I was there shortly before they went online only, and when chatting to one of the employees they told me that they had far more stock than they could ever hope to display in the store. I had been looking for some common items and they had to go and get it "from the back". By that stage online orders were already more than 90% of their business. MB_Klein.pdf

I buy the #156 in bulk packs, "scale size" they are a little neater than the #146. But they work great considering that a loose coupled train should be about 3mm between buffers when in tension.

Strangely enough, the major European manufacturers (including the Hornby subsidiaries) have got close coupling mechanisms well sorted out. Many steam locos have effective loco-tender mechanisms too. Coupler pockets of both types are to specification, including the little swallowtail NEM 363 that is intended to be mounted on a kinematic mechanism. The standard UK implementation where the NEM 363 is mounted at a non-standard location and a bendy NEM 362 is mounted in it is just bizarre. As for wagon size being a "problem", some of the Trix 19th century wagons are tiny (eg Trix 24099). Ironically, Bachmann in their Liliput brand makes a very nice close coupling, which is basically a mini-tension lock with guiding horns to make it "rigid" (Liliput L939105) . How do I know this? With well over a 1000 pieces of rolling stock, there are very few that have problems, and those are typically where the designer has deviated from proven practice. As far as UK outline is concerned, within passenger rakes, I use a variety of European couplings, depending on what works best in the circumstances. For goods wagons, I have given up and I remove the NEM mounts and install long-shank Kadees as the NEM mount ones are both ugly and expensive.

A little melodramatic perhaps...but it's not going to stop me from getting the siphon I have on order. (I'll see if I can retrofit a Fleischmann 6574) Goods wagons get the NEM pockets removed and replaced with body mounted Kadees. It helps of course that loose coupled wagons had up to 9 inches between buffers! Fran, Accurascale does a MUCH better job at doing things right than some of the "established" players in the market. I have always marveled at the qualitative difference between the "British" and "Continental" models from a nameless manufacturer.

Sigh... Another fail for the British Model Industry. A stunningly beautiful model without kinematic close coupling. Bogie mounted couplings are so 1980s. I realize that fitting a body mounted NEM 362 in kinematic mount might be a challenge, but that is why the NEM 363 exists. For example, Roco used the 363 in their Bavarian bogie coaches that also have the bogies very close to the end of the coach and where a NEM 362 wouldn't fit.

Although the valve gear is not fully functional, in the real world on a layout it is probably not a big deal. (I can think of a few recent models with bright red inside valve gear that NEVER moves.) For example, many models have their Walschaerts valve gear in mid gear, so the valve rod barely moves if at all. The fascinating thing with Stephenson valve gear, or Allan in the case of the T3, is the way the rods move, with respect to each other. But, and this is a big but, the motion of the gear is probably exaggerated compared to the amount of travel on the prototype. I have a Tillig narrow gauge loco where the rods and link are a single piece and they look ok when on the layout as the travel is limited. It won't stop me considering a Bellerophon. What probably will is that I have way too many small industrials already.

Difficult, but not impossible. the Fleischmann T3 had this in 1985, and again in 2011 with the "Berg", the Trix/Marklin King Ludwig in 1993 and Trix/Marklin T3 in the early 2000s

A lot of Hornby's newer locos have small motors with very powerful rare earth magnets. They may not be coreless, but with respect to characteristics are more like coreless motors than the old open frame dinosaurs that some of us grew up with. (It takes quite some tweaking of "default" decoder characteristics to get them to perform at their best, which is very good!) Alan

I got an email a couple of weeks back say that due to unanticipated demand, my pack would be delayed.

Oh dear...I went ahead and ordered 4 of the six wheelers, that I wasn't going to order because I ordered LMS, MR, SECR and LNER ones. Well, I guess they will look a lot prettier behind the Dean Single than those tatty old shorty clearstories. The livery application is just so good..it was impossible to resist.

It isn't only a UK problem. Popular ESU decoders are out of stock at many suppliers in the USA and Germany. German magazines have had editorials about the challenges that manufacturers are having with supply chain issues. Several manufacturers ESU included have had to redesign products over the last couple of years due to component supply issues. (As an aside, I work for a company that manufactures railway electronics. The lead times for some components is more than a year.)

Funnily enough, I've never had a problem with Roco-Line: (400 locos, more than 1000 pieces of rolling stock) What I have had a problem with is Hornby's very casual approach to wheel profiles. Unlike almost everyone else that uses profiles that more-or-less approximate NMRA or NEM recommendations with nice tapered and rounded flange...Hornby's often has super sharp flanges that manage to climb over any irregularity on the track. To the point that I even had some with a reverse taper. Any issues I have had have always been "bad wheels/bad back to back"

Agreed to both points. For me it is really about the convenience of opening the loco, removing the blanking plug and popping in the decoder, as opposed to struggling where to put the decoder, fighting with a mess of wires, and taking several tries in getting the loco body back on again without crushing something. After all there is no cost saving these days in buying an 8 pin decoder against any other configuration in the same range.