ExPatBrit

I've got no evidence that Bachmann ever produced 1864 in malachite green, although I'm happy to be proved wrong. Any ebay listing of 1864 I've ever seen has had 1864 on the box but 1854 on the actual model.1817 may actually be a problem of photographic evidence, it only being noted as in malachite green with lining, but never photographed for confirmation, I'm presuming that 1854 got photographed in said livery at the time, but I could be wrong on both counts, I'd be interested in the response you get from Bachmann.

I think you'll find it's the loco box, (not Thanet set), that is printed wrong, what's in the box is numbered 1854, at least that's how mine is. The mistake then gets repeated in ebay listings, because that's what it says on the label, much the same as the Lord Nelson class #855 gets listed as "Robert Blake Maunsell", because that's what's on the box. A google search of "Bachmann n class 1864" will get you pics of the model actually numbered 1854.

Which doesn't change the fact that I was buying from Kernow, not Sagepay and I doubt there's any "Until death do us part" clause in any agreement between them.The fact that all these work arounds, for non UK purchasers, are being offered, speaks volumes and as I keep repeating, the competition have got it right, which shows Sagepay aren't the only game in town. So I stand by my statement, a method unique to Kernow in my experience, I'm not the customer of their software vendor, I was a potential customer of Kernow.

Thanks for the reply.Did he manage to keep a straight face while he was giving you that answer? Kernow are having a laugh aren't they? All the software needs is a placeholder, so they know they have pre-order and CC details on record, the rest of the world manages it, yes even Hornby, who according to the pundits are all at sea in the areas of sales, marketing and customer service, more capable software I guess. Why buy software that won't allow placeholders for pre-orders and CC details? Barmy! And, sorry, railway modelling isn't unique when it comes to pre-orders, what is unique, in my experience, is the way Kernow handles them. Anyway, my condolences, you tried..........

Thanks for your concern and kudos to you for getting involved, like I've already said, I'm puzzled, not angry, (not sure how anybody could tell from printed words). I'm quite happy for you to publish what Kernow say, on here, if you think that's the best approach, would think it would be, as it's in the interest of the wider, non UK residents. I'm sure none of them are the slightest bit interested in enriching the CC companies any more than they already are, it's not like Kernow recieve a brass farthing for trading this way. It's only their overseas customers who suffer and customers are such a pain for retailers and manufacturers, their business would be so much easier without them!!

Why the assumption I'm angry, because it's negative? More puzzled that in 2016 someone would be running such an antiquated pre-order entry system and I have to accept it because, "well we are in Cornwall, that makes us special", or "that's a first world problem", the implication being, "that makes it OK", or other such nonsensical twaddle. I don't know how I could be any clearer than my previous post, Kernow's pre-order entry system requires them to make a charge on the customers credit card and then immediately credit back the charge. Whether you are aware of it or not Kernow are, in fact, taking a pre-order deposit, however temporary, the CC get's charged. For a UK customer, this is no problem, the net effect is zero, but outside the £ currency area that means the customer gets hit with the buying, (order entry) and selling, (credit back to the card), exchange rate difference and if the credit card is so minded, foreign currency transaction fees. And another foreign currency transaction fee when the model ships. So, 3 transaction fees and the exhange rate difference, all for one transaction. That's the best that Kernow can manage?. The amounts are relatively small, but that's hardly the point, other retailers and manufacturers, all over the world, including the UK, get it right and have done from at least the last century, it's only software. If I couldn't write a database or spreadsheet app in a couple of hours, that didn't require prior CC charges, I'd need my bumps read and I'm no software engineer. The fact that you are using Kernow, means, by implication, that you have indeed "approved" Kernow's business systems, like it or not. "We didn't know" is hardly a defense, they are your business partner, not mine. And as a subsequent post, (SRMan, post #367, thanks SRMan) has explained, Kernow have a way to avoid this, so why isn't it an automatic procedure, without me having to phone them? Why have an internet pre-order system if you have to phone anyway? Lessons from Fred Karno's Circus maybe? But full marks to you for at least showing some concern, other posters attitudes show they don't have a clue about retailer/customer relations, but they must be very satisfied that Kernow have lost a sale and that's the real test that all is not right.

I pre-ordered the SR version 2 weeks ago and I'm out of pocket already, with the amateur way Kernow insist on entering pre-orders. Being outside the UK, I pay a foreign currency transaction fee, which is fair enough, some cards do, some don't. But then when Kernow credit back the payment, because it's a pre-order, I then pay another foreign currency transaction fee and I also get hit with the difference in buying and selling exchange rates and they manage this all in one day! And, of course, I'll be hit with another foreign currency transaction fee when the model is despatched and my card charged. Well done Kernow, fantastic system you've got there and well done MR for approving it, highly unimpressed. Hornby, by contrast, manage to charge my card once, when the model is ready to ship, pre-order or no and I don't get hit with a foreign currency transaction fee either, (yes, same card). Now, I know it's not vast amounts of money we are talking here, but money is money and it also happens to be mine! I find it hard to believe a major UK retailer can't handle pre-orders to destinations outside the UK better than this rubbish method, they'd get laughed at if they tried that crap in the US. I know now there's one UK retailer I won't be bothering with again for anything on pre-order, it's 2016 for heck's sake not 1916.

Can't disagree with anything in your post, it's debatable as to whether the 700 was even the first with horizontal handrail knobs. Here's a link to the J15 thread were much the same was being said at roughly the same time as in this thread, (sorry, not sufficiently motivated to find out dates for other models for sure, the J15 was one I recalled from memory) : http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/80950-Hornby-announce-j15/page-6 To my eyes, the J15 looks worse than the Black Motor, didn't stop that model being well received. And that whole period of design was when resistance to any kind of price increase was being strongly voiced, much as we might like, we can't have it both ways.

Not actually true, in general, whatever you can do on an injection mould tool, you can also do on a diecasting die, only the construction materials change and naturally the price of the mould or die, because complication has changed. But with either production process, small holes not in line of draw are a pita. As sure as god made little apples, when, (not if), the pin forming the hole breaks, the broken bit will end up somewhere it shouldn't and guaranteed the following "crunch" sound will be expensive. If you take the sane and sensible approach and drill the holes after moulding or casting, then the drill fixture for a radial hole will be more expensive, because the fixture will need to sit at an angle. Someone else has already said, the horizontal holes would have been a conscious, deliberate decision by the Hornby design team to contain tooling costs. And offset cranked handrail knobs would be harder to fit in production, because they automatically become "handed" by the crank. The fact that our US cousins have made models like this in the past is more a reflection on the quantities their production runs are, (and justification for assembly tooling and aids), compared to average British outline production quantities, roughly 6 times smaller based on population alone. Again, to repeat another poster, if it's a deal breaker, don't buy the model, personally, I think it's a super model and don't view it as any kind of slippery slope, the handrail knobs are just one of many compromises r-t-r manufacturers have to make, radial holes wouldn't have come for free and neither would cranked handrail knobs.

According to Bradley, "Locomotives of the LSWR", #'s 182/3/7/207 & 255 were converted to pneumatic push pull between October 1931 and September 1933. So you're not that far out, but in any case it's your layout, your rules. Good luck finding transfers, HMRS Pressfix or Methfix maybe?

As a lifelong Spurs supporter, (and whoever Arsenal are playing), I think it's inevitable that Leicester have won, but I'm not too unhappy, I may be wrong, (I've been out of the UK for a few decades now), but I think the '62/'63 season, the days of Greavsy being league top scorer, was the last time Spurs have been this high up so late in the season and I recall LC were also in the running that season as well.We have a young team and if we can hang onto players like Kane, Alli, Rose, Walker and Erikson, then the future looks good, we've played some great football. Unusually, for a Spurs team we have a goal difference worth a point, resolute defence was never a strong point, and the best record in gaining points from a losing position, in the past we'd go a goal down and wilt. Just too many draws have made the difference, but at least this year we've been able to go to places like Anfield and Old Trafford and give them a game. As long as we finish above the shower from the Emirates, I'll be really happy. So, well played Leicester!

Sounds like they didn't and paid the price, but learn't from the mistake and now they do. Rewarding to know they listened to me, lol So the headcount in the annual report is not all UK based.

Ime, if they don't have a permanent office in Hong Kong/China with someone responsible for management of the contract manufacturing and toolmaking, then they are making a serious mistake, (while admitting I have no idea if they do or they don't). And the individuals concerned better have a stronger allegiance to Hornby than they do the locals, with enough skills to be "dangerous" to those locals in moulding/diecasting manufacturing, tooling and quality control. Again, ime these individuals won't come cheap, they'll want Hong Kong levels of renumeration, not Chinese. Flying a pencil pusher in and out once a month or so won't cut it, (part of the key to Oxford Diecast's success is the guys overseeing Hong Kong/China, know the manufacturing/tooling side of the business).

Again, ime, I've never heard of a trade injection moulder/diecaster/assembler needing prepayment to reserve manufacturing capacity and with reports of excess capacity in China, I'd think that's extremely unlikely, but in theory there's nothing making it impossible. If I was in Hornby's position, would I use a source that required that? Not a chance, there's too many that don't. I think the Chairman will need to be a walker on water to get the bank to approve a recovery plan which includes all the currently planned capex expenditure. Frankly, if he needs telling by the bank to cut the program back, then he's no better than the guy who has already departed. If Hornby don't have a wide enough product range now, then further new releases ain't gonna solve their problems, new releases was the story of 2015 for Hornby and it got them what exactly? Like you, there's a few models on the 2016 list that I'd dearly love, but there's wishful thinking and then there's really wishful thinking.....

You need to read my first paragraph in the context of the post I was replying to, and with a reminder that difficult doesn't mean impossible. The sentence starting "The only leverage...." In my second paragraph covers your second point. If the new owners went to the moulder requesting new product, then the moulder would now have 100% assurance of getting more work and would therefore be highly unlikely to turn it down. Lima I know nothing about, but presumably Lima was a self contained unit with all tooling present and accounted for afaik.

Ime it doesn't work like that, if the moulds/tools aren't in the machine ready to go, then Hornby have no exposure and even if they were in the machine, probably the worst exposure would be a setup charge. They could avoid any charges real or implied by claiming postponement not cancellation. As for moulds/tools, again they can claim postponement not cancellation and then their exposure is limited to whatever is in the tooling contract. In the west it's 1/3 with tooling order, 1/3 on tool completion and 1/3 net 30 or 60, or something very similar. Not sure about China, but with negotiation it could be no worse than work done so far, with a promise to complete tooling when circumstances allow, which could be never. I could see some models where the first 1/3 had been paid being completed, but those with no costs incured so far don't have a cat in hells chance, imo. And don't forget there are costs for packaging printing plates, artwork, tooling costs for the icecube vac-forms, tampo print dies, assembly fixtures, paint spray masks & etc. that aren't anywhere near needing expenditure yet. Hornby can save all that cost, without thinking about it. With the Hornby announcement, I don't hold out too much hope that we're going to see anything like their promised models this year, I couldn't see any bank approving it, the cost of continuing must exceed the cost of deferment, however you slice and dice. What will have gobsmacked Barclays is not the size of the loss alone, in itself a substantial number, but the speed with which it overwhelmed Hornby, we are talking days and weeks here, not months or years. If Barclays allow Hornby to continue, they will be watching capex with several pairs of eyes and life will be pretty miserable in Hornby for a while.

And having been involved in plastic moulds, injection moulding, diecasting and injection moulding machines for most of my adult life, that story has more than an element of phooey about it, (as in not getting the full story). Injection moulding and diecasting machines aren't by and large, specialised, (ignoring things like two colour machines, insert moulding machines & etc.), the mould either fits in the available space, or it doesn't and usually it isn't that big a deal to make it fit. Machines are classified by size, as the clamp tonnage goes up, then so does the size of the mould space and the shot volume, (the amount of material the machine can inject in one go). So, even if the mould didn't fit a smaller machine, then it would fit in one slightly larger and within reason, the machine can't be too big, (note, this is a conditional statement, hence the use of "within reason"). The B17 saga sounds like a moulder not having big enough machines, or the toolmaking on the first set of tools was so bad it wasn't salvagable, which is a very rare occurence. If the former then that's Hornby's fault for not determining that first and finding another supplier with the right equipment. I'd have to hope that Hornby have a mould/die register somewhere, not scraps of paper, with vitals like clamp tonnage needed, space required horizontally/vertically in the mould space, part weights, (which determines shot volume required) and what they actually paid for/got in the tooling costs & etc. If they haven't then they're going to get what they deserve and why from time to time they may choose the wrong supplier. I'd also expect them to insist on a full set of mould/die drawings, which may not have any immediate value or meaning to them, but if they haven't got them they can't show them to other toolmakers or moulders and denying themselves of that ability is just plain stupid, CAD/CAM makes that all so simple. It's been a while since I sourced in China, so I can't remember exactly how they operate, but if it's anything like the UK\US model, then trade moulders, which is what they are, charge the customer a "part" mould cost, which may actually be the whole cost of new tooling. The "part" element is assumed to cover mould maintenance, cleaning, refurbishing & etc. which means the trade moulder does have some financial stake, if only on paper, in the tooling. Diecasting is slightly different in that the number of shots are usually counted, so that die repairs can be scheduled, costed and invoiced to the customer. So, it's not as simple as Hornby, (or successors) turning up at the factory gate, with a truck one morning demanding they get "their" moulds back. Suing for return of property in China wouldn't be on my bucket list of things to do for fun. The only real leverage a company like Hornby has left, is does the moulder have a reasonable expectation of getting more work from the customer he's potentially about to pi@@ off? If the moulders door are shuttered, (as in closed for business), then it's time for prayers to a higher authority and get the camp beds out, it's going to be a long wait. Establishing good relationships with suppliers is even more important in China than it is in the west, it's hard work for a company with the product range the breadth of Hornby's, there's a lot to be said for owning your own manufacturing plant, in the field I was in, the companies with their own facilities have done rather better than those that relied on sub-contracting. My 2 cents based on experience gained the hard way, let me tell you about the time this Chinese moulder.......oh never mind.

Thanks again, yes, I'm inclined to agree with your decision, particularly if GFB has a timely and clearly mapped out development route, which seems to be the case. Just a guess, but I'd think GFB could have something designed and implemented before Esu had even briefed their engineers, there are advantages to having only one product.On reflection and in light of the two most recent posts, (thanks Ron Ron Ron and Dogmatix), I don't see how Esu would want to develop the SmartControl to equivalency with ECoS + MC, they're queering their own market, I have a feeling that what it is now, is pretty much how it's going to be, Esu had already done all the work to make MC understand the complete ECoS command structure, why not Smart Control? So, I think SmartControl is going to be to ECoS+MC as Dynamis is to ECoS and competing more with the Daisy than anything else, in the entry level sector. But good luck with your choice, looks good, I'd be interested in your observations when you get it.....

I think it's there to allow for any misalignment of the motor "tower" with the rear "tower". The alignment of both is dependant on the straightness, or otherwise of the chassis block. You couldn't just hang the flywheel and gear on the unsupported motor shaft, that would give you pot luck gear engagement and mucho vibration, that brass worm would be toast in no time flat. Alternatively if you aimed for a 1.5-2.0 mm motor shaft fitting in a bearing, any deviation from other than a perfect chassis and perfect "towers" would lock everything solid, assuming it would even go together.Edited to add: The square hole is likely a location key for one or more parts of the production process, eg: locates the boiler square and parallel for drilling and tapping the screw holes, or ensures registration between one lining out op with another, etc., etc.

Thanks for the link, much appreciated.The document itself isn't very comprehensive, little better than I could have figured out on my own, if I actually owned a Smart Control (no wish to be ungrateful, it's certainly not your fault, but there's precious little to base a purchase decision on). The manual reference seems to be Piko part # 59112-90-7000 and I can't find that with a google search, so it's a guess as to what the capabilities are until Piko make the manual available as a download. Not something I'm going to buy to find out what it does, at the moment it doesn't appear to be anything but a glorified Daisy system, so prove me wrong Piko/Esu!

Does anybody know yet what functionality the Piko system has, eg: shuttle running, route setting etc? Is there a downloadable manual in English anywhere yet? I know with the ECoS/MC the functionality is in the ECoS, not the MC, which is basically a "remote control" for the ECoS, but what about the Piko?

That's exactly right, airborne particulates, dust and crud are the bane of paint spraying, so the atmosphere inside is filtered and pressurised to reduce the particulates as much as possible, hence "clean room". The spray booths themselves will have strippable coatings which get peeled off and recoated when overspray has built-up and really good ones, what's called a "wet back" with a circulating water "back" or water curtain to catch the paint particulates, which then get filtered from the water. Operators should wear lint free "white suits", so they aren't introducing more airborne particulates and crud from their "civvies". Any pressurised compressed air for the spray guns and blow cleaning is or should be de-ionized to prevent static charge in non metallic parts, for example plastic loco bodies.All this, because, counter intuitively, paint will highlight, not cover, any defects, dust and crud in and under the paint. It's possible, but not vital that Tampo print could be done in a clean room, the surface areas and hence problems are usually much smaller. I'm also pretty sure this definition of a clean room, (as opposed to an electronics, space, aeronautics, inspection, assembly or medical clean room, although the principles and needs are the same), would mean the same thing to Oxford Rail, Hornby and subs, Kader, Leyland, Ferrari and etc. a Chinese Wall is something else entirely. Most, (good), auto-body shops have the same thing, for the same reasons, in a seperate area from the rest of the shop.

Yes, it is a bit of a lump wih a fair overhang, so good headstock bearings and spindle rigidity are pre-requisites. I have a full range of 5C collets, plus various indexing heads for my cnc mill, which also take 5C collets, so the Bison chuck is a real time saver. For heavy stuff, I tend to interpolate on the mill anyway.

For those with 5C collets and no collet closer, Bison do a scroll chuck which takes them. Pricey, but convenient, there's no need to leave room outside the headstock for mounting and unmounting the collet closer and it's far quicker exchanging one chuck for another, rather than setup the closer. And it's as accurate if the mounting plate is turned to size in-situ. Here's mine, more than a few years old now, still spot on....

My Drummond 700 arrived in Delaware in 2 days, (DHL) and the S15 was three, (FedEx), not quite as fast as Apple from China, (24 hours), but pretty switched on nevertheless.