RBE

Its not a rail guard its a step. The rail guards are mounted to the bogies as per the prototype.

Which Lens decoder is it. It is sold as 21 pin because it is 21 pin. There are indifferent 21 pin standards though so maybe that's an issue for you?

I would check the worm cover caps for peace of mind.

Have you ran it previously with the sound off? It seems odd that there would be more noise after running in than before. It's not something that we have seen before and we have had 008 and 120 running on Making tracks for a couple of months none stop with no detriment to running.

There is no decoder issue though with the 56. The complexity of the lighting requirements on the 56 necessitates a certain level of custom set up. The choice is that you either have basic lighting or submit to custom chip set ups, you can't have both. We are going for fully accurate with lighting etc to match the model and that means we need custom chip set ups. We have specified which decoder to use and you have the ability to download and blow your own chip or get one supplied via a retailer. The locomotive works perfectly with the specified decoder so if you are planning on using something else then that is a problem created by the end user and not the manufacturer to be honest. We can only do our best to accommodate other decoders etc as best we can given the complexity, but that level of compatibility is not a requirement or an obligation on our part.

Having fitted the clips to a few returns I can now understand 1: How hard it is to apply the clip from the top and ensure that it engaged both sides fully without specifically checking afterwards and 2: How much force is required to pop them off when you want to remove a bogie. Based on this I would air towards them not being fully home during assembly. Needless to say we have made the factory aware of the issue and also already tweaked the tooling for the clips in the next run to make it easier to fit positively. On the cradle, we do not intend to move away from this as it protect ms the models and their detail like nothing else. However we do intent to change the design a little where the wheels sit, and also add thumbscrews rather than normal screws to make removal and reattachment easier. I personally have an easier time putting locos back in this than clam packaging, I guess it's down to practice.

You don't have to take the circuit board out. You can easily clip it back on through the access holes.

Tbh we are questioning whether it's a cradle issue or simply that the clips were not pushed fully home at the factory. Once on they are very hard to get off. It seems unlikely that screwing to the cradle would pop them.

Yes it's a very easy fix. Just remove the body and look in the four access windows on the chassis where the gear towers are. There is likely a cover clip not seated correctly. This can be clipped into place with a flathead screwdriver. Clip on Clip off

I would check to make sure that you don't have the worm clip issue. It causes the worm to not mesh with the gears so effectively powering only one bogie under load. The loco can easily pull that load without problems when working correctly. In fact a test was done recently where a Hornby 56 pulled against ours one going one way and one the other and our 56 pulled the Hornby one away in the opposite direction.

Have you got the dip switches set for none ESU?

Why don't you use the specified Lokpilot with the correct programming either via download from ESU or pre programmed from Rails of Sheffield?

The symoba couplings very much benefit from a very shallow pull out, it's more like a slightly improved draft box and is the way to go I think.

The couplings aren't 'guided by the bogie' the bogie has a gap in it to simply make room for the mechanism. Ideally you don't want the kinematic anywhere near the bogie as the sideways pressure caused by the kinematic (which is a different force to that of a bogie mounted couplers) is usually what causes problems with the couplers causing derailments as it pushes the bogie to the side. This bogie gap requirement and potential for bogie contact is unavoidable if you insist on a combination of kinematics and bogies very close to the end of the vehicle.

There's time yet. 👍

Yes on coaching stock with magnetic couplers kinematics do come into their own I agree.

Well yes there is that however the majority of modellers will want to use the NEM pocket for one coupling or another so a necessary evil really. The 56 is great as the bang grid can hide it brilliantly when you are detailling the end up. That's why we also included the NEM socket bang plate in our BBAs as well.

We are looking at another run of those.

It depends where they are fitted and whether there is an option for fit kinematic type couplers. There's very little option for a Kinematic on something like a 37 or 47 with the bogies right up behind the bufferbeam. I don't really see how the NEM pocket differs if bogie mounted or kinematic mounted tbh, its still in the same place.

Cool. I'm only there on the Friday though mate.

Whilst I agree to a degree, our PGA kinematics are absolutely superb, they do in general cause more trouble than they solve IMO. The idea behind them is good but as I said once you get a lot of weight on them you are relying massively on the spring pulling it to centre or the brute force of the coupling pulling sideways back to centre by the stock to get it into the middle at which point you potentially get the aforementioned potential derailing of the first wagon. On top of that there is more vertical movement in the pocket which is also undesirable.

The issue with Kinematics, and this is something that I have faced as a modeller too, is that they are great if your train is light. However the nature of how it works is a little counter productive. The weight of the train is taken on the chassis as the coupling moves out on the curve extending the spring that holds the coupling central, however when moving back onto a straight the coupling has to pull itself back in to get over the central 'mountain' that pulls the train back in reducing buffer gap. That's all well and good but the very spring that has to stretch on corners now has to overcome the weight of the train to bring it back to centre. You are effectively asking the spring to be both contradictory things. I do often wonder if we need to drop the buffer gap pride a little and just simply substitute the kinematic couplers for a simple sprung draught box.

If I'm honest I still don't know what the nail does. 🤷

No more so than any other kinematic coupler. It's a standard design. Uncoupling Kadees on curves is problematic whether the pocket is kinematic or not.

I am looking at revising the the model to have bogie mounted pockets for the 60 but it will depend on whether they foul the snowplough etc. As for the fans on DC, there is an issue with the current DC blanking plate and we will be making a replacement available that solves the issue soon.