PECO Announces Bullhead Track for OO

[Gary H]

The very short check rails are also a feature of their flat-bottom range.

 

I suspect it may be a design feature intended to allow wheels with a tight back-to-back to squeeze through, thus preserving their claim to be "universal".

 

In which case the short check rails may remain.

 

Martin.

 

I do hope not as it makes the whole thing look like ****.

[Pacific231G]

And you actually had to be in the sleeper on SR territory or you didn't get on (or off) the boat.

Err. yes you could. I used that service one very cold February in the mid 1970s. I travelled down on the EMU that left Victoria after the Voitures Lits. At Dover Marine there was a long and rather cold walk over various footbridges to reach the train ferry dock where I got on the ship (boat?!!) . At Dunkerque, I got off the ship and, after the border controls, was drected by signs to a row of SNCF coaches waiting a couple of hundred yards from the berth. Eventually the Voutures Lits were coupled on to them and the combined train headed for Paris.

Aboard the ferry, passenger accomodation was limited to a saloon with a bar that was available to the sleeping car passengers as well as foot passengers. There was no restriction on visitng the vehicle deck so I did and apart from the Night Ferry sleepers, and I assume a Fourgon, most of the deck was occupied by HGVs.

Edited January 14, 2017 by Pacific231G

[The Stationmaster]

Err. yes you could. I used that service one very cold February in the mid 1970s. I travelled down on the EMU that left Victoria a few before (or possibly after) the Voitures Lits. At Dover Marine there was a long and rather cold walk over various footbridges to reach the train ferry dock where I got on the ship (boat?!!) . At Dunkerque, I got off the ship and, after the border controls, was drected by signs to a row of SNCF coaches waiting a couple of hundred yards from the berth. Eventually the Voutures Lits were coupled on to them and the combined train headed for Paris.

Aboard the ferry passenger accomodation was limited to a saloon with a bar that was available to the sleeping car passengers as well as foot passengers. There was no restriction on visitng the vehicle deck so I did and apart from the Night Ferry sleepers, and I assume a Fourgon, most of the deck was occupied by HGVs.

 

Ah, but you did have to be in a sleeper if you were making a through journey and not travelling as a 'classic' passenger.

[Mike Storey]

Err. yes you could. I used that service one very cold February in the mid 1970s. I travelled down on the EMU that left Victoria a few before (or possibly after) the Voitures Lits. At Dover Marine there was a long and rather cold walk over various footbridges to reach the train ferry dock where I got on the ship (boat?!!) . At Dunkerque, I got off the ship and, after the border controls, was drected by signs to a row of SNCF coaches waiting a couple of hundred yards from the berth. Eventually the Voutures Lits were coupled on to them and the combined train headed for Paris.

Aboard the ferry passenger accomodation was limited to a saloon with a bar that was available to the sleeping car passengers as well as foot passengers. There was no restriction on visitng the vehicle deck so I did and apart from the Night Ferry sleepers, and I assume a Fourgon, most of the deck was occupied by HGVs.

 

Interesting. I worked for Sealink in the mid-'70's, at Dover for a summer period (on the linkspan) and then Victoria, for three years. Part of my duties at Victoria, when on late turn, was to provide customer assistance to outbound Night Ferry passengers until they went on to the train, where passport and, previously, customs checks would be carried out during the journey. Large luggage would be checked in by each passenger at the HMC shed alongside Platform 1, and sealed into the Fourgon(s).

 

You are right in that there was a parallel train-boat-train night service, mainly for the backpacker element, at much cheaper rates than the day services, or indeed the Night Ferry. This tended to leave at 23.00 or 23.15, when the Night Ferry left at 22.00 or 23.00 depending on the time of year (French time changes did not coincide with UK time changes in those days).

 

However, on board the train ferry, Night Ferry passengers had their own refreshment service within the train for the entire voyage and I very much doubt the average NF passenger would want to mix it up with the rucksackers for 2.5 hours. Access to the vehicle decks was supposed to be strictly forbidden during the sailing, for safety and security as much as for HMC regs. Sounds like the ferry crew were not properly enforcing the regulations. 

Edited January 13, 2017 by Mike Storey

[PMP]

On the 7th Jan I posted this, http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/107569-peco-announces-bullhead-track-for-oo/?p=2565620

 

I took my own advice and yesterday 12/01/2017 spoke with PECO regarding these products. For consistency I spoke to the same senior manager that I spoke to at Warley 26/11/2016.

 

The observant amongst you will note that I have not subsequently edited or added anything to the post on here, or my linked Facebook post of 26th November 2016 since they were posted, and I have no need to amend them.

 

That's because the information posted on the Facebook page on 26th November, and that I posted here 07/01/2017, linked above, has not changed.

 

 

Hope that helps cut through the BS that for some reason keeps floating to the top.

[gr.king]

I fear that is likely to be a forlorn hope.

[martin_wynne]

That's because the information posted on the Facebook page on 26th November, and that I posted here 07/01/2017, linked above, has not changed.

 

Hope that helps cut through the BS that for some reason keeps floating to the top.

 

After that rather bad-tempered post, you are going to look a bit silly if the turnouts are released at Easter with loose-heel switches and longer check rails.

 

Martin.

[PMP]

I'll take the risk Martin, thanks for your concern though.

[57xx]

On the 7th Jan I posted this, http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/107569-peco-announces-bullhead-track-for-oo/?p=2565620

 

I took my own advice and yesterday 12/01/2017 spoke with PECO regarding these products. For consistency I spoke to the same senior manager that I spoke to at Warley 26/11/2016.

 

The observant amongst you will note that I have not subsequently edited or added anything to the post on here, or my linked Facebook post of 26th November 2016 since they were posted, and I have no need to amend them.

 

That's because the information posted on the Facebook page on 26th November, and that I posted here 07/01/2017, linked above, has not changed.

 

 

Hope that helps cut through the BS that for some reason keeps floating to the top.

 

I'd like to give this post more than one like. It deserves many more.

[Guest]

Hope that helps cut through the BS that for some reason keeps floating to the top.

 

I was going to add something to this thread a while back but for some reason every time I wanted to type bullhead, my brain was making me type bull####. Glad I'm not the only one.

 

I spotted a comment in a thread from 2011 along the lines of "as Peco aren't likely to make proper bullhead track any time soon, I shall have to look elsewhere". Now Peco are making bullhead track and points to match, the prayers of a lot of folk have been answered. I guess for some though, nothing less than absolute perfection will do. I'm delighted with this new track and don't really give a monkey's if it's not absolutely perfect, it's still a giant leap forwards. I really don't see what all this speculation achieves? If it's been tooled, I guess it will be what it will be. I, for one, am happy to wait and see.

[Clive Mortimore]

On the 7th Jan I posted this, http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/107569-peco-announces-bullhead-track-for-oo/?p=2565620

 

I took my own advice and yesterday 12/01/2017 spoke with PECO regarding these products. For consistency I spoke to the same senior manager that I spoke to at Warley 26/11/2016.

 

The observant amongst you will note that I have not subsequently edited or added anything to the post on here, or my linked Facebook post of 26th November 2016 since they were posted, and I have no need to amend them.

 

That's because the information posted on the Facebook page on 26th November, and that I posted here 07/01/2017, linked above, has not changed.

 

 

Hope that helps cut through the BS that for some reason keeps floating to the top.

 

After that rather bad-tempered post, you are going to look a bit silly if the turnouts are released at Easter with loose-heel switches and longer check rails.

 

Martin.

And if PMP is correct .........................................

 

Martin, all through this thread your post have not been 100% positive towards Peco. If you have a problem with them that is up to you and you have been allowed to air those views on here. Please can you stop putting down those of us who  have been looking forward to a reliable, easy to use, ready to use system of track that looks better than we already have but is as user friendly as Peco. Luckily Peco seemed to be delivering what we collectively wished. We know it is 00 but that is the gauge we model, we are not making or asking all finescale 7mm to foot modellers to join us, or anyone who does not want to use the new track so please can we see what the end product is like without you keep picking fault in something you have not seen yet.

Edited January 14, 2017 by Clive Mortimore

[martin_wynne]

I'm delighted with this new track and don't really give a monkey's if it's not absolutely perfect, it's still a giant leap forwards.

 

It's a leap forwards, but how big a leap depends on where you are leaping from.

 

For those who have been using Peco's existing flat-bottom track through gritted teeth for half a century, it is indeed a giant leap.

 

For those who have been using copper-clad bullhead but wishing they could buy something ready-made, it may or may not be a big leap. If the check rails are the wrong length and the switch blades are hollow stampings and the wheels fall into the crossings, it may not be a leap at all. We are assured that it won't be any of those things, but we can only wait and hope.

 

I wonder sometimes what folks think a forum is for? If you don't like the idea of modellers chatting among themselves about what they are hoping for and what they might or might not do with the new track, why bother coming here and reading it?

 

Martin.

[Guest]

It's a leap forwards, but how big a leap depends on where you are leaping from.

 

For those who have been using Peco's existing flat-bottom track through gritted teeth for half a century, it is indeed a giant leap.

 

For those who have been using copper-clad bullhead but wishing they could buy something ready-made, it may or may not be a big leap. If the check rails are the wrong length and the switch blades are hollow stampings and the wheels fall into the crossings, it may not be a leap at all. We are assured that it won't be any of those things, but we can only wait and hope.

 

I wonder sometimes what folks think a forum is for? If you don't like the idea of modellers chatting among themselves about what they are hoping for and what they might or might not do with the new track, why bother coming here and reading it?

 

Martin.

 

My comments weren't actually directed at you, Martin, but if anyone was going to bite, I just knew it would be you...

[gismorail]

My comments weren't actually directed at you, Martin, but if anyone was going to bite, I just knew it would be you...

Love the banter on this site and some topic's attract better than some  

[Pacific231G]

Ah, but you did have to be in a sleeper if you were making a through journey and not travelling as a 'classic' passenger.

You mean you had to have a sleeper berth if you were travelling on the sleeper train-err well yes?

OK I take your point that a lot if not most sleeper trains used to also convey passengers in day carriages. In the 1970s I often travelled in Europe on trains that had a couple of Voitures Lits (that I certainly couldn't afford) plus couchettes (that I could sometimes afford) and ordinary day carriages (that I usually used )  In its latter decades the Orient Express was very much like that and the film that depicted that most accurately was "From Russia with Love". Others tended to over glamourise it.

 

Interesting. I worked for Sealink in the mid-'70's, at Dover for a summer period (on the linkspan) and then Victoria, for three years. Part of my duties at Victoria, when on late turn, was to provide customer assistance to outbound Night Ferry passengers until they went on to the train, where passport and, previously, customs checks would be carried out during the journey. Large luggage would be checked in by each passenger at the HMC shed alongside Platform 1, and sealed into the Fourgon(s).

 

You are right in that there was a parallel train-boat-train night service, mainly for the backpacker element, at much cheaper rates than the day services, or indeed the Night Ferry. This tended to leave at 23.00 or 23.15, when the Night Ferry left at 22.00 or 23.00 depending on the time of year (French time changes did not coincide with UK time changes in those days).

 

However, on board the train ferry, Night Ferry passengers had their own refreshment service within the train for the entire voyage and I very much doubt the average NF passenger would want to mix it up with the rucksackers for 2.5 hours. Access to the vehicle decks was supposed to be strictly forbidden during the sailing, for safety and security as much as for HMC regs. Sounds like the ferry crew were not properly enforcing the regulations.

Interesting Mike. I vaguely remember seeing the Night Ferry departing before the boat train and by the time I got to the ferry the sleepers were already loaded. When I travelled on the ferry early in 1975 there certainly were Night Ferry passengers using the bar and just stretching their legs so they certainly weren't confined to the train but the attendants would presumably have prevented anybody else from entering the train. It was early in February (I had a week of outstanding 1974 leave to use or lose, a seven day France Vacances ticket and southern France was a lot warmer than Britain) so there were only a handful of foot passengers and I don't think the Night Ferry was heavily booked. Edited January 14, 2017 by Pacific231G

[gr.king]

I spotted a comment in a thread from 2011 along the lines of "as Peco aren't likely to make proper bullhead track any time soon, I shall have to look elsewhere".

Quite, only more so, if you follow my meaning. I know I've said it before, but the unending repetition of questions, facts, myth and arguments seems to be routine on this thread, so....the very possibility that Peco might EVER make ANY bullhead track in OO gauge has been derided by some in various parts of the RMweb parish far more recently than 2011, yet here we are.

[The Stationmaster]

You mean you had to have a sleeper berth if you were travelling on the sleeper train-err well yes?

OK I take your point that a lot if not most sleeper trains used to also convey passengers in day carriages. In the 1970s I often travelled in Europe on trains that had a couple of Voitures Lits (that I certainly couldn't afford) plus couchettes (that I could sometimes afford) and ordinary day carriages (that I usually used )  In its latter decades the Orient Express was very much like that and the film that depicted that most accurately was "From Russia with Love". Others tended to over glamourise it.

 

Interesting Mike. I vaguely remember seeing the Night Ferry departing before the boat train and by the time I got to the ferry the sleepers were already loaded. When I travelled on the ferry early in 1975 there certainly were Night Ferry passengers using the bar and just stretching their legs so they certainly weren't confined to the train but the attendants would presumably have prevented anybody else from entering the train. It was early in February (I had a week of outstanding 1974 leave to use or lose, a seven day France Vacances ticket and southern France was a lot warmer than Britain) so there were only a handful of foot passengers and I don't think the Night Ferry was heavily booked.

 

I travelled from London to Paris in a sleeper on The Night Ferry in 1975 and you certainly weren't allowed to alight from the sleeping cars on the ship - in fact it would have been rather dangerous blundering around on the ferry deck unless some sort of emergency left no choice.  There was a buffet car in the formation from Victoria which sleeper passengers had access to but no access to a bar or elsewhere on the ship.

[Coryton]

I travelled from London to Paris in a sleeper on The Night Ferry in 1975 and you certainly weren't allowed to alight from the sleeping cars on the ship - in fact it would have been rather dangerous blundering around on the ferry deck unless some sort of emergency left no choice.  There was a buffet car in the formation from Victoria which sleeper passengers had access to but no access to a bar or elsewhere on the ship.

 

When (some years ago) I travelled on the Paris to Copenhagen overnight train, the coaches were set up with wooden steps for access to/from the vehicle deck.

 

I had no reason to believe access to the train deck wasn't permitted at any point. I did spend some (most?) of the passage on the outside deck, returning to the train before arrival when train passengers were told to get back on. But I spent some time on the train after the ferry left - nobody came round to tell us to get out once the train was safely installed on the train deck as you would in a car or coach. I remember walking down the corridor of a train which was swaying with the motion of a boat was a very strange experience (like sitting in a car on Eurotunnel where the car is moving but the motion is all wrong - and the engine is off!).

[coachmann]

Although it is very slim, if I ever make a return to 4mm scale/00 there will now be a reliable no-###### bullhead track and point system to return to. Meanwhile, the futility of wanting/demanding absolute perfection in 00 gauge is just that and no amount of super-detailing will improve the narrow-gauge appearance of 00 track or things that run on it. With no wish to alter locos to EM (coaches are a doddle), 7mm/0 gauge saved me the hassle. (And in the event turned out to be the best possible move (for me) in all departments).  

Edited January 14, 2017 by coachmann

[Phil Parker]

For those who have been using copper-clad bullhead but wishing they could buy something ready-made, it may or may not be a big leap. If the check rails are the wrong length and the switch blades are hollow stampings and the wheels fall into the crossings, it may not be a leap at all. We are assured that it won't be any of those things, but we can only wait and hope.

Let's also hope the sleepers aren't made of chocolate and the rails are made of Twiglets. We can only wait and hope, but thanks to PMP's talks with Peco and the prototypes so far shown, I feel a little optimism is in order.

 

I do hope not as it makes the whole thing look like ****.

No it doesn't, It makes the point look like a finescale OO point with short checkrails. Peco have had this pointed out to them and might fix it, or not. If they don't, forwhatever reasons, then if you really can't bear to give house room to such a product, you can still build your own points.

 

Or scrape off the Peco checkrails and replace then with alternatives from C&L.

 

Or stick with the existing range of HO sleepered track.

 

I'll admit that I didn't believe years ago that we'd see scale OO track for sale. I am VERY happy to be wrong. I just hope that the UK modeller doesn't look at it, look at the price, and decide that the cheaper stuff is OK really. Peco have taken a risk with this stuff with its limited appeal outside these shores.

[AndyID]

Some people need to "lighten up". It's supposed to be a hobby, not a religion.

[Pacific231G]

I travelled from London to Paris in a sleeper on The Night Ferry in 1975 and you certainly weren't allowed to alight from the sleeping cars on the ship - in fact it would have been rather dangerous blundering around on the ferry deck unless some sort of emergency left no choice.  There was a buffet car in the formation from Victoria which sleeper passengers had access to but no access to a bar or elsewhere on the ship.

I wondered if my memory was fooling me but have just been going through my copy of Ferry Boat de Nuit 1936-1980 which includes a number of accounts of journeys made on the service and a couple of articles about the Night Ferry service in Vie du Rail and its predecessor Notre Metier.

 

It seems that passengers usually did stay in their compartments during the crossing  where if awake the attendant could provide them with drinks and would obtain duty frees for them from the ship. However, one or two people do mention leaving the train and going out on the deck and others who travelled as I did as foot passengers mention exploring the vehicle deck. There was a low platform between each pair of tracks with stairways to the passenger decks so passengers wouldn't have been blundering around on the vehicle deck itself and such access would have been needed for emergency evacuation to the boat deck in any case. I'm sure it was from one of these platforms that I saw the loaded voitures lits and beyond them the HGVs.that occupied the rest of the deck.

 

Various pictures also show foot passengers waiting to disembark at Dunkerque via the ramp but I can't remember whether I did that or not. I assume that only done at off peak times when there weren't too many foot passengers to clear. That practice of off-loading the foot passengers before starting on the vehicles was also quite common on some of the car ferries as it saved the extra operation of bringing up the gangways.

 

It took a bit of thought to figure this out but, from the point of view of customs and immigration there shouldn't have been a problem with Night Ferry and foot/car passengers mixing as they would still have had to clear border controls at the rail terminus for Night Ferry passengers or at the port itself for others. The same would apply in reverse to those getting on the ferry. For the journey on the French side the sleeping cars and accompanying Wagon Restaurant were locked out from the day coaches that accompanied them as the sleeping car passengers were between border controls whereas the foot passengers were already/still on French soil.     

Edited January 14, 2017 by Pacific231G

[Coryton]

 

Various pictures also show foot passengers waiting to disembark at Dunkerque via the ramp but I can't remember whether I did that or not. I assume that only done at off peak times when there weren't too many foot passengers to clear. That practice of off-loading the foot passengers before starting on the vehicles was also quite common on some of the car ferries as it saved the extra operation of bringing up the gangways.

 

 

On a ferry trip from Holyhead to Dublin a couple of years ago, foot passengers had to wait until all vehicles had boarded (and their passengers got all the good places to sit) before boarding via the ramp.

 

I can't remember now if we disembarked via the ramp before the vehicles came off or if it was on a gangway,

 

The last time I got the ferry from Harwich the gangway was (apparently) broken and foot passengers boarded  by getting on a bus which dropped them off on one of the vehicle decks. Not something I've seen before.

[BlackRat]

After that rather bad-tempered post, you are going to look a bit silly if the turnouts are released at Easter with loose-heel switches and longer check rails.

 

Martin.

How is it bad tempered?

 

Reads fine to me or am I not seeing something that you are?

[Clive Mortimore]

It's a leap forwards, but how big a leap depends on where you are leaping from.

 

For those who have been using Peco's existing flat-bottom track through gritted teeth for half a century, it is indeed a giant leap.

 

For those who have been using copper-clad bullhead but wishing they could buy something ready-made, it may or may not be a big leap. If the check rails are the wrong length and the switch blades are hollow stampings and the wheels fall into the crossings, it may not be a leap at all. We are assured that it won't be any of those things, but we can only wait and hope.

 

I wonder sometimes what folks think a forum is for? If you don't like the idea of modellers chatting among themselves about what they are hoping for and what they might or might not do with the new track, why bother coming here and reading it?

 

Martin.

Is the sentence I have made bold a fact, or you having a chat about past Peco products?

 

Odd thing is since I went back to the very inaccurate reliable Peco H0 code 100 streamline track with Pig Lane and Hanging Hill I had less derailments than with SMP copper-clad kits I used on Southbridge. Same scratchbuilt locos on all three layouts. Same wheel standard and back to backs, in fact some of my Hornby pankcake motored locos have a 40 thou plastic card washer I used when I opened out their back to backs for Southbridge to prevent them form derailing as much as they did.

 

Brisbane Road is Peco code 100 and few if any derailments per operating session, most derailments are due to operator error.

Sheffield Exchange is Peco code 70. Stock does come off but not enough to prevent an operating session being fun.

Ranelagh Bridge has not been run enough for me to comment on its running, it has only been electrically tested before storage when we decided we were going to move (and haven't yet). 

 

If the new Peco product is as good as the old when running trains then I look forward to the day when I build a new layout with the new track system.

 

 

Hands up for those who want British looking flat bottom track, pre and post Pandro clips to go with the new bullhead track.

Edited January 14, 2017 by Clive Mortimore