Hornby Princess Coronation Class (Duchess)

[JSpencer]

Are Hereford Model Centre the only major retailer that hasn't had their delivery from Hornby yet? As 46256 & the H class are selling out fast, I'm getting nervous about my order from them. Silly, I know, as they're only model trains, but...

 

No I think Hattons and Model Railways direct have not had theirs yet either.

[tractionman]

 

The 'Duchess of Atholl's ' front bogie derailed on a large gap on the inner circuit and the tender derailed on the outer curve a couple of times whereas there were no derailments with the 'City of Liverpool'. The Wrenn City is the sort of locomotive that you can leave to run while you are doing something else whereas you need to keep a watchful eye on the Duchess all the time. The Wrenn tender has a metal chassis which means that the weight is in the right place whereas I think the Hornby tender is too light. I did not like the fixed pony truck with flangeless wheels on the Hornby Duchess as it looked ridiculous on 2' 6" radius curves.

 

 

I think the tender does seem light though mine stayed on the rails despite my dodgy uneven track which has a few lumps and doglegs in it (it was only meant to be temporary!), but the front bogie did jump the rails at one of the ski jumps, who can blame it!

 

My Duchess of Atholl managed eleven bogie coaches with ease, I've no other loco that can manage that, and half the consist comprised some rather old coaches too which are quite heavy and not as free running as my recent Hornby LMS stock.

 

Cheers,

 

Keith

[WD0-6-0]

I haven't seen it noted yet (and this isn't a dig at Hornby I love my Stanier) but the box art shows bevel rim bogie wheels when the ones on the model are plain. Easily replaced and still a mile better than the old model though. Not a big problem

Edited October 28, 2017 by WD0-6-0

[Steamport Southport]

I haven't seen it noted yet (and this isn't a dig at Hornby I love my Stanier) but the box art shows bevel rim bogie wheels when the ones on the model are plain. Easily replaced and still a mile better than the old model though. Not a big problem

 

I believe we mentioned it a while back and was shot down for being over critical.

 

 

 

Jason

[reevesthecat]

Received mine from derails (Sir William) despite being a mainly D&E modeller I really wanted one of these as I received the duchess of Sutherland set years ago when I was 10 for Christmas and this model has reignited those happy memories. I am really impressed with this model the finish and detail is superb. It runs really well forward but an audible click in reverse maybe a coupling rod catching need further investigation.

DCC socket in the tender looks easy enough to chip will have a go at some point.

Well done Hornby

Thanks

Mark

[WD0-6-0]

I believe we mentioned it a while back and was shot down for being over critical.

 

 

 

Jason

Fair enough, I'll leave it there then! I'm not actually criticising, I think it's one of the best models I've ever bought I just find it curious they'd put in the effort to develop those wheels for the photos then never use them

[cctransuk]

I believe we mentioned it a while back and was shot down for being over critical.

 

 

 

Jason

 

We were indeed.

 

In fact, I mentioned directly to Hornby the Stanier tender mythical valance - which has been eliminated - and the fixed trailing truck with flangeless wheels.

 

I suggested a pivotted trailing truck, locked with a second screw and fitted with flangeless wheels, to suit the 'radially-challenged' amongst us. If this had been done, and a spare pair of flanged wheels had been supplied, those of us with more generous curves would simply have had to remove one screw and swap the wheels.

 

I will be investigating the possibilities for an articulated trailing truck just as soon as I can turn my attention to the model of 46256 that I picked up from Kernow Models today.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[No Decorum]

Sir William comes with an extra set of trailing wheels which are flanged. The flanges foul another flange moulded onto the rear of the trailing truck. The truck itself is plastic and I found that the flanged wheels turn readily once I filed off some of the rear of the truck. My layout has gentle curves so that was enough for my purposes.

 

The rear of the truck is prevented from swivelling by a part of the moulding sticking up into a corresponding hole. It should be easy to carve it off. The front of the truck is held in place by a screw in the middle of a square tab fitting into a square recess. If the square tab is rounded off a bit, it might allow some sideways motion. Alternatively, jspencer, I think, suggested cutting through the rear of the truck’s frame in order to allow it to flex outwards.

 

It should be possible for flanged wheel obsessionals to be satisfied unless the loco faces very tight curves.

 

EDIT Duh! I should have looked again before posting. The wheels are fixed in the chassis, not the trailing truck, so there is little point in making the truck swivel. There is a little sideplay, though, which allows the model to negotiate gentle curves with flanged wheels. Perhaps I should mention too that the wheels touch the rail head, so they do rotate. With some earlier models, the wheels dangle in mid air. To cure this, I bung a small piece of ball point inner tube (anything would do) under the plate holding the wheels in place to allow them to descend under their own weight.

 

All in all, an improvement on the Merchant Navy.

Edited October 28, 2017 by No Decorum

[Colin_McLeod]

Forgive a naive question but does the rear truck swivle on the prototype or is it fixed? Thanks.

[No Decorum]

Forgive a naive question but does the rear truck swivle on the prototype or is it fixed? Thanks.

Not naive at all. What modellers like to call the trailing truck is an extension of the frames, so does not swing. In order to allow the broad firebox enough depth, the frames are reduced to about half height and in order to support the weight, an extra half-height frame is fixed to the half-height main frame. I know that in the Gresley arrangement, the wheels and axleboxes move from side to side and I’m almost certain that they do on a Duchess as well but I’ll have to check exactly how.

[Arthur]

 

The Ivatts were fitted with a delta trailing truck which was a separate item and did pivot/swing. It was a completely different arrangement to that used by Gresley.

 

The original truck was a steel casting but problems with it led to a welded replacement.

 

.

[cctransuk]

The Ivatts were fitted with a delta trailing truck which was a separate item and did pivot/swing.

 

 

As will the one on my Hornby model - unless the manufacturers have been fiendishly awkward in their design.

 

I know that model pivotted trailing trucks swing much more than the prototype, due to the radii that they traverse.

 

However, the prototype trailing truck DID move quite noticeably and, IMHO, nothing looks more ridiculous than a fixed truck projecting out beyond the outer rail when the loco negotiates a curve.

 

We'd not tolerate fixed front bogies - why should we accept fixed trailing trucks?

 

Is this another case of 'splasher-gate'?

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[coachmann]

It's an innexpensive RTR toy for goodness sakes and a smasher at that!  Railway modellers are reputed to have certain building skills and if a RTR model isn't to thier liking, they generally go off and build a kit and then pay a fortune for someone to paint and line it for them. 

Edited October 29, 2017 by coachmann

[Andy Y]

 

Is this another case of 'splasher-gate'?

 

 

Please don't start issues off; stop building train set curves if it offends.

[JSpencer]

Personally I prefer a swinging truck rather than a rigid trailing wheel. However does the latter stop me from buying RTR models? No.

 

Having kit built a few big locos in the form of Turbomotive, P2 and W1, I can understand the difficulties RTR makers face trying to get round set track curves, my three kits won,t tolerate anything less than 3ft radius, and look more comfortable on 4ft.

The Hornby P2 looks ridiculous going round set track curves, not because of a non swinging truck, but simply because these are big locos leading to big overhangs front and back. All of this leads to tough choices in limited space.

 

Returning back on thread, my only concerns are that a lot of model shops have not had their stocks yet.

Edited October 29, 2017 by JSpencer

[MikeParkin65]

As will the one on my Hornby model - unless the manufacturers have been fiendishly awkward in their design.

 

I know that model pivotted trailing trucks swing much more than the prototype, due to the radii that they traverse.

 

However, the prototype trailing truck DID move quite noticeably and, IMHO, nothing looks more ridiculous than a fixed truck projecting out beyond the outer rail when the loco negotiates a curve.

 

We'd not tolerate fixed front bogies - why should we accept fixed trailing trucks?

 

Is this another case of 'splasher-gate'?

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Real steam locos also make copious clouds of steam and smoke but no one, not even the DCC sound enthusiasts worry a jot about that. This hobby is all about compromise, ingenuity and imagination. Personally I much prefer the fixed truck because it looks so much better in 80% of scenarios on my layout (so straight track, gentler curves and on shed). For the 20% of scenarios where the fixed truck is apparent I employ compromise (hide those curves as much as possible) and imagination. Ingenuity would be as Coach says, to either modify my new toy or build a kit. Given that neither would likely produce a better outcome than Hornby have delivered I am leaving well alone!

[cctransuk]

Please don't start issues off; stop building train set curves if it offends.

 

Tongue-in-cheek - nothing less than Peco largest radius here. My point was that, even on prototype radii, movement of the prototype trailing truck was quite evident.

 

Surely, one point of fora such as this one is to bring to the attention of RTR producers the views of the consumer? The effective pressure of such expressed opinions is evident in the demise of the Hornby Stanier tender 'valance'.

 

If enough consumers were to make it clear to Hornby that the option to have a swivelling pony truck is desired, they may well act. I have explained in this thread - more than once, (see #708) - how this could be achieved whilst still retaining the default option of a fixed / flangeless truck.

 

It is surely counter to the aims of this forum to close down discussion on particular subjects, just because the moderators may not agree with the point being made?

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Edited October 29, 2017 by cctransuk

[Andy Y]

It is surely counter to the aims of this forum to close down discussion on particular subjects, just because the moderators may not agree with the point being made?

 

I don't fancy refereeing yet another product-related spat on a Sunday thanks, nothing to do with whether I agree or disagree.

[Widnes Model Centre]

 

Returning back on thread, my only concerns are that a lot of model shops have not had their stocks yet.

 

We know of a few shops, can you identify which shops? We haven't received any, nor can I find them on my back-orders.

[cctransuk]

I don't fancy refereeing yet another product-related spat on a Sunday thanks, nothing to do with whether I agree or disagree.

 

I can assure you that there will be no 'spat' initiated by me - hopefully those who disgree can do so in a similar reasoned manner.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[adb968008]

Mines arrived...

 

 

 

Arrived from Sheffield, the outer brown packaging is fine, so it left Yorkshire that way.

Looks like a grumpy Sunday for me.

Edited October 29, 2017 by adb968008

[Ian Hargrave]

Mines arrived...

 

7A630E56-C7A5-44A9-91CE-F91E0EA85C9A.jpegA2506812-96E7-4562-B904-D0BAAF5AC8A2.jpeg51E5DE3E-0898-4225-BA94-CE8948502091.jpeg

 

F8032C7C-6CAD-46E3-87DD-F5F97A84A39E.jpeg

Looks like a grumpy Sunday for me.

 

I have to ask...is this transit damage by the carrier or more likely sent in this condition ? In which case why ? IMHO return as faulty and not in merchantable condition.Wholly unacceptable.

[No Decorum]

On Atholl, the slab under the cab is part of the frames. The trailing truck is inside it. On the Princesses, the sideways movement was 4¼" each way and I should imagine that the Duchesses were much the same. Forgive the approximation, but that is less than 1·5 mm. Some sort of compromise will be necessary for model curves. Obviously, the trailing truck would strike the inside of the frame on all but the gentlest curves.

 

Sir William is different. As Arthur points out, The trailling truck is visible passing under the frame. It might be made to swivel but then there might be trouble at changes of gradient on a curve. I haven’t an Atholl but on Sir William, there seem to be lots of options for modellers to hack about the trailing truck to suit their own preferences and layouts.

 

On one side of mine, the union link points backwards instead of forwards; famous last words but that should be an easy fix. The brake rodding looks as if it protrudes too far down and may well foul stock rails. More trials indicated.

[Stevelewis]

I have to ask...is this transit damage by the carrier or more likely sent in this condition ? In which case why ? IMHO return as faulty and not in merchantable condition.Wholly unacceptable.

 

cancelled.   incorrect  reply!!

Edited October 29, 2017 by Stevelewis

[adb968008]

I have to ask...is this transit damage by the carrier or more likely sent in this condition ? In which case why ? IMHO return as faulty and not in merchantable condition.Wholly unacceptable.

I’m going to ask for a swap.

I’m sure they will be fine changing it.

Just a bit fed up to get excited on my last free Sunday for a few weeks was over before I put turned the power on.

Sadly my DJ 71 just arrived from Merseyside and that’s got scratches all over it too.

Not a good day for modelling.