OO gauge Crowdfunded APT-P (Warley announcement)

[DJM Dave]

Hi That picture is lovely - I like the red lines - but have to say I thought it was only set 7 so its good to see others got it as well. The formation is a bit of a GT set as well with two power cars and 2 +3 trailers. 

 

Certainly sprung contacts at top of body cavity registering on top of nose cone with a clip on that can be re clipped in the raised position so that lights work when nose lowered would be a way forward. I am sure some after market thought mister would create a servo operated nose lift for even more play factor. And a second servo to advance a coupler would put icing on cake, especially in N gauge ?

and of course rotate the buffers. , I`ll get my coat          

 

Robert

 

Get your coat? You’ll need a sowester after that little lot. Lol

 

Cheers

Dave

[Clydebridge]

On this day 36 years ago just two days after it's debut in revenue earning service.  Not sure what unit number this is but the 0700hrs Glasgow to Euston debut run on the 7th of December was 370 002  with Polmadie Driver Rab Harper at the controls and Willie Gilmour as co pilot. That's Rab hanging out the failed unit window looking somewhat despondent being propelled up the facing road back to Polmadie by the looks of it.  Class 47 haulage anyone?

 

Still undecided whether I should purchase one for enjoyment or as an investment or both. Either way it's going to be something special.

 

PS: there's still some APT legacy infrastructure at Shields Depot including the Traction motor drop pits and overhead crane etc should the real thing ever get back into mainline running and need a service.  >joke<

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[JSpencer]

If the set was being dragged, I am pretty sure the tilt system on the real thing would have been switched off.

 

And I would surprised if the end user of the model, will be given the choice of switching on or off a tilt system on a model.

 

So either it is being dragged and the model tilting as it does so, or the model is non-tilting, which would be a silly choice as it was the feature that made this train iconic.

 

I therefore cannot see the point of lifting/plug-in noses that give little - IMHO - value and might even make the nose look ugly trying to get the thing perfectly lined up with no deep Atlantic trench where the two parts join.

 

Of course if the tilt system was left switched on while it was dragged by the comparative slow cumbersome diesels. I rest my case here.

On doing all the minor internal details, really only needed if you can them while the thing is sitting on a layout. I know Rapido added a sandwich, but this is not noticible really and they got this 4 car set within less than half the price of the proposed 5 car set hear (yeah I know they gad price advantages of a few years ago). My point is, unless adding all these invisible details makes little or no difference to the end price, nor increases the risk of it arriving broken, it probably is not worth it.

Edited December 10, 2017 by JSpencer

[Dagworth]

The one thing I hope that will be incorporated that is missing on the Hornby model is the huge wells through the power car from floor to roof above each bogie. What Hornby portrayed as a black rectangle is actually a hole all the way through, which carries the linkage that prevents the pan from tilting.

 

View from the bogie up to the pan

 

Andi

[blueeighties]

Working lights is no longer a 'nice to have' in today's RTR market. I'd say it was as much a standard feature as having wheels on the bogies !

Of course they are. But INTERNAL lights are not.

[royaloak]

Of course they are. But INTERNAL lights are not.

If you are going to have working lights then they need to be prototypical brightness, not the 10 billion candlepower lights fitted to most of the available lit models.

 

If you are going to do it then do it right, not as a gimmick!

[Andrew F]

Decent decoders have the right dimming qualities.

[royaloak]

Decent decoders have the right dimming qualities.

Not much use to us still on analogue though is it, and even if I was on DCC why should I have to fit a decoder to correct a design/manufacturing error?

Edited December 9, 2017 by royaloak

[blueeighties]

Good grief. I know Michael quite well, and applaud him for embarking on such a wonderful project. But I really don't envy having to deal with all of the naysayers. This model could be produced with 100% complete accuracy to the prototype in both form and function, yet still folk would grumble and mumble. Manufacturers of unique projects such as this care about detail and getting it right....in this day and age correct lighting is generally catered for without question on DCC and DC through well designed electronic circuitry. How about waiting until there is actually some test models produced and ready for comment and inspection rather than moaning about potential issues that won't actually be issues at all? Or failing that, just stick with your old Hornby model and be happy that you don't need to face the absolutely unbearable fact that you may not be happy with a new model.

[Darius43]

Not much use to us still on analogue though is it, and even if I was on DCC why should I have to fit a decoder to correct a design/manufacturing error?

If you were on DCC you wouldn’t get very much out of it without fitting a decoder.

 

Darius

[Kelly]

Decoders are potentially cheap enough for manufacturers to include in with the models and do away with DCC ready.

[Bucoops]

Desperate for a lottery win to buy a full set!

[adb968008]

Maybe we do that at Crewe for the scanning party? Would be great to get as many like minded individuals as we can there and bat things back and forth. It won’t be a design by committee, but I guarantee we will listen and take on board everything, and maybe incorporate a few things too.

Cheers

Dave

APT BR cheese butty party in the buffet ?, free packet of crisp for those paying the first instalment ?

If your decorating the buffet, you can always get advertising for the shelves.. Tennants, Iron Bru and Tunnocks tea cakes ?

 

We could of course think of lifting pans, opening doors, working screen wipers or even toilet occupied signs but there’s not a lot to practically automate on the APT beyond interior lighting, but passengers would be nice, some with dodgy 70’s colourful jackets and the progressives.. Punks were around early 80’s... of course some 1mm sized tea cups on the table would be a nod to that Peter Purves film with the rattling cups.

Edited December 10, 2017 by adb968008

[phil gollin]

... but there’s not a lot to practically automate on the APT beyond interior lighting, .......

.

 

Oh! I don't know.  A small smoke unit to signify frying electrics.  "Passenger voices" asking "what's the delay" ?

 

.

[FPH 603]

How about a whole bunch of APT promo for to put on the end walls of the compartments and for people to throw away? Screw up the spares and scatter them as model litter. Or maybe the sounds of people quoting 'The APT on platform 1 is fifteen years late!"

 

EDIT: That newspaper posted by Clydebridge a yesterday could be a feature too...

Edited December 11, 2017 by DoubleDeckInterurban

[kevpeo]

A sensible suggestion/question for Dave. I noticed earlier in the thread talk of one DCC decoder to control the whole set (in the power car?) This is fine for dc/dcc if no sound is involved, but will there be provision in the DTOS for sound decoders?  Believe me, it is very obvious that the horns are sounding from the middle if it is a full set!  Plus you can also have the aux diesel sounds too.

 

Kev, part owner of a Hornby 2+12 set, who has been told we will be upgrading!

[GordonC]

The nose can be un-clipped as designed at present, however there’s a couple of engineering bits and bobs to get over first. One of the things I’ve noticed recently in new models of some limited edition models is that the mad trencher has had his shovel out on the model design.

I’m looking for the nose on the APT to have a lot more ‘finess’ than that

 

Moving back to the nose internals, the nose has the lights in in real life, and i’d Like to have the lights operational.

 

So i’m Toying with the plug in nose having brass type connectors on it that touch an area on the front of the cab front bulkhead that has the buffers attached, and a plug in NEM pocket.

 

Still playing with design ideas, and no doubt that this is on the list to accomplish.

 

Cheers

Dave

 

would the lights ever be 'on' if the nose was lifted? should the red tail have been shown prior to a loco buffering up?

 

I'd perhaps suggest that clips for the nose to plug into to make the lights work might be unnecessary. However, was a normal portable tail lamp ever clipped on with the nose lifted like that? would something like Bachmanns Mk2s where a working small tail lamp could be clipped on be possible instead?

[DJM Dave]

No, the lights wouldn’t be, as it would be lifted for being hauled.

 

The rear end would have tail lights working though afaik, as there’s no lamp irons for a lamp that I know of.

 

Obviously the lifted nose won’t have working lights, but will have a light unit fitted, hence the design stage now of brass wipers or plungers to give connectivity to them. It has to be discrete though, as you don’t really want to see the contacts when the nose is raised.

 

Cheers

Dave

[JSpencer]

Forgive me for saying but all this talk of lifting noses and being towed is making me worried that the model may not be able to 'tilt'.

 

I have not found any evidence of towed APT with tilting still switched on. Given the nose would tilt as the train goes round corners, the NEM socket would tilt with it - but clearly the pulling loco won't.

So you either need:

1/ a special coupling that copes with tilt between the loco and the train (tension locks might support it but buckeyes won't)

2/ the ability to switch the tilt off which is likely to be complex on such a long model train and would make it fragile (you break one, and thats it, one part which tilts no more)

OR 3/ the model does not tilt.

 

Now for me personally, a non-tilting APT is a show stopper (this is THE feature that makes it Iconic). If I have to choose between it being able to tilt OR it being able to be towed. The Tilt wins.

 

I know you are still thinking this through, but I would hate to see the Tilt feature abandoned on this train. Granted they did on the N Pendalino but not recommended for the mother of all tilting trains.

[GordonC]

No, the lights wouldn’t be, as it would be lifted for being hauled.

 

The rear end would have tail lights working though afaik, as there’s no lamp irons for a lamp that I know of.

 

Obviously the lifted nose won’t have working lights, but will have a light unit fitted, hence the design stage now of brass wipers or plungers to give connectivity to them. It has to be discrete though, as you don’t really want to see the contacts when the nose is raised.

 

Cheers

Dave

 

ah right sorry yes, I was thinking it was meant for the contacts to be so the lights worked while the nose was both lifted and lowered.

 

Lamp irons are just above the buffers though ....

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/nickdrew/5514634742/in/photolist-51g5YZ-9piWMm-21swvNu-GyJ7De-pzJP6X-oy4Vvr-ogSQx9-aTCvdH-ocKp8L-7riQMb-fD1cwT-kVoY5f-kHUqX-qXSpMf-8YvRC1-5wY9bH-djzGk5-9r8wTP-kmPpmr-bBAGUi-WYTycE-66QqDT-7SXFsB-4KKtLW-jvRdBw-ow9egv-oeSXbz-ouQ6TW-bvoa9w-or1du-5BUsv9-owkT1B-obNB5t-obMuEQ-7Ty1iG-owA9GP-crXNzY-5D1s4b-hU1s7W-RkQTJb-7BUs6q-egK9kh-7ijAhA-p8LXc-ygSZ5-ow9GpE-ovpypg-7dC7w4-5t3s4Z-5CEZKm

 

interestingly, none here ...

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/tunnel_one/36087048284/in/photolist-WYTycE-66QqDT-7SXFsB-4KKtLW-jvRdBw-ow9egv-oeSXbz-ouQ6TW-bvoa9w-or1du-5BUsv9-owkT1B-obNB5t-obMuEQ-7Ty1iG-owA9GP-crXNzY-5D1s4b-hU1s7W-RkQTJb-7BUs6q-egK9kh-7ijAhA-p8LXc-ygSZ5-ow9GpE-ovpypg-7dC7w4-5t3s4Z-5CEZKm-odjamj-XNn7sx-5rgkc-Z5cvUi-KoGWGJ-CXj2Vt-agy6Jr-GymM-5mnKtq-9w6o4D-of1GKN-owr9pe-ouvdig-qNSJhW-odbAxC-odq9oK-fpnFdz-7Jjx42-66UJKq-7hUZLw

[Rob F]

Forgive me for saying but all this talk of lifting noses and being towed is making me worried that the model may not be able to 'tilt'.

 

I have not found any evidence of towed APT with tilting still switched on. Given the nose would tilt as the train goes round corners, the NEM socket would tilt with it - but clearly the pulling loco won't.

So you either need:

1/ a special coupling that copes with tilt between the loco and the train (tension locks might support it but buckeyes won't)

2/ the ability to switch the tilt off which is likely to be complex on such a long model train and would make it fragile (you break one, and thats it, one part which tilts no more)

OR 3/ the model does not tilt.

 

Now for me personally, a non-tilting APT is a show stopper (this is THE feature that makes it Iconic). If I have to choose between it being able to tilt OR it being able to be towed. The Tilt wins.

 

I know you are still thinking this through, but I would hate to see the Tilt feature abandoned on this train. Granted they did on the N Pendalino but not recommended for the mother of all tilting trains.

Even tilting is problematic if we are after fidelity to the prototype. On the real train, the tilt is speed related. If you are bumbling through a crossover at 20mph the real APT would not tilt. On a model, the degree of tilt is (I believe but stand prepared to be corrected) purely linked to the amount of rotation of the bogies so the train will tilt to the same degree regardless of speed, which does look slightly odd at shunting speeds. It is a compromise that has be accepted I think. Either the train behaves prototypically at high speed or at low speed (tilt or no tilt), but it is very difficult to have both.

 

Rob

 

Rob

[JSpencer]

Even tilting is problematic if we are after fidelity to the prototype. On the real train, the tilt is speed related. If you are bumbling through a crossover at 20mph the real APT would not tilt. On a model, the degree of tilt is (I believe but stand prepared to be corrected) purely linked to the amount of rotation of the bogies so the train will tilt to the same degree regardless of speed, which does look slightly odd at shunting speeds. It is a compromise that has be accepted I think. Either the train behaves prototypically at high speed or at low speed (tilt or no tilt), but it is very difficult to have both.

 

Rob

 

Rob

For me, the whole point of having an APT is to replicate it running at speed. I certainly would not spend a grand on a 14 car set just to have a scale model of the thing showing how it worked while being shunted. I agree at big stations, the train would not be moving fast as it left or arrived at them. But few model these huge terminus type and most people running them will portray the train speed past small stations. So for me (as was the case for the Rapido model), portraying how it was mean't to operate, which was at speed (it is a high speed express train after all) is more important than being towed or passing slowly through yards and over cross overs.

[Vistisen]

I am thinking about the tilt/speed relation problems. Off the cuff thoughts, small servos are very cheap now days, and electrical chips cost next to nothing. Would it be possible to cause and control, the til with a servo motor in each carriage. That would open up the possibility of speed and radius related tilting, and even the option to exaggerate og supress tilt according to the owners inclination. It would also solve the nose up problems.

 

Dave: feel free to use my brilliant idea, it will only cost you a 14 train set sent to Denmark  .

[Covkid]

For me, the whole point of having an APT is to replicate it running at speed. I certainly would not spend a grand on a 14 car set just to have a scale model of the thing showing how it worked while being shunted. I agree at big stations, the train would not be moving fast as it left or arrived at them. But few model these huge terminus type and most people running them will portray the train speed past small stations. So for me (as was the case for the Rapido model), portraying how it was mean't to operate, which was at speed (it is a high speed express train after all) is more important than being towed or passing slowly through yards and over cross overs.

 

 

Understand your point "JSpencer" but with the utmost of respect how many model APT-Ps do you think will actually run full length and at a fair lick - sufficient for any kind of visible tilt ?

 

I regard myself as fortunate because I had a ride in an APT on test and recall it was an amazing piece of kit. However, I will not be parting with well over a thousand pounds to try and recreate my own little piece of history, in my chosen scale.

 

I have no doubts Durham Trains of Stanley and Dave will bring the 2mm version to the market, but I have grave doubts about the bigger brother cutting metal although I hope I am wrong. Therefore, IMHO there needs to be a realistic spec for the model, which those interested in the project need to buy into. 

[DJM Dave]

No, the lights wouldn’t be, as it would be lifted for being hauled.

 

The rear end would have tail lights working though afaik, as there’s no lamp irons for a lamp that I know of.

 

Obviously the lifted nose won’t have working lights, but will have a light unit fitted, hence the design stage now of brass wipers or plungers to give connectivity to them. It has to be discrete though, as you don’t want to see any ‘gubbins’ that shouldn’t be there.

 

Cheers

Dave