KR Models announce the Fell in OO and N.

[No Decorum]

7 minutes ago, Graham_Muz said:

 

Definitely not the same as the Bulleid lamps.

😳 Of course. Two extra on the Bulleids Southern style. I should have checked. With apologies to John Cleese this time: but apart from the two extra lights on the Bulleids and the Bulleid lights not being slightly off centre, the lights were the same. 🤦‍♂️

[The Stationmaster]

15 hours ago, maico said:

 

I've got an older Trix BR85 loco where all 5 axles are cog driven. What is the difference with the steam conrod layout that stops lock-up compared to the Fell?

 

Quality of components and assembly procedures.  Gear drive can be ok and will work without problems if a lot of care is taken in design and more so in manufacture.   But it requires precision parts and high precision assembly - hence it costs more; Rapido had to do a lot of work on their Royal Hudson to get it right.

[Graham_Muz]

40 minutes ago, No Decorum said:

😳 Of course. Two extra on the Bulleids Southern style. I should have checked. With apologies to John Cleese this time: but apart from the two extra lights on the Bulleids and the Bulleid lights not being slightly off centre, the lights were the same. 🤦‍♂️

What I was actually referring to was the physical lamp assembly which were unique to Bulleid's 

[No Decorum]

8 minutes ago, Graham_Muz said:

What I was actually referring to was the physical lamp assembly which were unique to Bulleid's 

Apart from the two extra lights on the Bulleids and the Bulleid lights not being slightly off centre and the physical lamp assembly, the lights were the same. No wonder Kernow gets things right where KR (and I) get things wrong.

[The Stationmaster]

1 hour ago, No Decorum said:

My thanks to adb968008 for posting this image to illustrate a different point. I’ve been thinking about the lights again and concluded that they would have been the same as on the Ivatt and Bulleid diesels. With apologies to Eric Morecambe, they seem to be in the right place but not in the right order. Leaving aside for now that oil lamps would have been used, this, I believe, is how they should be. Looking at the nose, the light just to the left of the lamp iron on the top of the bonnet is white, as it should be.  Directly below it and just to the left of the centre of the three lamp irons is another white light; also correct. Just to the right of the lamp iron is another white light. This is the tail light and should be red – see the picture. The two lights above the buffers show red in reverse and white going forward. They should always be white.

 

So, if you are minded to use the lights correctly, you could block off the white light which should be red and then block off such of the white lights as enable you to show the head code for any train type. Bingo! Just be sure not to reverse! Don’t forget to block off the incorrect tail lights at the rear. Perhaps a red sharpie would correct the light which should be red if running light engine. 

 The picture linked below is probably much more useful as it is more detailed and the angle is much better.  You can also see which of the lights seem to be 'clear' and the one which isn't.  

 

A couple of good images on the 'net show that the headcode discs which were used didn't obscure the headcode lights.  As there are some very clear images with discs and some with headlamps it might be that at some stage the loco was permitted to use the headcode lights, in addition to the discs, when they were required and equally at some time ordinary (oil) head lamps had to be used instead.  Exceptionally there is one very clear picture showing it with no disc or oil lamp but using the relevant headcode light to display a Class B (stopping passenger train) headcode

 

The position with the tail light is very simple - an oil tail lamp was required to be used on running lines when running light engine.

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/64518788@N05/35661282354

 

[cctransuk]

11 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

 The picture linked below is probably much more useful as it is more detailed and the angle is much better.  You can also see which of the lights seem to be 'clear' and the one which isn't.  

 

A couple of good images on the 'net show that the headcode discs which were used didn't obscure the headcode lights.  As there are some very clear images with discs and some with headlamps it might be that at some stage the loco was permitted to use the headcode lights, in addition to the discs, when they were required and equally at some time ordinary (oil) head lamps had to be used instead.  Exceptionally there is one very clear picture showing it with no disc or oil lamp but using the relevant headcode light to display a Class B (stopping passenger train) headcode

 

The position with the tail light is very simple - an oil tail lamp was required to be used on running lines when running light engine.

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/64518788@N05/35661282354

 

 

That's an early photo - TWO cab vents per cab; TWO grilles and TWO blank panels per nose side; original centre window; but the centre rods have already gone.

 

CJI.

[Michael Edge]

No, all the rods are still on, can't tell which side this is but you can see the 150hp engine exhaust. This wasn't there on one side of the Eastbourne exhibition photos (which KR have copied) but it's not entirely clear whether the loco was even complete then.

[cctransuk]

8 minutes ago, Michael Edge said:

No, all the rods are still on, can't tell which side this is but you can see the 150hp engine exhaust. This wasn't there on one side of the Eastbourne exhibition photos (which KR have copied) but it's not entirely clear whether the loco was even complete then.

 

Quite right - I didn't zoom in close enough!

 

(I make that one-all). 😉

 

John Isherwood.

[billy_anorak59]

56 minutes ago, Michael Edge said:

This wasn't there on one side of the Eastbourne exhibition photos (which KR have copied) but it's not entirely clear whether the loco was even complete then.

I think at least one side had a 'sort of' cover over the exhausts - obviously quickly removed, as seen here at Marylebone:

 

Incidentally, that early picture previously posted was the one used on the 'brochure' for the locomotive - front and back covers here:

 

[zoomer1979]

Well, just to add to the list of problems, my Dad's "early" version has an issue with one of the axles, as seen in the attached video.

Neil.

 

[chris p bacon]

46 minutes ago, zoomer1979 said:

Well, just to add to the list of problems, my Dad's "early" version has an issue with one of the axles, as seen in the attached video.

Neil.

 

I'd send it back, it's not going to get better.

[Les1952]

On 06/10/2022 at 13:35, cctransuk said:

 

What about the two photos upthread, taken en-route to, or returning from, a technical exhibition?

 

Since the train in which it is photographed is identical, as are the lighting conditions, it must be a 99.999% certainty that the two photos show opposite sides of 10100.

 

CJI.

 

There is always a problem with "same day both sides" photos or even "late in life" photos.  That is the date these photos surface.

 

I have an old Dapol 68034 J94, with Cromford & High Peak bunker.  Modelled by Dapol in J94 fashion with number below crest on tankside.  Fine- except that the model had been around a few years before a book was published of photos in and around Darlington.  By this time I had recrested mine to the post-1957 version.  Tucked away on the bottom half of a page near the middle of the book is one of the Darlington scrapline- with 68034 showing, awaiting scrap in the early sixties.  Early crest and number on the bunker.

 

Fine- a lot of J94s were camera shy, and the photo was tucked away in someone's collection in the eighties or nineties when Dapol's J94 came out.  I just wonder how far down the tooling process the Fell was when these two pairs of photographs became available, and did anyone let KR know they were there?

 

On a more negative note I had another email back from Keith saying I should have waited for him to send me a sound chip to fit myself.  I've replied that I don't consider that offer as acceptable customer service.

 

Les

Edited October 8, 2022 by Les1952

[cctransuk]

5 minutes ago, Les1952 said:

 I just wonder how far down the tooling process the Fell was when these two pairs of photographs became available, and did anyone let KR know they were there?

 

See up-thread - KRM could have had a complete dossier of research on 10100 - which they declined to pay for.

 

CJI.

[Graham_Muz]

11 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

See up-thread - KRM could have had a complete dossier of research on 10100 - which they declined to pay for.

 

CJI.

And for certain other models constructive advice and information offered for free has been discourteously blindly ignored. 

[corsair]

ive been testing my fell loco it would apear the rods clash with the fly cranks if your not carefull then it locks up think ive now sorted it out and fixed the pick ups so all wheels now pick up .

Also had a play with the lighting there are two outer leds for head code lights. the iner one is white the outer one is red so i carefuly removed the outer one just leaving the white ones.

The centre tail light still shows white instead of red so i painted out the side were the red tail light is using matt black on the clear plastic strip at the bottom that stopped the white showing were it should be red.

I then got a cock tail stick and carefully dropped a small amount of railmatch signal red at the bottom of the body shell were the red tail light should be  wipping the edges off leaving the black  edge looks better now ok i dont have a working tail light but all other lights now work were they should. 

Edited October 9, 2022 by corsair
added text

[flockandroll]

Please can some owners confirm that when on a rolling road on 12v DC the KR Fell is moving quite fast at about 7V and 150 mA, showing a white cab light and white lights in the direction of travel, and red lights to the rear, and this is directional, and there are no sounds, then this would be a DCC ready loco and not a DCC Sound Fitted loco?

Thanks (apologies for grammar)

Edited October 9, 2022 by flockandroll
correct V and mA

[96701]

22 hours ago, chris p bacon said:

 

I'd send it back, it's not going to get better.

This happened to mine as well, yet after more running, it is now running smoothly, so in my experience, it does get better.

[bazil31]

Mine arrived from Rails on Friday so got it out of the box today to give it a go on the rolling road.

It has the same issue also one of the wheels is loose on the axel spline and just turns on its own so I will have to send it back.

Don't think I can fix it.

 

Baz

[JSpencer]

6 hours ago, corsair said:

ive been testing my fell loco it would apear the rods clash with the fly cranks if your not carefull then it locks up think ive now sorted it out and fixed the pick ups so all wheels now pick up .

Also had a play with the lighting there are two outer leds for head code lights. the iner one is white the outer one is red so i carefuly removed the outer one just leaving the white ones.

The centre tail light still shows white instead of red so i painted out the side were the red tail light is using matt black on the clear plastic strip at the bottom that stopped the white showing were it should be red.

I then got a cock tail stick and carefully dropped a small amount of railmatch signal red at the bottom of the body shell were the red tail light should be  wipping the edges off leaving the black  edge looks better now ok i dont have a working tail light but all other lights now work were they should. 

I noticed that there is no spacer washer between some parts of the rods and the cranks. 

 

Mine very good now in one direction but binds somewhere in reverse and I think your post and my observation might explain why the quartering suddenly went. You see it happened on a curve and that gives a great chance for a crank to bind with a connecting rod.

 

[corsair]

1 minute ago, JSpencer said:

I noticed that there is no spacer washer between some parts of the rods and the cranks. 

 

Mine very good now in one direction but binds somewhere in reverse and I think your post and my observation might explain why the quartering suddenly went. You see it happened on a curve and that gives a great chance for a crank to bind with a connecting rod.

 

Hello thats what i would think happend all i did was run mine upside down and before i sorted the pick ups it jammed up now theres a bit of spring in the sideways play it seems to be ok 

[corsair]

out of interest did any one mention about the fell loco to kr models at the show this weekend any responces please thanks 

[JSpencer]

In this link, there is a photo giving a good view of the roof:

 

https://www.keymodelworld.com/article/british-railways-war-diesels

[Dvt Dweller]

13 hours ago, JSpencer said:

In this link, there is a photo giving a good view of the roof:

 

https://www.keymodelworld.com/article/british-railways-war-diesels

Unfortunately, its a subscribers only page. 

[zr2498]

3 hours ago, Dvt Dweller said:

Unfortunately, its a subscribers only page. 

I see the photo has been taken off. And rightly, so as I did not consider properly the copyright situation.

Apologies and thanks to moderator for putting this right.

Edited October 10, 2022 by zr2498
Copyright image removed

[Barry O]

Green lined livery, steam heating pipe fitted.. but not really as revealing as you need to start hacking your shiny new model about to correct it..

 

Baz