Hornby APT (2020 tooling)

[boxbrownie]

17 minutes ago, SamThomas said:

Thanks for that close up & detailed image David.

 

So, that means if you have OHLE you cannot actually run it "panto(s) up".

 

Here's me thinking the days of models with el-cheapo models plastic parts like that were over.

The panto on mine is as floppy as a floppy thing in floppy world.  I haven’t tried to modify it or force it in any way, it’s how it was out of the box, in fact it is still in the box only out for decoder fitting, photographs and running in.

 

Thankfully it runs lovely, no melted body no derailments….but then it’s not coupled to anything.

 

Had I have to judge the APT on just the NDM I have I would have said it’s a great model but has a crappy pantograph which brings the model down.

[Pete the Elaner]

42 minutes ago, boxbrownie said:

Only one?  Three main parts are plastic, the lower arm, the upper arm and the pan head, the metal parts are the leg base, the spring (that does FA) and the single support rod (which does FA) 

 

You can see how impressed I am with it the panto on mine only stays up when the NDM is upside down! I had to use a bit of heat shrink tube to pose it for the picture.

 

Mine fails to stay up too. Any higher than in your photo & I feel something would snap.

 

As for the pantograph head, is that really modelled on something which existed on an APT? I have only ever seen anything like it on Hornby's earlier class 86s. The arm looks better than their earlier efforts, but I still feel it will break far too easily.

[PaulRhB]

31 minutes ago, Pete the Elaner said:

 

As for the pantograph head, is that really modelled on something which existed on an APT? I have only ever seen anything like it on Hornby's earlier class 86s. The arm looks better than their earlier efforts, but I still feel it will break far too easily.

That’s the early head so being similar to the 86’s would make sense, the 7 car set carries the later high speed version. They were experimenting with all sorts of things on APT as even the P train is still technically an experimental unit. 

[rob D2]

If anybody wants to be part of a Hornby focus  group , i don't have time 

 

 

[Pete the Elaner]

12 minutes ago, PaulRhB said:

That’s the early head so being similar to the 86’s would make sense, the 7 car set carries the later high speed version. They were experimenting with all sorts of things on APT as even the P train is still technically an experimental unit. 

 

I was interested because I've never noticed anything like it.

The closest I've seen on an 86 is in my attached photo, taken of 86238 in its late-90s Anglia days. I remember seeing a slight variation of this with a 3rd cross member, but this was not between the 2 existing contacts, it was in front & at a lower height so it should not have contacted the wire. I never understood what purpose it served & I only ever noticed it on multiple units too.

 

[boxbrownie]

14 minutes ago, rob D2 said:

If anybody wants to be part of a Hornby focus  group , i don't have time 

 

 

I got one of those as well, no idea how as I have never contacted Hornby or bought from them direct, hmmm

[Ouroborus]

5 hours ago, boxbrownie said:

The panto on mine is as floppy as a floppy thing in floppy world.  I haven’t tried to modify it or force it in any way, it’s how it was out of the box, in fact it is still in the box only out for decoder fitting, photographs and running in.

 

Thankfully it runs lovely, no melted body no derailments….but then it’s not coupled to anything.

 

Had I have to judge the APT on just the NDM I have I would have said it’s a great model but has a crappy pantograph which brings the model down.

 

Hornby will sell you some of their NDM medication for this.  Take one Mepanzafloppin twice daily.

Edited February 22, 2022 by Ouroborus

[APT Fan]

1 hour ago, scumcat said:

I have the other type and it is mostly metal. Only the lower bar is plastic. The plastic c cup that holds it broke, Hornby replaced it no question.

 

 

How smoothly did that go? Did they just send you a replacement out or did you have to muck about returning the unit? I get the impression they are a bit more fussy if you've purchased through a retailer rather than direct from Hornby.

[stonojnr]

8 hours ago, Pete the Elaner said:

 

I was interested because I've never noticed anything like it.

The closest I've seen on an 86 is in my attached photo, taken of 86238 in its late-90s Anglia days. I remember seeing a slight variation of this with a 3rd cross member, but this was not between the 2 existing contacts, it was in front & at a lower height so it should not have contacted the wire. I never understood what purpose it served & I only ever noticed it on multiple units too.

 

 

when the 86s arrived in the Anglia region mid 80s, they were still using the Stone Faiveley style, and got fitted with the Brecknell Willis high speed ones later, though in the early days some still had the diamond cross style ones too. But that might explain the visual differences you noticed.

 

the APT-P ended up with a Brecknell Willis, but I dont think Hornby has ever modelled the electrics pantographs accurately, though they did at least used to be metal and sprung better

 

 

 

[Ouroborus]

1 hour ago, APT Fan said:

 

 

How smoothly did that go? Did they just send you a replacement out or did you have to muck about returning the unit? I get the impression they are a bit more fussy if you've purchased through a retailer rather than direct from Hornby.

 

Hornby offered to take a look at both of my NDMs which derail and also the capacitor issue.  Neither were bought from them.  They ask for proof of purchase and the serial number of the box.  Postage will be refunded.

[Mr_Tilt]

On 21/02/2022 at 12:24, PaulRhB said:

Kit, do you know how they changed vehicles around for these formations? I assume one car is jacked up off the bogie  and then were they able to move coaches around with only one attached? It doesn’t work with the models arrangement as the pivot is outside the axle so it flips up, so did they have a transit bogie or did they weight the empty end?

 

Afraid not, I'd left BR by then, but kept in touch with the overall progress of the project as I was determined to be on the very first passenger carrying run, which I was. 

 

On E-Train we built four handling dollies which could fold flat and slide sideways under the vehicle, and would then be un-folded and jack the end of the vehicle clear of the articulated bogie. We could then move the vehicle around the yard as required. We used the dollies when we moved the train from York to Shildon, but the sub-contactors managed to break two of them  so any further moves will be difficult.

 

I'd have to assume they had some sort of similar system at the RTC and at Polmardie, but on a much larger scale. I've yet to see any pics of the interior of the Polmardie shed that might show such equipment.

 

Certainly the CM&EE building at the RTC had some hefty side lift jacks that would be able to do the job, but they were fixed in position on the floor and wouldn't allow any end to end movement. 

[PaulRhB]

45 minutes ago, Mr_Tilt said:

I'd have to assume they had some sort of similar system at the RTC and at Polmardie, but on a much larger scale. I've yet to see any pics of the interior of the Polmardie shed that might show such equipment.

Thanks Kit, that sounds just like what I was expecting they might use. There must have been some documentation on it for process but no photos I’ve ever seen. Hopefully someone will know from the Crewe group. 

[Pete the Elaner]

11 hours ago, stonojnr said:

 

when the 86s arrived in the Anglia region mid 80s, they were still using the Stone Faiveley style, and got fitted with the Brecknell Willis high speed ones later, though in the early days some still had the diamond cross style ones too. But that might explain the visual differences you noticed.

 

the APT-P ended up with a Brecknell Willis, but I dont think Hornby has ever modelled the electrics pantographs accurately, though they did at least used to be metal and sprung better

 

 

 

 

Sorry, I think you've got that wrong.

The pan in my photo is from c2000 & is a Faiveley, not a BW. I never saw one of the regular Anglia 86s with a BW pan & I used them for my daily commute regularly early this century, so I saw them regularly.

 

The lower & upper arms on Hornby's Faiveley pan look reasonably accurate to me. It is the contact head which looks nothing like what I have ever seen on a real train or in a photo before.

[PaulRhB]

16 minutes ago, Pete the Elaner said:

 

Sorry, I think you've got that wrong.

The pan in my photo is from c2000 & is a Faiveley, not a BW. I never saw one of the regular Anglia 86s with a BW pan & I used them for my daily commute regularly early this century, so I saw them regularly.

 

The lower & upper arms on Hornby's Faiveley pan look reasonably accurate to me. It is the contact head which looks nothing like what I have ever seen on a real train or in a photo before.

There are some notes in this account that mention the aerofoils that control the uplift had to be adjusted vs the 86 configuration due to the APT aerodynamics. This might account for the difference in the bars on the head. 
http://www.apt-p.com/APTMemoriesWorkDCoxon.htm

 

Photo of the early pantograph here during tilt tests, it’s a bit distant but shows it from angles you can compare to the 5 car set version 

http://www.apt-p.com/APTMemoriesWorkEGriffiths.htm

 

[boxbrownie]

14 hours ago, scumcat said:

I have the other type and it is mostly metal. Only the lower bar is plastic. The plastic c cup that holds it broke, Hornby replaced it no question.

Any chance of a picture of your type?

 

If it looks better I might try and get one.

[APT-P]

7 hours ago, Mr_Tilt said:

 

 

Certainly the CM&EE building at the RTC had some hefty side lift jacks that would be able to do the job, but they were fixed in position on the floor and wouldn't allow any end to end movement. 

 

[APT-P]

[Mr_Tilt]

2 hours ago, APT-P said:

 

 

Interesting pics there Rob, thanks for posting them. 

 

In the lower one it looks like the lifts have been modified so they could move along their tracks, and in the upper one there's a slave bogie under the nearest vehicle, something I've not seen before. That small traverser must have been added after 1978 as I've not seen it before either, and I guess they could have used the big traverser at the south end of the building similarly. 

[PaulRhB]

2 hours ago, APT-P said:

Superb, I’d had a look around the APT site but didn’t find those. Thanks for those

[boxbrownie]

2 hours ago, scumcat said:

This is a poor photo I am away from home today I will take a better one when I  get home

I assume that is the broken panto before the exchange?

[RedgateModels]

1 hour ago, boxbrownie said:

I assume that is the broken panto before the exchange?

Oh no it isn’t 

[letterspider]

Thanks for sharing as that was the same with my model - it wouldn't sit straight and being made of plastic was part of the problem.

 

[pwr]

Whilst I realise soldering is not something everyone is comfortable with, the reality is pantographs are not that difficult to make if you are happy to work at it.

 

These are two I made using a Hornby base and a somerfelt collector.

 

The first is an 86 and te second a simpler form on a 309

 

 

 

I would think a new panto for the APT could be constructed in the same manner. Both the above are fully functional.

 

Sorry about the poor quality of photo

 

Paul R

[AY Mod]

On 22/02/2022 at 10:49, boxbrownie said:

the spring (that does FA) and the single support rod (which does FA)

 

Even these won't get it up far enough or for long enough.

 

 

There's been a lot of swearing at this end whilst photographing it for review with that, the couplings and internal lighting.

[boxbrownie]

1 minute ago, AY Mod said:

 

Even these won't get it up far enough or for long enough.

 

 

There's been a lot of swearing at this end whilst photographing it for review with that, the couplings and internal lighting.

Rather than swallow them try jamming them under the lower arm, no not your lower arm!