Hornby Turbomotive

[Flying Pig]

22 hours ago, MikeParkin65 said:

Agree - up until now 20's and 40's have been the worst (and least used up here in the attic as a result!). I'm sure Digitrains (and Hornby which I havrn't heard yet) have done their research but the footage of the Swedish loco up thread sounded a lot less jet like - I wonder what Digitrains have used for the sound source.

 

Most of the sound seems to be from the exhaust which is white noise plus some deep smokebox resonance.  There is a rather persistent audible whine as the loco recedes, but it is not particularly loud and may at least be in part due to the turbogenerator the Swedish locos carried.

 

 

[smr248]

1 hour ago, On30runner said:

 

It isn't a Tesla. Werner actually machined an impulse bladed turbine for it. Drawings are available in his book from G1MRA.

Thanks for the correction.  I confess to jumping to conclusions after a quick scan of the internet...

[daltonparva]

The TXS versions are now being listed on eBay.

Edited October 4, 2023 by daltonparva

[atom3624]

I'm actually looking forwards to mine arriving - anticipated since I requested Hornby make one, when a teenager 50 years ago!

I'll live with what some say is the shorter-lived boiler and incorrect colour lettering / numbering / lining - I think it looks great.

I hope the tender's not feather-light, or that there's room to add weight - I hate superlight tenders.

Al.

[Bulleidboy100]

I'm surprised nobody appears to have downloaded the Hornby Turbomotive sound - and commented.

[woodenhead]

21 minutes ago, Bulleidboy100 said:

I'm surprised nobody appears to have downloaded the Hornby Turbomotive sound - and commented.

Given what the Digitrains sounds like, thank heavens.

 

One loco that definitely does not benefit from sound.

[atom3624]

Sam's Trains has just published a review online - YT.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GG1pcqywlp8

Review I think is fair and presents inconsistencies as he sees them, which is fair enough.

 

Must admit, I hope the higher pitched turbine 'whoosh' wasn't too loud, as many are setting their 'sound' models, as it'd drive the locomotive crew mad I would have thought!!

 

Al.

Edited October 4, 2023 by atom3624

[Adi]

My model looks a stunner

[Buhar]

The boiler with top-feed only was fitted when new in 1935 and was replaced with a domed boiler in 1936 which it carried through until final rebuilding as a conventional locomotive, so very short-lived.  The black shaded lettering looks correct for the loco in that form.

 

Alan

[Buhar]

7 hours ago, atom3624 said:

I'll live with what some say is the shorter-lived boiler and incorrect colour lettering / numbering / lining - I think it looks great.

 

The top-feed only boiler is as built in 1935, the domed boiler was fitted the following year and lasted to it's final rebuilding as a conventional locomotive, so it was short-lived.  The lining, lettering and shading looks correct for that initial configuration.

 

Alan

[atom3624]

Thanks Alan.

Thing is, when 'Googling' 'LMS Turbomotive', then images, the majority are of the early configuration, strange as it sounds.

 

Al.

[Flying Pig]

4 hours ago, Buhar said:

The boiler with top-feed only was fitted when new in 1935 and was replaced with a domed boiler in 1936 which it carried through until final rebuilding as a conventional locomotive, so very short-lived.  The black shaded lettering looks correct for the loco in that form.

 

Alan

 

Black shading is correct pre-1936, but shouldn't the letters be gold?  They appear to be yellow.

[MikeParkin65]

Just reading the RCTS tome

by John Jennison.  Regarding the sound he includes the following extract taken from Edward Livesay who rode on the loco in 1939 ;-

 

‘Two valves were opened for the get-away, and as the engine began to pick up speed I was struck by the novelty of my auditory impressions. The familiar staccato exhaust-beats were missing; I could hear nothing from the front end, the continuous flow of spent steam being so soft as to be practically noiseless. But another sound was at once perceptible, a musical singing note from the turbine-pinion, which sounded directly the engine began to move, rising in pitch as the speed increased, until at about 15mph it disappeared; I suppose because of the inability of my aural mechanism to follow it farther up the scale. This musical accompaniment gave point to the nick-name that enginemen have bestowed on 6202 "Gracie Fields". Why? Because she 'sings as she goes', of course!’

 

This to me doesn’t suggest the distinctly jet engine sound of the Digitrains project. Be interesting to hear Hornbys TXS take on it. 
 

Also states as @Flying Pig suggeste that the lettering for the LMS version should be gold leaf. 

[zr2498]

14 minutes ago, MikeParkin65 said:

Just reading the RCTS tome

by John Jennison.  Regarding the sound he includes the following extract taken from Edward Livesay who rode on the loco in 1939 ;-

 

‘Two valves were opened for the get-away, and as the engine began to pick up speed I was struck by the novelty of my auditory impressions. The familiar staccato exhaust-beats were missing; I could hear nothing from the front end, the continuous flow of spent steam being so soft as to be practically noiseless. But another sound was at once perceptible, a musical singing note from the turbine-pinion, which sounded directly the engine began to move, rising in pitch as the speed increased, until at about 15mph it disappeared; I suppose because of the inability of my aural mechanism to follow it farther up the scale. This musical accompaniment gave point to the nick-name that enginemen have bestowed on 6202 "Gracie Fields". Why? Because she 'sings as she goes', of course!’

 

This to me doesn’t suggest the distinctly jet engine sound of the Digitrains project. Be interesting to hear Hornbys TXS take on it. 
 

Also states as @Flying Pig suggeste that the lettering for the LMS version should be gold leaf. 

Yes, I will be interested to hear the Hornby TXS project when someone uploads a recording.

For now, there are two additional players:

 

 

 

 

 

[Adi]

Here my review on Hornby new tooled lms turbomotive 

 

[davknigh]

No comment on the squint handrail above the number plate on the smoke box?

 

Cheers,

 

David

[Pete the Elaner]

On 04/10/2023 at 15:17, atom3624 said:

I'm actually looking forwards to mine arriving - anticipated since I requested Hornby make one, when a teenager 50 years ago!

I'll live with what some say is the shorter-lived boiler and incorrect colour lettering / numbering / lining - I think it looks great.

I hope the tender's not feather-light, or that there's room to add weight - I hate superlight tenders.

Al.

 

The tender is a bit on the light side & mine jumped off at one point, which I believe was due to its lack of weight. The decoder & speaker are in the loco though, so there should be room to add a balance weight or 2.

[atom3624]

16 hours ago, Pete the Elaner said:

 

The tender is a bit on the light side & mine jumped off at one point, which I believe was due to its lack of weight. The decoder & speaker are in the loco though, so there should be room to add a balance weight or 2.

Thanks for the confirmation - pity.

I know others' thoughts, but for me, coal / water load permitting tender should be about 40-50% of locomotive weight.  This will certainly keep it on the tracks, and if free-running enough (contacts well-aligned for example) shouldn't impact too much on performance.

That's my way of thinking, and what I do anyway.

Not required here, but I'll generally increase the locomotive weights a little where able - for some, like this, it's not necessary.

Al.

 

PS:  One nice touch I really like is the arm rest / pad over the bottom of the window - not seen that before, by anyone!

Edited October 7, 2023 by atom3624

[rogerzilla]

It looks good but, based on the S*m's Tr**ns review, the motor isn't quite up to the job of hauling such a heavy loco, even before you add a train.

[Ian Hargrave]

42 minutes ago, rogerzilla said:

It looks good but, based on the S*m's Tr**ns review, the motor isn't quite up to the job of hauling such a heavy loco, even before you add a train.

Sam however,to the best of my knowledge, is not a forum member.Maybe a good idea if some of us tested its haulage capabilities for ourselves ? Personally speaking,I have no issues with this model on that account.  

[Invicta]

2 hours ago, rogerzilla said:

It looks good but, based on the S*m's Tr**ns review, the motor isn't quite up to the job of hauling such a heavy loco, even before you add a train.

 

1 hour ago, Ian Hargrave said:

Sam however,to the best of my knowledge, is not a forum member.Maybe a good idea if some of us tested its haulage capabilities for ourselves ? Personally speaking,I have no issues with this model on that account.  

 

It would be certainly interesting to see how typical the performance ST appears to have experienced is compared to a wider sample- I can't add much to the debate as mine has so far only had a run on the model shop's test track, and 10 minutes on my rolling road, but  video clips were posted on Facebook last week of one handling a 12-coach set (looked like a mixture of Hornby Staniers and Bachmann LMS Period 1s) on the Manchester MRS 'Dewsbury Midland' layout - Has Sam just got a duff example, or one in need of a bit of running in?

[1BCamden]

On 30/09/2023 at 02:13, Ian Hargrave said:

Couple of minor points. No shed code ?  And as I’ve posted ,there’s a possibility that on a running in turn with a local working …..yes I did see 46236 hauling 3 Stanier non corridors on a Shrewsbury-Crewe stopper….it might have used that top bracket.These are indeed very minor points on what appears to be Hornby refreshed. Thanks for the close ups of the works. My 6202 will be having an identical running in turn when it arrives 

 

 

Hi Ian, yes, you are correct, as constructed with boiler No 9100, 6202 didn’t have a shed code plate attached, although it appears to have had bolting points for such an attachment.

After the July 1936 Crewe heavy overhaul, 6202 was outshopped with a new boiler No 9236, after which, receiving a 1B shed code. A difficult item to spot due to the oil cooler fall plate being in the elevated position when running.

Edited October 8, 2023 by 1BCamden

[adb968008]

12 hours ago, rogerzilla said:

It looks good but, based on the S*m's Tr**ns review, the motor isn't quite up to the job of hauling such a heavy loco, even before you add a train.

 

11 hours ago, Ian Hargrave said:

Sam however,to the best of my knowledge, is not a forum member.Maybe a good idea if some of us tested its haulage capabilities for ourselves ? Personally speaking,I have no issues with this model on that account.  

mine certainly has better performance than I saw on his video. I recall him saying it only picked up at 30, mines around 15-20. 

 

I note the model doesn't have a trainset top speed, so it wont be going hell for leather, but imo its top speed is very realistic and not rocking about the track doing it, its smooth.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 8, 2023 by adb968008

[Ian Hargrave]

A year ago IIRC Sam took issue with the motor in the new 9F and replaced the original one with one he’d sourced himself.I cannot recall anyone on this forum posting that they’d had a similar issue.Coincidence maybe ? 

[The Stationmaster]

12 hours ago, Ian Hargrave said:

Sam however,to the best of my knowledge, is not a forum member.Maybe a good idea if some of us tested its haulage capabilities for ourselves ? Personally speaking,I have no issues with this model on that account.  

I do wonder (seriously) if the surface Sam runs hs tests on can sometimes affect performance?  Even carpet tiles have fibres and fibres hold dust and small pieces can come off almost undetectably.  Get something like that into a mechanism and problems will arise.

 

Us older folk no doubt all remember the manufacturer's dire warnings not to run their models on carpet.  And they said that for very good reasons.