Trainmaster64

I do own one A4 - this being Hornby's fantastic No.60010 'Dominion of Canada' issued in 2010. A very fine locomotive and my personal favourite of them all; I love to run it time and time again. My only concern is what will happen when and if the motor finally goes... for now though I am happy to keep her in steam and in full operation. I also used to own a RailRoad A4; Mallard No.60022 with the DCC chip. A decent locomotive, but sadly had issues with the decoder chip that made her inoperable. The locomotive moved about a foot, then produced a magnificent steam effect. Only did it once though...

Here's an interesting point to bring up; not sure if anyone's discussed this or not but this seems the appropriate place to ask about this: I own three 'Railroad'-style 0-4-0 locomotives in my fleet; a Railroad Caledonian 'Pug' No.272, A GWR175 Holden Class 101, and a Pullman Class 06 for the 2008 Club Loco. The Pullman 06 has an SK code on its box; however the GWR175 101 has an REF code on it, and my Caledonian 'Pug', bought in 2012, has an REF code as well. This would indicate that Hornby started to use Refined before 2010 for production of some locos and possibly other items. The questions are, when did Refined start for Hornby, with what items, and how long has this been going on? If anyone has any products from Hornby from this time period (not just locos, but maybe trucks, coaches, buildings, etc.), let's check the codes on the boxes and try to put together dates and times. Be sure to indicate the loco and possibly product numbers if possible, so we can determine a timeline of sorts. To start, what are the codes on the other two GWR175 products? The Castle, I would assume was a SK product - but perhaps not? And what of the Achilles Train Pack?

Quick question to anyone who owns one of these engines - the bearings in the chassis of Hornby's Tornado. Are they round or round brass bearings, or are they the square-cut bearings as found on the 42/72xx, P2, Duke, etc.?

Just a few updates as of this day: -The Italian tender engine has been put into operational order; it is able to run once again. However because of its temperamental nature it is only working very limited workings. -The Stephenson's Rocket has been obtained as of 12/05/13; it has run but is undergoing overhaul. It is doubtful if the locomotive will operate in the future. Trainmaster64

Just a few updates here from the last time: -Almost all locomotives have been added to the fleet here and catalogued; the two Italian steam engines are all that are left and will be finished by the end of the weekend. -Class J70 No.7 'Toby' has been reinstated to the fleet as a limited-operations engine, after the mechanism was torn to pieces and cleaned thoroughly. -Norris-Type locomotive has been reinstated to the fleet as a limited-operations engine, after an examination revealed its pickups were bent out of shape and deformed. A more permanent solution is required to keep the pickups in place; for now the engine works fine at times. -No. 625 316 arrived yesterday as a long-term restoration project, and has begun preliminary work. Trainmaster64 Chief Mechanical Engineer, Sumtown Tramway Co.

Fair enough, coachmann; I was not suggesting that you are not entitled to your own opinions as well, and I do apologize if it seemed as if I was. We are both entitled to our own opinions and have the right to share them. My comment was that you seemed to be somewhat more cheeky, as you put it, and not much else to it. If you were to spend time and effort compiling your thoughts and opinions like that, and posted them in a general thread for the thing in question to share with others, would you want to have such a comment about them afterwards? In fairness, I do agree that my model is older - perhaps if my review was a more general one on the 'Castles' it would have gone over better. As it is I feel that a lot of what I said in the review and in my comments accompanying it are valid still, and can be applied to the 'Castles' produced even today, particularly in regards to the drawbar/four-pin connector arrangement on them. As they have not been upgraded since 'Earl Cairns' I feel that the comments are still valid even today. I'm willing to let bygones be bygones, as it were - no hard feelings? Let's simply move on from here, and enjoy the 'Castles' for what they are - I think we can agree that, whether it's 'Earl Cairns' or 'Clun Castle,' these engines are fine examples of Hornby on their A-game.

Thank you very much; I will definitely consider that when thinking about buying a 31. I don't want to have to go for a Railroad one but if I can't find any of the newer ones it may be the solution for me.

Thank you very much, Adam, for your quick response - I do appreciate it highly. It seems as if I will be going for the Tarmac livery then; arguably the nicest looking one of them all. Granted, that's personal opinion there! It will be interesting to see how it performs as Hornby's first new four-wheeler since the 'Railroad'-style 0-4-0 locomotives and chasses.

A few points, I will raise on your comment, coachmann: My comments, I think, can and do pertain to the Hornby Castles in general, which can be applied to all of them - not only 'Earl Cairns'. If I am mistaken here, please let me know, but I am fairly certain that all the 'Castles' since this one share the same build and design, with minor cosmetic differences to distinguish between individual engines (double chimnies and so on). Though this is one engine in particular that is being reviewed it is not a unique build and unlike anything since - Hornby have produced 'Castles' since then, in single-chimney form and in BR Early Crest livery. Most of what I had said in my review can be applied to every 'Castle' that has been built from the redesign a few years back to now, particularly that of the tender-locomotive connection employed these days. I appreciate that the model hails from 2009 and it is now 2013; however, my thoughts on it are still valid, I think. If I am mistaken in this, and if my opinions on it are not to be shared here, please tell me now so that I know better for next time. Your response seemed fairly rude and unnecessary, to be frank - the sarcasm is noted and not appreciated in the slightest. All I was doing was stating my thoughts on my own particular 'Castle,' as well as the Hornby 'Castles' in general; nothing more. Presuming Hornby's build quality is up to snuff still I would not hesitate to buy another for my line, and would recommend it highly for all Western modellers in any livery and identity, since they have not changed from 'Earl Cairns' to now. Again, if I have done anything wrong by stating my opinion on my locomotive and commenting on the 'Castles' in general I do apologize for it - I will be very careful about doing so in future, I think.

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/1084/entry-8969-br-castle-class-4073-no5053-earl-cairns-a-profile/ A profile on my own 'Castle', No.5053 'Earl Cairns.' I got it a couple of years back, at a decent discount - today I still consider it one of the smartest buys I ever made for the line. Lots of detail, but not so much that it becomes a hazard to simply hold in one's hands; a strong and smooth powertrain to move it along; excellent quality and stunning looks... this is one of the best that Hornby have done, and though there are newer and more detailed engines out there this is still one of the best I can see. Every GWR/BR(W) fan should own at least one, even if it's a smaller line that is being run. The benefits of this engine are far better than the consequences. The only two faults I would have to mention are in the coupling of the engine to its tender - the four-pin plug doesn't work for me at all as it is less stable and solid than the previous-generation Hornby tender coupling. If the tiny wires become unsoldered or disconnected, the whole unit is worthless. Also, the drawbar is very small as well, and couples differently than other tenders - having a permanent connection on the tender rather than the locomotive. Using the previous-style of coupler between locomotive and tender would, in my mind, have made this a near-perfect machine; as it is, it's a stunner still and well worth purchasing.

I am really liking the looks of these engines - I may be interested in obtaining at least one for my line, provided the price is right (it seems to be) and that the identities are okay. By that, I mean that I cannot use an engine which survives today and has been preserved. Does anyone thus know if all of these engines' liveries are of preserved examples, or is there at least one that is of an engine not preserved? I know that Cattewater (Esso) has been preserved; are the other two as well?

The Class 646 locomotive, as photographed in July 2012 not long after arrival. This locomotive was obtained on a whim like the GE 20T Switcher, and was bought with the intent of operating a 'world' fleet of locomotives from most countries, selecting the most historically relevant engines possible - this including the Class 646 from Italy. Manufactured by Lima in Italy, appropriately, the locomotive is more basic than the other engines but makes up for it with a charm of its own in terms of its appearance. The side profile of the locomotive, showing its unique shape - boxy, but decent. The motor, an old Lima 'Pancake' motor, is showing its age but still runs in a fair condition, propelling this locomotive around the line with some speed. In time it may require a remotoring to be efficient as the other engines; for now the locomotive works fine. The cabside, where the simple shapes and livery stand out in sharp relief and are highlighted well. The roof pantograph on the front of the locomotive, standing tall and proud. The articulated section of the locomotive, showing its flexibility as an articulated design. The rear cab of the locomotive. The rear of the locomotive - though the paintwork is faded and the quality is lesser, the engine is a survivor and still stands strong. The front of the locomotive, showing its headlamps (directional) and profile. Overall this is a locomotive that runs reasonably and looks reasonable, yet belies more than it lets on.

The Pullman-liveried Class 06 diesel shunter, as photographed in January 2013. A new arrival to the railway, yet produced some five years previously - this being an official Hornby Club locomotive for 2008 - this engine was an attractive purchase as a limited-release, small-sized shunting engine for the railway. Though the Pullman livery is far from realistic it does look moderately attractive in some ways, with some of the minimal detail on this engine helping to bring its looks up even further. The side of the locomotive, where its livery is able to shine through the greatest. This locomotive does look decent in some ways, though unrealistic as it is; the only downfall with this engine is its chassis which IS wholly unrealistic and provides this engine with a top speed too high to comprehend. Nevertheless the engine runs smoothly and is intended as a more basic locomotive for crews to learn from. The side of the locomotive, showing off the impressively-done Pullman crest and fine lettering on the toolboxes. The separate handrails are also a nice touch - not as detailed as the Class 08, but still very nicely done. The cab of the diesel, where the numbering and lettering are crisp and the simplistic looks are allowed to come through in a decent way. The rear of the locomotive, where the warning stripes are applied nicely and the overall shape of the engine looks the part. The front of the diesel, showing its looks once more. Overall a simple yet decent looking locomotive, which is able to appeal to collectors and newer drivers alike.

The Class 101 tank engine, as photographed in December 2012. Obtained in September 2012 along with the Class 423 4-VEP, this locomotive was actually produced two years previously as part of the 175th Anniversary of the Great Western Railway. Cheap and cheerful, and sporting a handsome livery to commemorate the feat, the locomotive is No.1347 of 1835 produced. The side profile of the locomotive. With a simplified valve gear and a standard chassis, the locomotive's performance is of course laughable - excellent for beginner drivers to get used to. Nevertheless the locomotive does run smoothly if not realistically, and is an enjoyable engine to drive every now and again. The smokebox and cylinders of the engine - simple yet decently done. The tanks and brass dome of the locomotive, showing the finely-applied celebratory crest and number. The rear of the locomotive, showing the bunker and cab controls. The front of the locomotive, with the smokebox dart lined out well. Overall a smart and sensible locomotive, which is perfect for beginners and interesting enough to give more experienced drivers something to look at.

The SFCC Battery Trolley, as photographed in May 2012. This unit was obtained as a gift, along with the Brill Trolley car, and like it was stripped of electrical componentry prior to arrival. The difference between them lies in their respective heritages and uses; this unit is vastly different in terms of looks than the other. However, this is not a bad thing as this unit still looks fresh and decent. The side view of the trolley car, showing its intricate design and delicate yet strong looks required for its purposes in San Francisco. The side paneling of the car, with the livery staying sharp and fresh despite its use as a static exhibit. The headboard and side view of the locomotive, visible here as well as the destination board is clear. The rear of the locomotive, showing off the railings and detail within. Overall a decent-looking car that serves its purpose as a static exhibit and tourist attraction very nicely.

The Brill Trolley car, as photographed in September 2012. This unit had been delivered to the railway as a pair with Trolley Car No.4, and was gifted to the line for promotional purposes. As the unit's electrical componentry was removed prior to donation the trolley serves as a static exhibit, albeit one that turns many heads and is a decent-looking engine in its own right. The side profile of the street car, showing the wood doors and classic shape of the unit. With dual electrical arms and a sizeable body to carry many passengers, this unit is unique in terms of looks and original purpose. A closer look at the side of the streetcar, depicting its original destination - Broadway. The rear of the streetcar unit. Overall a decent looking car that is a fine exhibit for all to admire and look at with delight whenever they visit the railway, which once served a very important purpose.

The District Inspector's Trolley, as seen in May 2012. This trolley car was purchased as a means of transporting the Mechanical Engineer and other important railway personnel to various sites easier without commandeering a spare locomotive. Bought from DB, this unit is very small but has charm and character quite disproportionate to its size. The side profile of this unit - obviously, it is an unpowered piece that still manages to convey a sense of motion to it. Made mainly of metal, the piece rolls smoothly and is a nice visual attraction. The rear of the unit, where the tail lamp and profile are seen once more. Overall this unit is a decent-looking piece, that displays well and helps give any railway more character.

Hi andyram; I'm planning on starting three blogs after this one is fully updated - one for the line itself, one for the engines and one for the rolling stock. They'll all be done in good time soon enough...

The miniature 'American-Type' No.107, as photographed in January 2013. Purchased at a discount from its normal value and pricing, this locomotive was originally old stock before being sold new to the Sumtown's miniature division as a functional replacement for No.119 of the same class. Identical except for powertrain and livery, the locomotives sit well against each other but are vastly different in terms of performance. The side profile of the small locomotive, showing its diminuitive size yet impressive detail when compared to the standard-gauge line opposite. Despite its size the engine is fairly powerful; its only downfall is its traction tires that hinder the performance too much. With a different design the locomotive could prove to be a very strong performer; as it is it is still able to handle the stone trucks easily enough. The tender of the locomotive, showing off its typical looks and simple yet elegant livery. The cab and boilerwork, where simplicity yet elegance is key here. The rear of the locomotive, showing an admittedly impressive profile even at this size. Overall a competent engine that was found for a decent price, which works well and fairly smoothly.

EWS Class 08 No.08 865 as photographed in January 2013, shortly after arrival and trials. The engine was obtained as a need for a strong shunting engine was required; the line primarily and predominantly focuses on small locomotives to be able to operate services and pull trains along the sharply-curved line. After examinations of the Class 08, and after obtaining a relatively cheaper unit, the decision was taken to purchase a stronger, more powerful and detailed unit for primary use. This engine has proven to be the result, with operations commencing almost immediately after trials. The side profile of the locomotive, showing its unique profile and features. Branded in EWS livery, this locomotive has an unprecedented level of detail and depth inside and out that makes it perfect for use on this railway. The powertrain, a strong unit with a flywheel, is very powerful and allows the locomotive to haul extreme lengths of trains that it would otherwise normally never carry. The front of the loocomotive, showing off the warning labels and crisp paintwork on the radiator grille and the numerous handrails present. The side of the diesel shunter, depicting the fine paintwork and delicate siderods of this outside-framed diesel. The cab, which is fully detailed and easy for crews to use. With opening doors and finely-printed instructions on the sides of the diesel, the unit is able to be used very easily by all crews. The rear of the locomotive, where the warning stripes are outlined well and lamp irons are present and ready for use. The front of the diesel, showing off the radiator and electric lighting on the outside of the engine. Overall this diesel is one of the strongest engines of its size, and is a credible argument for building up a diesel fleet in future to mingle with and supersede the normal steam fleet at times.

The Shinkansen Series 0 Trainset, as seen in December 2012. A late arrival to the railway, this unit came as a trade from NPR, and has provided decent service ever since. An iconic trainset in its own right, as well as one of the seminal locomotive designs of the 20th Century, this unit is powerful and fast. Though it uses an older mechanism and has its own flaws, it still retains enough value and enjoyment to thrill whenever it is allowed out. The side profile of the power car. Though its design and livery are simpler than that of the more modern and up-to-date engines seen on the line before and after, this set is still striking in appearance. Using an old 'Pancake' motor from its parent company, Lima, the engine is still able to move with some speed and ease - though full power is never obtained these days, due simply to the age of the engine and the difficulty in obtaining parts to keep it in operable condition. The passenger cars that run with the train - simple, yet effective in service, and painted somewhat well for its age. Another view of the coaches at the station. The front of the iconic power car, showing its strengths and weaknesses all in one. The paintwork holds up well despite its obvious age, and the looks are convincing enough for those on a budget-oriented line like this one. The downside is that this trainset failed to come with a second power car at the other end - the train can only run in one direction safely, and must be looped around or else towed in reverse to safely return the opposite way. The side of the carriage, showing, among other things, the simple coupling arrangement between each piece of the train. This is a non-electrical, simple hook arrangement that holds well and works decently enough. The front of the train, showing the one other fault with this unit - the lit nosepiece on the power car, which is illuminated from the headlamps and acts as a third, massive headlamp for operations. Regardless this unit works well and is a treat to behold on the railway - it is a unit which one must have in their fleet for historical purposes if nothing else.

The GE 20T locomotive, as photographed in July 2012. A used locomotive bought purely on chance and interest, this locomotive is a very unusual type of engine - the railway's officials are even to this day unsure as to its exact prototype or even maker. Consequently this engine is not as familiar as others on the line; it is known that this locomotive is all metal, and seemingly built and painted by its previous owners from a kit of parts. Its looks are thus somewhat lesser than other engines on the line, but still identifiable nonetheless. The side profile of this unusual engine, where all can be seen quite clearly. The lining out on this engine is atrocious, but the powertrain is anything but. Despite using a belt drive and only using four wheels, this locomotive has impressive slow speed control and is able to move a very heavy train - albeit slowly - easily. The front side of the locomotive - despite the atrocious lining out and paint imperfections, the details are all present. The rear of the locomotive, where the cab and rear steps are visible. The rear of the locomotive, where the warning stripes (though very sloppily applied by the previous owners) and non-functional lighting are seen. Unusually a red lamp on the roof is lit when the loocomotive is in motion. The front of the locomotive. Overall, despite the paintwork on this engine it is a very interesting looking locomotive that runs very well and is able to be used many times over again.

Thanks for the heads-up; I wasn't aware of that product. I will definitely be sure to check around and see if I can find that. Thanks for the tip and kind words.

Absolutely; that's the key. If you can find them for a good enough price, I feel they can still have their merits - for that low price I paid, I got a four-car EMU with reasonable looks and performance, full lighting throughout and directional headcodes, and DCC-ready capabilities. There are still flaws; that's a given - but they're much more bearable at a lower price. That seems to be a decent question - if the price on these units can be had for low enough, are they worth buying regardless of their faults? I paid 63% of the RRP; for comparable or lower cost, are they possibly worth investing into to buy and tinker with to get up to snuff? My decision has been made already; does anyone else feel the same? Or are the faults simply too much, no matter the cost or tinker value?