NCB

On 06/02/2023 at 09:48, andrewshimmin said:

 

I did a quick play around with AnyRail - the yellow panels are 1m long (close enough to your 39").

This is an idea for after my round-and-round.

It's only a sketch, it's not a thought through plan.

Here is my version.  More anon.

@

]

57 minutes ago, natterjack said:

I have been looking through the range for a project in hand and a great many items are listed as sold out with no indication of resupply. Is this because existing 3mm scale demand has been satisfied and further production deemed no longer viable, or perhaps some other reasons such as anno domini?

 

In any event, the 3mm Society could do well to be considering the resurgence of UK outline TT120 and pro actively welcome its nourishment as a boost to its own future.

What on earth what are you looking at?  I know of no such document which lists a great many items as sold out. The current price list and illustrated catalogue are kept very much up to date as to what the Society's offerings are. From time to time items run out and there may be a wait for them to be resupplied; Covid had an impact. The shop can give you more information.

On 25/01/2023 at 16:14, Ravenser said:

 

How far can existing 3mm wheels be used? They are at least aimed at 12mm gauge, and at 6/5ths of  TT:120 scale the scale difference might be managable

The Society's Intermediate range should work with TT 120 standards. Driving wheel sizes available are;

12;  13.5;  14;  15;  15.75;  16.5;  17;  18;  19.5  MM.

The Fine range being thinner might not work with TT standards but does also offer 9mm and 10.5mm sizes, as well as 19/20mm sizes.

In comparison, in TT a 4'6" wheel works out at 11.43mm and a 5' wheel works out at 12.7mm

On 25/01/2023 at 17:08, Phil Parker said:

 

The 3mm Society already has a range of wheels. I'd be inclinded to the ones aimed at 14.2mm gauge modellers, fitted with shorter axles.

So would I. With the qualification not these thinner wheels might not work well with current TT track standards.

What would be useful would be Gibson or somebody producing locomotive driving wheels for example 4'6 or 5'; t would open up the scale to people doing their own thing.

2 hours ago, Ravenser said:

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Ravenser said:

 

I do think TT:120 is going to need a constructional culture to fill in the inevitable gaps, and I hope it will prove a scale in which it's practical for ordinary folk to make stuff in reasonable comfort. Simply sitting waiting to be spoonfed with all requirements won't work. That may well give it a distinctive and different appeal 

I

6  standard Hornby 166m straights arrived in the New Year...

...followed by 2 points and  very  useful rerailer last week.

Assembled and tested with a Piko Taurus;

Looks good and the Taurus just sails through that  pointwork.

More track arrived today :-)

17 hours ago, 5Dublo2 said:

I must admit I spotted that difference in the measurements on Hornby's website/catalog info, but had not thought about the problems it might cause

Depends on what the 631mm refers to.Now reckon the cause lies where others have indicated.

11 hours ago, Pacific231G said:

Minories does avoid S curves on all but one of the six possiible routes whereas an eqivalent plan using straight crossovers involves an S curve on four of the six routes and a double S curve between platform 3 (the lower platform road) and the outbound track. I wouldn't though consider the Minories arrangement of crossovers made with opposite handed points with set track or even small radius points as even a single curve is sharp enough for buffer locking so trains pf main lie stock will just lurch through the approach points. With less sharp points (Peco's TT mediums are claimed to be equivalent to a prototype B6) a train of coaches snakes in and out of the station (except perhaps on that one route) in a way that gives far more of a main line terminus feel than a straight throat. 

Hornby's 631mm point is equivalent to a 39  inch point in 00; think that's ok for S  curves.

17 hours ago, Porfuera said:

 

Indeed - I have enough trouble with basic arithmetic, never mind geometry - and I know even less about point geometry, but is the problem something to do with the fact that the curved part of a a point isn't just a simple curve? I'm sure someone on here will be able to explain...

 

I've put together a quick Minories-type plan on Anyrail using Hornby set track, although as I mentioned above the ends of the tracks don't quite line up. However, just because it works on Anyrail doesn't mean it will necessarily work with the real thing.

 

 

Better than my first attempt. Now see what  the problem is.

20 hours ago, D9020 Nimbus said:

The no. 6 radius curve should match the point—that's what it’s in the range for. Are you doing the track plan on a computer or with real track? It certainly matches the points on AnyRail.

Anyrail. The point is quoted as 631mm radiuis, the #6 curve as 640mm. Would account for  the difference I'm seeing. See

Top point and  curve to its left don't join.

EDIT Now  see lower point on the right is causing the problem.

I'm playing around with a Minories type layout using Hornby TT set track. Couple of questions.

Firstly, I thought the point of Minories was to avoid sharp S type curves. However looking at the original Minories plan there is such a curve when an incoming train is trying to get to the top platform road.  I'm not sure that in TT this matters too much as you can afford to use reasonably generous curves if you're using the set track.

Secondly I can't find a curve to perfectly match a point. The nearest I can get is #6 radius 15 degree curve which is just a bit too long. Maybe there ought to be a #5  curve  to do this.

Any thoughts?

Nigel

Playtime. Turnouts on their way.

2 hours ago, Hroth said:

Ok.

Just to muddy the waters a bit...

 

In the March 1957 issue, RM announced "TT IS HERE!", covering the release of what we now call Triang TT3.  By the May 1957 issue, retailers were advertising TT sets, locomotives, carriages, wagons and track off the shelf. Other manufacturers were producing track* too.

 

Here we are, a similar distance in time between announcement and now, and all there is to show is an out of stock first release trainset and some scraps of track, all only available from Hornby.

 

TT120 is all very laudable, and I'd like it to succeed in gaining a market space, but it looks like Hornby are about to shoot themselves in the foot.

 

* Peco and Gem.  There may have been locos too, but the mag isn't to hand at this very moment...

 

Could only find the Jinty  explicitly mentioned in RM  5/57.

https://www.railtec-models.com/catalog.php?type=5&gauge=TT

They will also consider new requests.

On 31/12/2022 at 16:33, GreenDiesel said:

I'm fascinated by Hornby's new TT launch, and find myself thinking about it often, watching TT videos on Youtube, etc. About 8 years ago, I switched from 00 to N, so I don't think I can really afford another scale switch, unless it's a few years in the future.  I've always thought TT was the ideal scale and I really enjoy watch videos of TT layouts in operation.

 

A few thoughts/questions: It would seem strange (and limiting), I think, to buy all of ones products from the same manufacturer. In 00 and N, I'm used to sourcing locos and rolling stock from a variety of companies -- both new and very old -- and this partly adds to the charm of having a layout, putting together a believable layout from items that are either brand new or 40+ years old. Also, does anyone know if Bachmann or any other manufacturers will get into TT120? I could see that happening, although it's curious the Heljan recently pulled away. 

 

Mods: This post is NOT meant to be controversial, etc., I'm just asking about and posting thoughts that have come to mind as I digest the TT news. Please feel free to take it down, though, if necessary.

 Nobody knows the intentions of other manufacturers, but I'd  be surprised if Dapol and Bacchmann aren't giving it serious thought. The pie is large enough.

Seem to remember someone intending to do OO9  W&L stlock, possibly Bachmann..Vale of Rheidol hasn't yet been done.

Hornby parcel delivered 🙂 Track?

23 hours ago, adb968008 said:

1. Forgive me marking up your image, but compare the blue and yellow lines of the cylinder on the right side as you look at the picture.

The r/h cylinder looks off.

 

2. Look at the gauging of the front driving wheel (bottom most in the picture) again compare redlines along all 3 wheels to the yellow line of that one, it looks a little wider.

The top most drivers look slightly off too, but it maybe the camera or are they are slightly twisting compared to straight of the centre drivers ?

 

Combination of the wheels, cylinders and rods would suggest somethings a little off.
 

Does it stall, jerk or wobble at low speeds?

 

Following on from my earlier comment, you're not allowing for camera distortions.  The camera is pointing directly down on somewhere  left of loco  centre line, which means you are seeing the stuff on the right partly sideways on. There may be problems,   but  this pic doesn't  show them.

With Hornby couplings,  if you drive straight over a raised uncoupling ramp, does uncoupling occur, or do you have to stop then back up?

On 23/12/2022 at 20:42, tezzrexx said:

Sorry, I mean this

 

 

 

Your camera is left of centre-line so looking partly sideways at the valve gear on the right.

19 hours ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

Happy Christmas everyone!  Of course, a year ago no-one knew we’d be here, with correct scale / gauge commercial UK products starting to appear that are compatible with existing commercial European outline models.  Personally, I’ve really appreciated the contributions from experienced North American TT modellers coming on board here too - TT of course being an American Scale originally, even if there is limited trade support these days.  Who knows if that might change too?

 

Full marks of course to those who’ve got off the blocks and started modelling in TT:120 already, showing the rest of us what’s possible.  Initial feedback from the first products appearing from Hornby seems to me to be positive - (I’m happy for us to leave the debating around Hornby as a business to the Products and Trade Forum elsewhere on RMweb: the aim of this Forum is to share and encourage modelling ideas).

 

There will be plenty of others waiting to see, or perhaps not yet aware of the potential of TT:120, as well as those who believe in the vision but aren’t doing much modelling at present (to be honest, I’ve slipped into that category with my own TT:120 project).

 

Not to worry, the journey has begun.  Who knows where we’ll be this time next year…?

 

Take care, and all the best, Keith.

 

And Merry Christmas from me as well.

People like me wondered how the conflict bettween scale track and wide wheels would be resolved.  Think Hornby answered that. The models are well made and convinciing, even if they have tweaked the odd dimension.

2023  -  the year of TT-120

I can't stand the Hornby 00 wheel treads; too shiny which makes them stand out. The TT ones look to me much more discreet to me and should be OK in practise.

1 hour ago, Porfuera said:

 

For OO Hornby and Peco both produce (slightly unsightly) isolating tracks and presumably this will arrive for TT:120 if it isn't already in the catalogue.

 

The same effect can be produced with one or two isolating rail Joiners (or a razor saw) to isolate the end section of track and then wiring in a single- or double-pole switch to reconnect power to the isolated section when required.

 

Alternatively there is DCC...

Dublo had a quite neat 1/4 straight isolating track. Seems an obvious requirement to me.

Question. If you want the end of a track to  be isolated, eg as at the buffer ends in  Minories, how would you do it using Hornby set track?
 

Incidently,I reckon Minories works just as well as a main line terminus with suburban traffic and goods being located somewhere else. Could even be inter regional. So, A3s and Duchesses would be quite at home there. CJF postulated a reverse loop for the fíddle yard,  and that would work well with such a scheme; you could house storage for the locomotives within the loop. It shouldn't take up too much space.