atom3624

I'm definitely 'chomping at the bit' on this one. Thanks for the replies. I think you're right - wait for Hornby to clarify which model is which and for what reason. Al.

I think when they can get a motor, or breed a horse small enough .... !!

Hi John, that's what's confusing me. Perhaps the numbering is back-to-front. 'Promotional' might be the first one, in 'photographic grey', grey buffer beam, etc. ... R3841 as you state, never made it - could be possible to combine R3840 / R3841 and throw in the plates - purchaser to add if required - if that's the only difference? From what I can make out, it started with a SINGLE chimney, then remained a 'squashed sausage', but gained a Kylchap double chimney ... After that, it was rebuilt, made 'simple' ... Al.

I know there was only ever one, but there were several 'iterations'. I accept my wording was clear enough, but I'm trying to clarify which 'R' is which iteration - of the same locomotive, and what the liveries will be, and where ... Impatient? YES!! Might put an 0-4-0 3-pole in it with 2x 250g flywheels on to fill the space .... Unfair. Hornby, PLEASE 'don't do a TTS P2' and put a poor-quality 3-pole in it for progress - that 5-pole which has been in MN's and Coronations for a decade or so remains an excellent motor ... Al.

This is a fantastic announcement by Hornby, certainly thrown the cat amongst the budgies - as fundamental (in being different) as Rocket and APT are (in being 'obvious' and popular choices). I've always loved this locomotive since I first saw photos of it as a school lad 45-50 years ago. The photos indicate the Kylchap double chimney with 'original-looking' bodywork. The first ones had a single chimney. Will Hornby be producing the single chimney'd one as well - original variation? My preference will be as in the photos, with 'squashed sausage' bodywork and Kylchap (double) chimney. Which option will this be? Which livery (-ies) is it available in? Thanks, Al.

Definitely 6 chuffs per revolution = A1P = A3 = A4 = MN = WC = BoB = RSc. Al.

If that VR is used to help model / design, then eventually to program perhaps an entire period of time's operation - say 19:00-21:00 - then I like it. If it is being mooted as an alternative to actual model railways, then I'm not a fan. Al.

Yeah, I want to think of a TPE 802 'out of the box' and on my tracks!! Al.

A TPE 802 would be brilliant!! Al.

A thought I had would be to to have the ends threaded. Anyway, with a little work, this 'minor' can be easily resolved ... Al.

How about a real exclusive? ANPR / Interceptor 'Deltic' .. that'd catch up pretty quickly!! Al.

Thanks Dave. It's now been running for perhaps a total of 3 hours - nothing further - all solid. I had tried to true and make as perpendicular as possible. I love the moving axleboxes, so great idea - more than 'just a gimmick' for me. From what I've seen, I think it could have been easier with very-slightly opened holes in the bogie sides - which would be covered by the 'ab's anyway, and slightly longer axles - at least 1.0 - 1.5mm each side - just my thoughts and opinions. Thanks for getting in touch. Al.

It is a beaut and nicely weathered / fatigued. I'll see if I can continue my idea, tomorrow - it was looking OK, I just got too cold!! Al.

Has anyone refitted an axlebox? I started running in my Patriot, and one came off. Until then, it seemed to run flat, level and smoothly around my 4th radius impromptu circle of track. When I replaced it, it started to have a slight 'wobble' as mentioned by some. Could this 'wobble' actually be the axleboxes catching in the bogie sides? I also had problems ensuring a clean superglue fix - despite cleaning both surfaces, cleaning out the hole in the axlebox, and a little dab of superglue in the middle - and also found the axles protrude very little - very small amount to 'purchase' to. All is glued now, and remaining in place. I also gave a little 'dab' with a piece of piano wire where each box touches the wheels on the others, to restrict possible recurrences. I'm running to see if the occasional wobble 'settles' as suggested by Dave, in case it is the shaft of the axlebox. In my instance, it could be the track, but a Hornby Class 60 was rock steady on the same track. Al.

I know it's just me, but I still expect to see Thomas or James pulling one of those cranes ... !! Al.

Thanks, I was right, just had the sound turned down. Unusual to see the Rocket 'by name and nature' - >70mph I reckon. Lovely track!! Al.

Could be wrong, obviously, but didn't the Battlespace TurboCar have a 4-blade prop? I vaguely remember my brother's over 45 years ago - brilliant fun!! So much so that our dad fitted a cage around it!! Al.

I was getting between 50 - 60 mm / minute, or 1 mm / second at the faster end, so Scottie was significantly slower!! Al.

Excellent - I was going to put my 48151 onto the track as well, but thought it would be unfair with the smaller wheels ... Nice close-up video work. Lovely locomotive. It shows just how much Hornby have advanced in the last 30 years or so!! Al.

Having worked on minesites around the world, and within quite a few poorly funded laboratories, I've witnessed the 2 extremes of 'make do to the best with facilities available' and 'risk assess everything to death' (to literally avoid one). I can understand both sides of this 'coin', but quite aside from the potential for damage, wasting valuable private investors' funds, there is that consideration for Health and Safety, which can easily be neglected to varying degrees in the interests of 'getting the job done'. I hope nobody was injured, and neither that there was any damage incurred. OK, back to the original intention of the videos: Great to see the old crane in action. Nice to see that there is reasonable progress in the restoration to normal use of 35005. Al.

I only use a HM2000 - haven't 'gone DCC' yet nor have I a Gaugemaster ... Must admit to all, being a 'scientist' I started an experiment this morning, filming alongside a 1m ruler, but I was getting 'occasional temporary stalls' as were visible on 'adb's video, so I didn't see any advantage, so I aborted before I froze - 1.5'C outside and not much warmer inside the garage!! Might try again later! Al.

I've referenced this and you, aka 'adb' as I called you in a previous post, within the Hattons' 66 thread - which is what spurred this on. Love the little 'thump' near the start, then it's off again. I do notice a few momentary stalls, 'though it restarts of its own, without assistance within a second or so. I reckon Scottie was more continuous than the Continental locomotive you've indicated, and slower - that's what was impressive for me!! From initial tests, the Hattons one seems to be about the same, 'though I haven't run it in - I may make a 4th radius loop and set it off - both ways, both ways - then try it. I don't reckon any 1:1 locos will be moving that slowly for more than a few metres anyway. Thanks for sharing. Al.

With Polly, Nelly, Connie, would they use Percy gearing, or make it closer to realistic? I remember my Polly solely for losing coupling rod screws as the wheels were invariably spinning round so quickly ... !! I was 12 !! Al.

Wonder what the Dapol 59 will be like? It should smoke when performing a cold start then 'clean out', perhaps smoking again at full throttle momentarily ... but despite the novelty, not that realistic. The 'flashing' around the bogies is said to be 'wheel sparking' ... a feature too far? Al.

Thanks. Looked highly irregular. All explained - except why would they want it reversed? 35005 is a favourite Hornby locomotive of mine ... Al.