bertiedog

Easy if the DC is feedback type......

I have tried to induce the hunting but cannot get any on DC or a Lenz chip on DC or DCC. This is over the full range of speeds.,and with several quite different controllers. It.seems very very odd that others get troubles with two or three examples, indicating the motor etc., must not suit the control system they have in use. For it to be the same on DC and DCC is unfathomable, unless a mechanical problem. The nature of the pickups should not make any difference, but with DCC the plug and suppressors might well be working to affect control. But it cannot affect DC unless a full feed back controller is in operation. Generally the frequency of the feedback is higher than DC. Also the clash in frequency will just cause noise, not hunting at the speeds involved. A change of motor should not affect anything, the motor is standard in every way. It draws normal current at all speeds. The conclusion is still a clash with suppression used, but how does this affect DC? It is interesting the lights flash in time with the motor glitch, indicating an electrical issue, not mechanical problem, and with DCC it must be curable with the CV's, or shutting off feedback. I have built and serviced locos since the 1960's and have never come across such a problem before. Plenty of mechanical issues like this, but not electrical. If it was on my bench, then the first thing is to disconnect the motor, and attach flying leads to the motor and test on DC. This eliminates all mechanical problems. Then try back on track with a jumper bypassing the suppressor and see what happens on DC, Then connect up as usual for DCC and see if it hunts. At this point the tests have all returned the results and the DCC would bear the blame, (or not). The next step would be to hard wire without the suppressor I still fail to see how it can be on three units without being a control issue, and curable. Stephen

Just had the first points arrive and laid on the layout, works perfectly with all wheels made to standard size and BB. I tested RP25, Hornby, and other current makes and they work fine. The point is less robust out of the pack than other Peco codes, but just as strong fixed down on the layout. Personally I feel the lack of self isolating as standard is going to confuse some users, just because it is different, It does not affect me. The appearance is good, there are compromises, but if your that offended buy another make or build the point, probably at twice the cost. It is certainly the best RTL commercial point ever offered to railway modellers. Big but though, when are the rest coming?

Sounds like the radio interference items on the DCC socket are odd values and are causing a reaction with the feedback signal. DCC does not require any suppression, as the chip does it all for you. Glad to hear the hard wiring works the trick. Stephen .

Just had an email in from a friend who is an expert on DCC in the States, and it must be the DCC system at the base of it, as slow running and higher speeds are OK. Shift the CV settings for acceleration and feedback, and the problem should vanish. It may need a lot of experiment to find the best settings, or even shut off the feedback in the worst case. Makers cannot cater for all decoders fitted later, but if supplied chipped they must over full technical support, so contact Dapol first, before returning pre chipped unit. This sort of nuisance with DCC is why I backed out of using it. If your on DC then it must be tight U/J's.......... Stephen.

If your certain the wheels and pickups are 100%....then it must be the universal joints that are tight in some way, plastic flash or simply the motor needs easing away from the joints to leave a little slack in the drive chain. Feedback controllers do not generally fight flywheel operation, but could affect DCC chipped operation as the feed back operates at a higher pace than most DC controllers. Any effect would not produce oscillation, as both the flywheel and the feedback are cross connected and aid each other. This is not to say it cannot happen, it maybe occurring at a resonant frequency. Far more likely that it is the shaft and joints. However for it to happen on three units is implausible, so it may in that case the controller that is to blame. Try another controller, or add a second flywheel, if it really seems to be the cause. If it is the controller, then capacitors could be added to dampen the effect.

It sounds like the pickups, a bit of intermittent contact, I have not looked as yet at the way they do it, but if there are wipers on the wheel back, they need adjusting and checking the wheel backs are smooth and the wheels are true running. It cannot be very complex to solve, as the design is very straightforward, so look at the electrical path from the wheels to the DCC plug. Also check the BB is not out.

The wheels look like Essar, Stewart Reidpath, the bush in the middle could be changed to any size of axle, and the motor is a Romford unit series V, I suspect. The intermittent short will be via the cylinders, as maybe the crankpins are not insulated. With solid wheels and no rim insulation the motion will short the wheels. It was a poplar fix to insulate one cylinder with a mica insulation plate or a paper washer, which may have gone off with age. It needs further disassembly to find the short. If it can't be traced, then do the cylinder insulation, and rewire. Do not forget the slide bar hangers may also short out, and must be isolated on one side. Stephen.

I only just noticed this thread, never create a will on your own, and if you do get it read by a specialist anyway. The traps of over egging a will are legendary .. In a case in my family, my Grandfathers will was simple, three lines, a split between his wife and son. But my father got the best advice he could get, the will reduced to one unambiguous line and set up a Trust for Sale to provide for his wife from property. It was the first time I ever saw a Tax Inspector reduced to shock, as the tax bill on my mothers estate was reduced from over £600,000 to zero, as the property had the tax paid on the foundation of the exceptionally long period of the trust; rather than the option to pay when sold..... And as sure as eggs are eggs, never attempt to write somebody out of a will, leave them something, however much you hated them. Get advice or take a law degree course..... Stephen

21.75mm....... (two nominal tyres, plus back to back,(max dimensions), as tyres may vary, and the BB has tolerances. Best to get a full specification as per S4, from CLAG or off the net or P4/S4 societies. It is vital all dimensions are followed, within the tolerances, or it simply will not work properly.. Stephen.

Not possible with the Hornby design as it stands, there is a way to cure all issues with an 044, and that is to treat the drivers part of the chassis as a bogie, with the section allowed to pivot, but only fore and aft, not sideways. The bearings for the pivot goes under the footplate, with a rod running through the chassis. The movement only needs to be about a mm each way. The motor either stays put and moves with the drivers, or is connected by a U/J. It applies about 70% of the weight to the driving wheels. The result is amazing, it behaves like a diesel chassis, always having all four drivers firmly on the track, and giving a steady smooth operation to the loco. The haulage shoots up dramatically, as much as three times more. Derailments are near impossible on gradient changes. Stephen.

On the rocking on the rear drivers mentioned, all 044 locos tend to have this issue, which if dealt properly by the designer, just reduces the haulage, it does not cause derailment. If there are sudden changes of gradient causing derailing, then frankly it is the sudden change, not the loco causing the problem. Hornby have the balance point ahead of the rear driven axle, and testing on my test bench setup shows it would have to be from flat to a 1:18 slope, with no transitions, before the front wheels would leave the track. Other points on QC are very valid, pickups unadjusted or missing, badly moulded gears etc, but make sure the complaint is valid. The H is in every way very nice running, and powerful on the flat, but load and gradient can reduce the haulage far more than the 044 type.

Carefully going over the lot and a running in session on rollers of an hour each way, no issues at all have turned up. I have fitted a second flywheel to the motor, and it has a very advantageous effect, now able to coast over a foot from modest scale speed to a smooth stop. It delays the build up as well,giving a smooth climb to running pace, where it helps with a steady pace. At scale pace it can run over a dead point, let alone a dead frog. I may add a bigger flywheel, but will need a support off motor bearing to take the weight, and stop the risk of wear to the bearings on the motor. The general finish is first class, the windows fit is exceptional. Impressively heavy chassis, and the lighting is very good. Even a decent strong storage box. BUT......the interior needs attention, no detail in cab and the seats and main floor should never have been issued like this. The bulge is forgivable on No11 as the loo blocks the view somewhat. Well done by Dapol, more railcars as a series, please.

Look a little closer at the side of each window at the front, there are two visible horns, one each side level with the bottom of the windows. Whether these were always there is debatable, but it is in GWR livery,so not a BR addition. I'll add some brass turned horns in the same positions for my No11. Stephen

I will be checking over the No11 to find out P4 fitting would work out, and how to add dummy drive shafts to the bogies. This may be delayed a day or two whilst in Hospital/Clinic.

Tri-ang's Gear set was an abomination in engineering terms, they used two start worms as standard, and a single start worm happened at the chosen pitch to mesh, but at the expense of the efficiency of the contact with the teeth faces.....mind you it was a useful mistake!, but the 40:1 combo wore badly in the end.

What's the supply situation, as I went to order one and it shows sold out only one day after the narrow gauge show at Swanley.....how long before new supply? Stephen

It is far more than a simple change of transformer,it would have to pass US electrical standards, and certification and require import licences, plus extensive product liability insurance demanded by the US market,

Ebay from £5 upwards for Swiss precision motors

I may fit a new floor after altering the motor to a double shafted Maxon coreless motor, which just fits at the right level with two flywheels to give mass and inertia to the motor. It is also ballraced and silent. In the meantime the parts existing will be used with the new cab details. There will be another one bought later on for more radical alterations, Stephen

I'll stick with the correctly engineered proven operation of a flywheel. rather than line the pockets of some half baked DCC system from abroad curing a completely non existent problem. The railcar works fine, but any increase in mass of the flywheel will get better results. I have no problem to cure, it is just making a mechanical system better to add a larger flywheel. I have Hobby town mechanisms that contain 1/2 lb of flywheel and coast with the power off. This sound engineering, sadly is not appreciated by modern designers. DCC will not cure problems., or improve performance when used with decent locos.It is case of the Emperors New Clothes if users think it does, they really think it will, as the have just parted with £500 plus and have to convince themselves it was worth it. To each their own, if you have the money then spend it on DCC, but the same amounts spent on decent moors and gears would reap far more benefits to the user.. also stay alive circuits work perfectly on DC......

Maybe no running in is the reason that so many domestic items are built so poorly that they fail so often. I run 60 to 70 year old items. made to last, in British factories, I still use a Goblin Vac that actually came with instructions not to over load it till several hours usage. It was made about 1934/35. All my HiFi is 100% British and some near 45 years old, works perfectly. My tape recorder is an ex BBC unit that was made by Ferrograph, 100% reliable at 65 years old. Ferrograph insisted on running in the unit! It is simply a con to leave out running in on any item, the makers know that it shortens the life of any mechanism. The main exception to the rule are the pumps in fridges and freezers, which have exceptional reliability due to being run in oil and a vacuum sealed unit. The only MR make I can recall that was capable of running out of the box was Hag, who ran them in at the factory as part of the manufacturing process. I serviced and built thousand of models and most owners just do not appreciate that care, and more care are required to run them properly. To be frank most Chinese mechanisms work because of controlled slop in the design, rather than precision engineering..... And yes, there are missing rivets on the smokebox at the back edge.......... Stephen

I doubt the flywheel will cost anything much, and is 100% reliable and not a decidedly iffy product like DCC, which by the way I have very long experience with from zero one onwards, including a Merg unit and Lenz, and have wasted a small fortune on, along with time I could have spent on other things........I still run DCC with 0n3o locos, they often came S/h and where chipped. There is plenty of space for both in the railcar. I have no desire to run more than one item at a time on a model railway, DCC's main advantage.It cannot cure bad running locos, make them smoother, or make the tea.They make sounds, but come on Mr Edisons recordings sound better than the Mickey Mouse sounds offered. I have never worked out the cost of making a flywheel, ten minutes on the lathe with about 40 pence worth of scrap brass, against several hundred for DCC......Hmmm, what a choice to make!

Well ask the experts at the factory that makes them.....But Hornby are not engineers they as a small importing company have no experience of engineering apart from having the staff years ago, who had actual hands on experience of making engineering parts, and knowing how they work in practice.The designers may have some experience with other companies ,, but They work in a company that does not manufacture anything. So a designer at Hornby is all right on a CAD system, but is not an experienced time served engineer who has worked in industry for maybe 50 years. Our company made scientific instruments, and were often told that modern items are so accurate that they do not require running in, on investigation taught by colleges etc........complete and utter claptrap. With production in the FE how can we trust the lube is correctly done? Running in is part and parcel of the manufacturing process, it sets and polishes surfaces and fine tunes the mesh of gears etc. Taking Hornby at face value you would put a full load on a new loco.....it would lead to a burnt out wreck.......

As with most lighting on a plastic glazed model, there is a faint afterglow around the windows etc., and a bit leaks through the paint. but it is slight, and better than most models. One major modification, a new flywheel on the back end of the motor, as large as possible to give coasting capacity. With no DCC there is a lot of spare space, and if converted the DCC could live in the roof space above the lighting.