frobisher

I'd suppose the correct question would be did they have any disadvantages over the Super BGs? The two obvious ones would be; No gangway at the former driving end, so would need to be formed at the end of rakes (presumably the opposite end to the NAA). Lost space devoted to the former cab. The first is probably minor in fixed rakes, and the latter would probably be offset by the extra 7ft of length over the Super BG and saves converting another of those perhaps?

And unnecessary for TT:120 as a 9F is a phase 3/4 loco for Hornby...

There is a possibility; There was talk about a shelved project in the past that was very advanced and that this might have been it. We are told the project was well advanced but sufficiently behind the competing model to not make it worth proceeding to manufacture at the time, and that expenditure would have been written off as losses 10+ years ago. If there were partial tooling (say chassis et al) existing, then picking it up to go again would be relatively cheap (so tooling the body in effect). But even then I can't see them making "just" that 500 limited edition. There's more coming in the next few years.

I don't think the "cost saving" would be as much as you think it might be, certainly relative to the manufacturing/supply hassle to maintain a dual range of vehicles. Instead perhaps how about power sharing couplings between units, with DCC/wand controllable uncoupling? Perhaps a variant on the new magnetic Dellners?

Ooooh, wasn't expecting that - damn we seem to have a defacto standard :)

Well that wouldn't just due to geometry involved. The point isn't long enough on its straight section to make up for the fact it's lying on a 15degree angle trying to cover its straight length by about 2.8 mm.

Because these are more modern, and belong to the right leasing firm?

It's a set track issue pretty much (or at least the way Hornby have implemented it). What you might want to do is mix some of the short straights from the Tillig range into the mix (can you do that with Anyrail..?) or substitute some of their EW2 points for the Hornby ones that are "causing the problem"? It's early days for the Hornby track range so many necessary track pieces aren't there yet (flexi track in particular).

Very much so, whilst it's a free app, there's a huge market there that shouldn't be ignored and developing for the Amazon store forces a certain set of disciplines that are in general a good thing.

Class 77 is where you need to be.

Worked for me :) ...

"All" they need to do is make sure the Android app is also available on the Amazon App Store as well (some extra compliance stuff, but worth it) and that version will work with Windows 11 Android "stuff".

It'll depend where the decoder is and what's around it. All big unknowns for now. I'd hope that the underframe detail was mostly moulded plastic, and the decoder lives in one of the fuel/boiler tanks there. But the big chunk of metal sitting above it isn't going to be terribly helpful. But as was also said, the more BT decoder fitted locos you have, the better the local mesh and coverage is. But certain scenery construction practices might impact reception (use of chicken wire and tinfoil for instance).

Or is merely in a red box because people are fickle.

Damn! I'm now going to have to order some of yours and the Hornby buckeyes for a play!

Just a quick question, but are the two types coupler mutually compatible (Same, height spacing and polarity etc.)? A assume they probably are but it's probably worth mentioning it. Hornby's new buckeyes and their pipe ones clearly aren't with each other but I would be pleasantly surprised if the Hornby buckeye was compatible with these (but we're in the realms of 50:50 with polarity before we get to the fairly poor chance of a physical fit but you never know).

They pulled out of an N support with the demise of Lyddle End nearly a decade ago (and shame, the stuff was good!).

If I were Hornby, I'd wait until someone else announces they are doing one, THEN pump out a nice big spoiler batch or two. AND then I would stick a new mechanism in the Lima tooling and Railroad the hell out of the market at the cheap end. No point producing stock hoping there's a market and being stuck with it when you can exploit a sudden demand caused by someone else.

Ye cannae break the laws of physics... I dunno though, the Hornby version of this is one of the neater solutions, and not being 3D printed is a little more robust. The dummy buckeyes are rather nice, and AS have just launched their ones based off of dummy Delner couplings which won't be compatible but are rather gorgeous.

Because with a single magnet means you have a polarised system with +/- couplings that need to be in the right order in the train.

But without shorts within the unwired sections...

Though the 73 was fitted with a sound decoder at least he said at the start of the video...

Not happening any time soon, I should say. It's becoming increasingly ubiquitous and the only thing to fear is lower spec'd versions losing support in future (so far not really..).

I'll put a fiver on Rapido for Titgate Part II...

But it doesn't appear to have the rear guards window that the initial batch had at construction which is what I think IRC is asking about. But it is very, very likely as one of the last built it that picture shows its as delivered state pretty much. ie. no guards compartment (window on door only), smoke deflectors on roof. As per Lima's tooling not Hornby's original tooling.