GoingUnderground

I see on the ZTC web site that the 611 is now priced at GBP470,00 but that now includes the choice of 560 or 562 transformers. The upgrade is GBP 210.00. Everything in the ZTC range, apart from the 622 slave controller and the 304 accessory decoder, is now apparently back in stock, (the Stock on order notices have gone), including the 255 decoders that I use. The 304 Accessory decoder is missing from the product lineup - an accidental omission, or a hint that there is a replacement product in the pipeline? I thought that there was also a 21MTC version of the Diamond decoder in the range, but that seems to be missing as well, or am I mistaken about their being a 21MTC version? The ZTC brand does seem to have as many lives in it as the proverbial cat: the original Robin Palmer era the Nicholson Senior ownership period the Nicholson Junior ownership period SBX, Neil Kinnison, and now Pat Jones and Graham Warner.

I never criticised the customer service, even back in the Nicholslon days. whenever I rang them, I always got an answer to my questions, often direct from David himself. It was the operating issues with the 505 that gave me problems, plus the inconvenience of not being able to run 255/4007 fitted stock on DC. The change of name is a good start, but modellers have long memories. The name change will only work if there is a new range of products that are reliable and glitch free. I hope that he changes the branding to Taunton. It would also be worth changing the model number of the "611" to something like the "Taunton 200" to break the link and mental association, but not the commitment to existing 505/511 owners, with the old company. Customer service is now in Graham's hands and I'm sure he will endeavour to meet the high expectations already created for it. He does have a head start, as the 611 is a new product, at least as far as the electronics and operating program are concerned, so it is very unlikely that it will inherit the old 505/511 issues. Much of the old/existing range is showing as out of stock on the old web site, and it remains to be seen how many of the old products will return in their present guise or will be replaced by new or updated and improved items. As I said before, I sincerely wish Graham and Pat good luck and every success.

Whilst I might be an ex-505 user, I still use the 255 decoder, and agree that they are very useful in confined spaces. However it does have one major drawback, or at least mine have, and that is that they don't work on DC. I don't know if that has ever been fixed with a later version of the firmware. They are supposed to work on "Pure" DC, which I think means using battery power, or rectified AC with a large smoothing capacitor. This isn't "knocking", just my observations as a long standing present user of 255s. I saw that they were/are out of stock in the ZTC shop, so they may no longer be a current model.

I wish Graham and Pat all the best for their new venture. Whilst they will undoubtedly start will a considerable amount of goodwill from many existing owners, they have a lot of work on their hands to repair the reputation of the ZTC brand/product range with the rest of us, including ex ZTC owners like myself.

For Peter's benefit, I was referring to his comment "sad to lose a service facility if I should need one.", and I will clarify my points. For Point 1, if ZTC does fail, there may be someone, like Graham, who would set up shop to undertake repairs. So it may not be essential that ZTC continues as far as servicing/repairs are concerned. For Point 2, new owners of businesses sometimes do not want the hassle of servicing, or even meeting guarantees, on equipment not sold by them, and sales of businesses can leave those obligations with the existing owners. If that were to happen, the existing owners may not want to offer a servicing/repair facility for old equipment in which they no longer have a current interest. Existing users of ZTC kit would then need someone else to offer a servicing/repair facility as per Point 1. For point 3, the design of the 511 motherboard must now be at least 15 years old if not more, and in the electronics world that is a very, very long time. Items can only be repaired for as long as spares are available. Whilst substituting some components for newer equivalents may be possible, that may not be an option indefinitely. Sooner or later one of these literally irreplaceable components will fail, and that will be the end of that particular 505 or 511. This will apply no matter who offers a servicing/repair facility, and is the fate awaiting all modern electronics no matter who makes it. But most modern consumer electronics are probably replaced/thrown away before that becomes an issue.

Sorry to be a wet blanket, but you are assuming that: ZTC will continue in business; The new owner if the sale goes ahead will offer to service/repair old equipment not sold by them: and The component parts are still available irrespective of the status of the ZTC company itself.

Well, 8 weeks has passed since Waverley West posted. Anyone got an update? There was no news on the ZTC web site when I looked earlier today. I sincerely hope you're right about the priority to be given to Customer Service for the sake of all the 505 and 511 owners wanting upgrades. I've no doubt that Graham is sincere, but good customer service needs people and is time consuming and therefore expensive to provide. Even well established successful companies have problems with it at times. Also the new owners will not want to be bogged down with service issues relating to products sold by the previous owners. At the moment the only new items in stock at ZTC seem to be loco decoders. If they have sold out of 511s then any 511s in for repair/repaired awaiting return should be very easy to identify as they should be the only 511s in the place.

Is there any further news of the 611 or the future of ZTC? I was looking at the ZTC web site and noticed that the 511 and the PSU for it are now out of stock, not too surprising if the 611 is on its way.

Chris, As I thought that I had made clear previously, I totally agree with you, that is exactly what many folks will do. As I said before it's their layout and they can do what they want with it.

ESU have now released the "official" version of firmware 4.0.0. The upgrade process is the same as described in post 1.

You mean that you cannot get me to change my view to agree with you. I will quote you again "....please allow others the space to express their views and interests." even if they disagree with yours, or anyone else's. Dialogue closed.

Ian, It doesn't matter if I have seen the examples you gave or not of their "...consistently high standard of RTR modelling...". The ones that I have seen are not "excellent" and hence I challenge your description of their current models as being of a "consistent excellence" when by your own admission the Woodhead electrics cannot be described as such. I think that PaulRhB put it rather well when he said in post 68 "..Heljan are a bit erratic, some of the best and some howlers too..".

I haven't missed the models that you quote as they are of absolutely no interest to me as they never ran on the London Underground. I am interested in the EM1s and EM2s and can only speak from my experience of these models.

I think excellence is in the eye of the beholder. It just takes one glaring mistake to ruin a model, such as the pantographs on the EM1s and EM2s, or the cab windows on the EM2. Replacing the pans can be done, but many won't do it. Changing the cab windows on the EM2 is, IMHO, not practicable. These are my only Heljan models, and I wouldn't describe them as excellent because of these faults, reasonable but disappointing because of the faults, but not excellent. So I personally don't think it is appropriate to describe their current models as consistently excellent. People will buy the MetroVic and run it on their non-electrified layouts with the Bachmann LT wagon set, (which was hardly a frequent event), much the same way as people have bought OHLE locos and run them without any catenary. It is their layouts, and they are free to do what they want, but it may well damage genuine LT modellers by reducing availability of LT items as kits which haven't been "cherry picked". You cannot say that about other unusual or antique british outline locos or rolling stock. The LMS twins or the Co-Bo Class 28 won't have any effect on the availability of LMS or BR rolling stock, the ranges will continue as before, but the Haljan MetroVic may on LT may. That's my gripe. Heljan may get richer, and some LT modellers may indeed be happier with an RTR model being available, but LT modelling may end up poorer overall. I hope I'm proved wrong.

If I were an RTR manufacturer, I would not like to invest in tooling for models, such as Metropolitan locomotive hauled passenger stock, that depended on another manufacturer's product, in this case the Heljan Metrovic, to support sales of my product, too much of a hostage to fortune. If sales of the other manufacturer's product are poor then I've wasted my money in the tooling for the models to support it, especially if the loco and rolling stock were unique to one route. This doesn't apply to Heljan/Olivia's Class 76/EM1s or EM2/77s as whilst the locos were unique to the Woodhead route, the rolling stock they hauled wasn't. Heljan's choice of the MetroVic on its own just looks bizarre to me. It's too late for the 150th celebrations, needs as a minimum a layout with 3rd rail, and suitable rolling stock. But how many layouts have 3rd rail, let alone 4th rail, and has been pointed out already in this thread, there is no RTR Metropolitan/LT stock, unless Heljan plan to release that later once they see how sales of the loco go. If the kit manufacturers do wait, as you suggest, and hold off producing more kits in fear of what Bachmann might be about to announce, it just further damages the availability of LT models. But it is the sensible thing for the kit makers to do to avoid potentially unsaleable stock. We are seeing Hornby and Bachmann producing less common models in a search to find new sales from models not already/previously produced, or produced many years ago. Heljan are obviously prepared to go down this route as well with so many of the mainsteam locos and stock covered already by Hornby and Bachmann. So I would not be surprised to learn that they are all looking at LT/LU items. If there are further LT releases the possibility/hope of release of other LT items will damage the kit makers. However, looking is not the same as releasing, and there is a precedent. Bachmann did announce about 10-12 years ago that they would produce UK trams in 4mm, and I think got as far as producing sample products, but then pulled the plug on the project. I cannot remember which trams, but the source of my information is David Voice's 3rd edition of "How to Tram & Tramway Modelling". I'm not a happy bunny, but fortunately I have most of the historic LT models that I want, and the ones that I don't yet have are on order with John Polley.

It is good to see London Transport/London Underground come in out of the cold after being totally ignored by mainstream manufacturers since the demise of the Hornby (Meccano) O gauge tinplate models of the MetroVic and "matching" coaches from the 1920s and 1930s, and the 1950/60s Every Ready tube train, which looked more like a cross between the 1950s Waterloo & City stock and Standard Stock. I will probably get one of the Heljan models, but it will be with regret as Phil Radley was telling me that Heljan's announcement totally killed off sales of his MetroVic kits. I will readily agree that Phil's isn't the best model, I'm currently bashing one of them to remedy most of the errors. However the Harrow Model Shop/Poulner Models/Radley Models kits were for many, many years all that was available for LT modellers. And cherry picking models like this will damage Phil's business, and may actually end up reducing the total number of LT/LU models around. The only compensation is that John Polley's Metromodels, the other supplier of LT models in 4mm whose range complimented Phil's kits are looking to produce new models themselves of much of the LT stock, including some that have never been offered as kits or RTR before. Heljan might be able to rebody the MetroVic motor/chassis to produce the Metropolitan BTH loco, one of which was actually converted to be the first MetroVic loco, No 17 "Florence Nightingale". The London Underground section of the Forum also has information on the BTH loco, which is also currently available as a Radley Models kit. On the licensing issue, it does matter in the case of commercial models. The London Transport and London Underground names and the roundel logos are all registered trademarks, as I believe are all the logos and trademarks of the predecessor companies that were amalgamated to formed the LPTB in 1933. I am reasonably confident that this includes the Metropolitan line logo which was last seen on rolling stock in normal revenue service as recently as 2012, on the A60 stock, next to the drivers door below the cantrail. Trademarks cannot be used without permission of the trademark holder, or the holder will sue. If they don't sue then the trademark holder risks losing the rights as it may be considered to have passed into the public domain if they stop enforcing their rights over it. TfL do not chase individual modellers as they are not benefitting financially from their hobby, but commercial organisations are. The best example in the case of LT/TfL is probably Modelmaster Jackson Evans who did license their transfers for LT/LU models from TfL. If you're a Londoner like me, you may not think of the roundel as a trademark, it just seems to be an integral part of the city, so it is easy to overlook the legal niceties about its commercial use, but they do matter.

Country, Suburban or City, they ran from Liverpool Street to Rickmansworth in leafy Hertfordshire, and for a very brief period to Chesham in Buckinghamshire. They also hauled GWR passenger stock to Moorgate, picking it up at Bishops Road, Paddington. If you're interested in the loco visit the London Underground section of the forum. There's plenty of information on there about them and what they hauled. For those of you that are interested, you need to add 3rd rail as a minimum, and ideally 4th rail. Only No 12, Sarah Siddons was ever modified for 3rd rail operation, and that was in 1983, 20 years after the locos were withdrawn from revenue service. At least they appear to have made a better job of it than they did with the Class 76/EM1 and Class 77/EM2. But the roof/body seam doesn't look quite right. Here's the real thing. Possible Livery variants are Metropolitan Railway (as per the photo), LPTB livery, Grey and Red (sometimes called the wartime livery), and finally London Transport livery.

Sorry but I disagree about the cause being poor education. I put it down to the low status given by people and governments to engineers, designers, technicians, and people who actually make things allied to the get rich quick mentality of the 70s and 80s, and the "I want to be rich and famous without actually doing anything to earn it" attitude of the 90s and 00s. It wasn't helped by the importance given by successive governments to service industries to cover the loss of good, well skilled engineering and manufacturing jobs caused by the attitude of both governments and companies that it doesn't matter where it's made as long as its cheap. This has resulted in so many skilled jobs being exported out of the UK leaving us both underskilled and the skilled people under or even un-employed, not undereducated. Another nail in the coffin has been the low status/value/worth given by many people to items made in the UK compared to the same items made overseas or with the name of an overseas company on it. Remember the "I'm backing Britain" campaigns to promote british made goods as opposed to british badged goods? It always makes me laugh to see people driving around in foreign made cars waving the Union Jack for the England Footy Team. So I do agree that this country has gone totally loopy.

I'm not sure if my link to firmware 4.0.0 above still works, so here is another one which should take you to the right place on the ESU web site: http://www.esu.eu/produkte/digitale-steuerung/ECoS-50200-zentrale/ECoS-public-beta-firmware/

For the ECoS users out there, you might be interested to know that ESU have released a Public Beta Test version of Firmware 4.0.0 (4.0.0 RC1) for the ECoS, both versions, and the Maerklin Central Station 1 Reloaded. This time there are 3 versions, one for the colour ECoS 2, one for the B&W ECoS 1, and one for the CS1 Reloaded. There is a new Rescue system which must be installed first, after which you can then install firmware 4.0.0 proper. You must be running firmware 3.7.0 before you start the upgrade. The upgrade is a 2 stage process, first install the new rescue system, then install the new firmware, virtually the same process as when us ECoS 1 users upgraded from version 1.1.3 to 3.0.0. The upgrade is a one way trip, no going back to 3.7.0 if you don't like 4.0.0. It can be downloaded by registered ECoS users from the german language part of the ESU web site. There's a translation of ESU's announcement here http://www.esu.eu/en/forum/forums-overview/topic/ecos_support-1/ecos_firmware_400_rc1-2/ on the ESU web site, accessible to registered ECoS users only. If you're a bit worried about the idea of upgrading to a Beta version with no way back to the old version then I would suggest waiting until the official version is released, which will probably be in the next couple of weeks.

The BBC, no obvious friend of HS2, say on their web site " Sir David questioned plans to link HS2 to the HS1 Channel Tunnel high-speed rail link at St Pancras. He said: "The current proposed HS1-HS2 link is, I believe, sub-optimal and should be reconsidered." "It has functional limitations. Let's scrap this, it's a £700m saving." There should be a study to look at other methods of linking HS1 and HS2, he said, ranging from a whole interchange at Euston and St Pancras through to "a more ambitious high-speed link". To me this says that the current plans for Euston and the HS1-HS2 link are not worth implementing as they stand, and should be redesigned, not that there shouldn't be a link.

So, did your source say where that left the release of the 611 and the 505/511 upgrade - full steam ahead, or on the back burner pending agreement of sale terms?

David, With the information coming from a "reputable" retailer, you had no reason to doubt it and passed it on in good faith, and that was good enough for me. However as Peco have now said that IL-1 remains in production, I wonder what made Hattons think that it was being discontinued?

As I hadn't got a 2013 or 2014 Peco catalogue I looked on their web site where they list it under N Gauge - Narrow Gauge.

Just realised the solution. Peco N gauge track SL200 uses Code 60 rail. So we can still get Code 60 rail but have to buy the SL200 yard lengths and discard the sleepering. However that still leaves the question of the insulators if you don't want to use the Scalefour ones.