Ravenser

2 minutes ago, melmerby said:

According to MPB the source voltage should be 8 - 16v AC or DC, they consume about 150mA when moving.

Polarity doesn't matter as there is an inbuilt rectifier, so the motor always turns the same way.

You just need a supply and a changeover switch to operate

My understanding from the documentation is that for 12V DC there is a positive common , and negative to each side of the motor/switch. So you need to wire the positive side of the DC supply to Common. That would seem to rule out using the traction supply

But , again - what is the situation for 16V AC (where there is no polarity) ? Does it work, and does anyone have any experience of it?

The deafening silence everywhere I look about wiring these for AC   is striking - and ringing alarm bells

Sine we are talking about non-DCC control of these motors - does anyone have any experience of driving them off 16V AC ?? The documentation suggests it is possible, but all the discussion and videos I've located about these talks about control via 12V DC , o9r from a DCC decoder, or by a Digikijs black box.

Nothing anywhere about a 16V AC supply option

Does anyone have experience driving these MP1 point motors using 16V AC ? Apparently they cater for this , but there is nothing much said in the notes supplied, and all the videos I can find/everything in this thread discuss using a 12V DC supply or connecting them to an accessory decoder , or some high end Digikeijs black box. But never AC

The intended application is an N gauge layout which is DC analogue. 16V AC supply is available, but the only 12V DC supply is the traction power (and connecting up to something that changes polarity and is turned up and down seems like a bad idea...)

The current issue of the Railway Modeller contains a rather startling review of this model, with the deadpan statement that they were unable to test it because one of the wheels fell off the review sample  and they couldn't reattach it:  

Quote

Unfortunately, upon removal from its packaging the model transformed into an 0-4-3T, with one of the wheels on the leading bogie wheelset becoming detached from the axle; it appears to be a split axle design . Efforts to reattach the wheel and its half axle proved unsuccessful, resulting in us being unable to test its running characteristics. [They state they put the wheel loosely into place for photographic purposes....]

 

....A noticeable nose down stance was observed... 

I am startled that a model with such an obvious defect managed to get through the development process, and even more startled and bewildered that a manufacturer believes that the market can be made to swallow it.

And this is the Mk2 improved M7.....

1 hour ago, Jeremy Cumberland said:

Zoom out and you'll find the key in the North Sea.

Actually the key for Southern England is in the Irish Sea. (Having spent a 5 minutes wondering why the N Sea key cuts off at the Jurassic before h5 , which is plainly the chalk....)

11 hours ago, whart57 said:

By the mid sixties you had to live in Rugby League land to have even a remnant of a steam era railway, and in the last two years there were also a fair number of steam specials run to mark the impending end of steam. The smaller engines had already gone, replaced by diesel shunters and DMUs on their workings, so there would have been a skewing to the larger locos.

Not quite - the mainlines out of Waterloo were still steam-worked until the late summer of 1967. But that meant Bulleid Pacifics. Smaller locos were there, but not in great numbers

14 minutes ago, natterjack said:

Which begs the question of those with experience,  'what is the best way to remove the original graphics?'

Many ways . Some scrub them out with a fibreglass pencil. Some use IPA or other solvent. T-Cut is possible. A touch of paint over then apply new . Fox and others sell obliteration patches.

And if you are applying BR details on a black panel you might not even need to remove them. The black background becomes an inherent obliteration patch

44 minutes ago, Gatesheadgeek said:

Presumably the models arriving in September have already been shipped out of China, or are being despatched from the factory, so they can be fairly confident of those arriving. Production of the other products arriving between now and Christmas, based on previous sign off, is presumably well under way and nearing completion.

 

Maybe the Duchesses will be the surprise arrival with those LMS coaches…

The one hard bit of info seems to be that the LMS Stanier coaches in LMS and BR liveries are pretty imminent - 2 months away, so presumably already being made and getting ready to go in a container.

The surprise might indeed be the Duchess , or an HST set

The pessimistic view "nothing more till mid 2024" seems to be unfounded

20 hours ago, Legend said:

That was possibly me . It’s certainly along the lines I was thinking .

 

For me a more comprehensive approach to get people in would be A3, A4 and an 0-6-0 tank engine . Mk1 coaches and short wheelbase wagons . Then 37, 47 and 08 . They could use the same mk1s and maybe supplement wagons with MGR 

 

I think they would have covered more of the bases that way and drawn people in .

So they've gone with an 08 instead of a steam tank engine. The J94 and 57xx are announced and have apparently been in tooling since early this year

They are making Mk1s and short wheelbase wagons.

The HAAs will be in the next tranche of wagons, over the next few months. The Cls 37 + 47 have just been confirmed as going ahead in Phase 3.

Really all this amounts to is dropping the Duchess in favour of 37+47 ....

12 hours ago, meatloaf said:

Ive been after a J15 and i dont see them on the Hornby site. Cant really find anywhere with them but i di remember them being very cheap a while back

A matter of weeks ago , in one of the Hornby threads , someone pointed us to Oxford Bundles.

This commercial nether hell is where Margate is desperately trying to off-load the real dregs of the unsaleable stock

(Note : dregs in commercial terms. Many of the Hornby models - like the J15 - are actually pretty decent models . But no-one wants to buy them)

Oxford Bundles - incl J15

You might have to remove the lettering and renumber to get a BR black one. But unlined black is a do-able livery

And this bit of desperation flags some of the real unsaleable stuff : desperate loco disposal

These quotes from Hornby's Financial Report seem very relevant to the developments with Oxford promised products:

Quote

The current inventory position clearly points to an over-commitment of stock ahead of increased sales, but part of the story also relates to the specifics of product development.

 

In some instances, like the TT:120 launch highlighted earlier, we were not ambitious enough in our initial commitments, and in other cases we find ourselves over-stocked on slower moving lines.

 

This brand-led, customer-led, structured, approach to product selection is something that has not had enough focus in recent years and is a contributor to the current Inventory position.

To me the last paragraph is why the Oxford Rail J26 will not go ahead. There is a military maxim " never reinforce failure" - and they are disposing of Oxford Rail J27s in bundles. Not enough TT:120 sets , too many black 0-6-0s...

On 17/08/2023 at 17:15, Mike Harvey said:

Oxford Rail is showing 45 items in stock, excluding 2 bundles and 9 Oxford Diecast items. The rest are sold out or for future release. No indication of quantities but they alone are not going to account for the end 2022 stock bulge at Hornby because they were almost all already in stock at that stage.

 

https://www.oxforddiecast.co.uk/collections/oxford-rail?pf_t_availability=In+Stock

 

And the future unreleased models:-

 

https://www.oxforddiecast.co.uk/collections/oxford-rail?pf_t_availability=Future

That brings us back to where we started... Hornby have sent out an email to those ordering the future models via the Hornby website , saying their orders have been cancelled.

And, yes, I do believe that signals that those models are going to be cancelled, and will never appear.

I cannot imagine the new regime at Margate signing off production of a J26 when they have J27s they can't shift stuck in the warehouse. Not when they have signalled that they intend to make what sells, not what doesn't. Reallocate those production slots to TT:120....

I can also imagine a conversation at Margate "So why do you want to make this 35T tanker? We're already doing the TTA in OO. We've got the Oxford 10T . Why do we need this???" "Oh, we used to do it in Airfix? Then re-run that as a Classic. Oh, we sold the moulds cos it was limited production/low sales...?"

That might be misplaced thinking, but I can certainly imagine that's how a new "sales-driven" regime looking at this project might think.

The Oxford Rail 10T tank wagon has been given the thumbs up - they've duplicated it in TT:120 . That might have a future in the main Hornby range, as might the open wagon 

What we do not know is how the pre-orders are split between the Hornby and Oxford websites . If most of them are through the Hornby site - and that must have a far greater market reach - cancelling the Hornby site pre-orders might go a long way to terminating the project

I don't doubt that an awful lot of the Hornby inventory bulge is not Oxford Rail (Some of it is LMS suburbans, J15s and D16/3s... all Hornby models). But I reckon Oxford has been a noticeable part of the problem , so closing down the Rail side of Oxford makes sense

On 12/08/2023 at 03:42, britishcolumbian said:

 

 

For the Park Royal and the W&M railbusses, the Kres VT95 is a much closer match in wheelbase, difference being only a fraction of an inch.

Given that the W&M railbuses were Anglicisations of the DB's railbuses that isn't surprising

This is not specifically an Oxford Rail matter (and this is an Oxford Rail thread) but...

Having looked at the linked piece , this bit leapt out and hit me:

Quote

For a business with hardly any retail stores – apart from a visitor centre in Margate -Hornby has also been very slow to embrace the internet and direct-to-consumer sales.

Last year, only 15.5 per cent of its sales and 8 per cent of its sales volumes were over the Internet, although this has been improving. The majority of its sales are still made through third-party distributors.

Those comments will have many members of this community choking on their coffee, because it is recieved wisdom in much of the hobby that direct sales by Hornby are intolerable and immoral , and the target sales volume over the internet should be "as near zero as possible. "

Indeed that small third party distributors are the only legitimate sales channel for Hornby...

The fight against Hornby concession outlets, deals with boxshifters, and above all the website, within the hobby has been ferocious, over many years. However that plainly isn't how outside observers see the situation. For better or worse.

I still stand by my basic point. Oxford Rail models haven't sold - as evidenced by the desperate measures being taken to shift remaining stocks of models released many years ago. That amounts to commercial failure for Oxford Rail.

The QC issue is perhaps explained by the reflection that diecast doesn't have to work. Hence Oxford Rail were on fairly safe ground with wagons - but apparently got into quite a lot of trouble with locomotives.

On 11/08/2023 at 16:43, cctransuk said:

 

I have not suggested that integration had occurred - I merely commented that, four pages of speculation later, not much has been achieved by way of reliable information.

 

CJI.

One piece of hard information: 8 years after release the Oxford Rail Radials have not "sold through". Nor have the Dean Goods roughly 5 years after release. 

By any normal standard these models have been serious commercial failures

The Oxford Rail Mk3s were irredeemably flawed (the tooling couldn't be rectified and has no future)

There have evidently been a significant level of non-working returns. The only other case where I can remember non-working examples of a RTR loco being sold off by the manufacturer is the Hattons Class 66. There certainly must have been a large stock of dud returns for such a sell-off to be practical.

While many on here may have liked the models as a budget range at attractive price, the price clearly did not shift the products. That amounts to commercial failure

Far from Oxford Rail being a great success snuffed out when they fell under the Dark Shadow of Margate , it seems to me that Lynton Davies managed to sell the company on before the problems became apparent, and I suspect Hornby Hobbies bought a pup.

Nobody would dare to point that out while he was CEO at Hornby . Now he has moved on - I suspect the new regime's view is that Oxford Rail produced models that didn't sell and created an inventory problem, as well as being unreliable product. If the locos didn't sell, and many of the ones that did came back as returns because they didn't work, it is unlikely that the product turned a profit, especially when sold at a lower price point to begin with.  On top of that, there is the question of brand coherence and where they fit

A small subsiduary that makes products that don't sell, and frequently don't work, at a loss; and which doesn't really sit anywhere in a mess of branding is an obvious target for a new broom. "Why are we doing this?" is the obvious question for the new CEO to ask when he trips over a pile of Oxford Rail stock in the warehouse - and it's rather difficult to come up with a convincing answer.

The seperate company and the retail website will no doubt be maintained to the end of the current (new) financial year. Apart from anything else they need to offload the stuff sitting in the warehouse before shutting down the Oxford website: no doubt there will be an Oxford Rail clearance stand at Warley again this year. There may be a minority interest somewhere that stops integration

Many of the wagons could be integrated in the Hornby range (they've already shrunk the Oxford Rail tank wagon for TT120, which is a pointer) .A few of the locos might be re-run in some years time by Hornby.

But basically I think Oxford Rail is being closed down. Oxford Diecast may have to remain in legal existance if there is a minority interest, but Hornby do not need to produce any further models (or runs of models) under the Oxford brand.  It may make sense for the tooling of any wagons of interest to be transferred to Hornby - it would be a backdoor way of reducing a loss at Oxford Diecast, and anyone who goes to the new regime at Margate to pitch a OO wagon project might well face the argument "but we could just buy some Oxford tools for X - so why should we sink money into this?"

Coming late to this , I'm afraid I have a fairly bleak take on these developments:

On 06/08/2023 at 15:18, Tim Dubya said:

Maybe Hornby are letting the (rail) brand die?

Bound to be some sort of official announcement soon I guess 🤷

On 06/08/2023 at 19:12, melmerby said:

Apart from the "Bundles" which mix together Oxford & Hornby catalogue items. IMHO some odd marriages!

https://www.oxforddiecast.co.uk/collections/oxford-rail/products/gwr-locomotive-r3534-and-assortmen-of-vehicles

https://www.oxforddiecast.co.uk/collections/oxford-rail/products/or76bundle05

 

On 06/08/2023 at 20:27, melmerby said:

A fair while, possibly(?) shortly after Hornby got involved.

They do bundles with their own locos & coaches but some with a Hornby item.

 

Not sure who would want brake vans with a King😃

On 04/08/2023 at 12:35, MyRule1 said:

 Thought it was odd when I received emails from Oxford about the availability of N7's. Some were obviously shop/warranty returns. Also there have been items on eBay obviously from Oxford.

On 05/08/2023 at 07:27, Adi said:

My j26 is with ros

Oxford rail say it not in production yet cuz of covid when I asked Oxford rail 

But Hornby said no plans yet which I ask in Jan this year 

So who knows 

The "bundles" seem to be the ultimate desperation firesale for stuff Hornby Hobbies can't give away. I stumbled across them a few months back in the course of a general Hornby thread where there was speculation about what Hornby's inventory buildup might be. Looking at them I concluded that Oxford Rail and Oxford Diecast might be a significant element of the problem.

A shocking 8 years after it was released , Margate are still trying to shift a stock of unwanted Adams radials. It seems that the market may not be able to absorb RTR duplication of a class of 3 used only on one branchline  . Who'd a thunk it?? The Dean Goods is a couple of years more recent, heavily criticised - and Margate are still stuck with a pile of them they can't get rid of. If you ever wondered whether forums could really sink a model , and could actually inflict serious financial damage on the manufacturer of a criticised RTR release - here's your evidence

There are some Hornby items. The LMS suburbans (perfectly respectable models of their prototype) have been whispered about as something that were a drug in the market - here they are in bundles. So are LNER black J15s , and D16/3s - perfectly decent model but sadly nobody  wanted to buy one ... I was a bit shocked to see a GW liveried King there . For all the bitching about Gresley Pacifics they don't end up in the bargain basket never mind the nether hell of Oxford Bundles. But it seems nobody now wants top-link GW motive power - even esoteric things like P2s and Tornado are better commercial propositions .(I was a little surprised to see Hornby give the go- ahead  to a Castle in TT120 , especially in preference to a 9F.)   And the Oxford J27 in LNER black - a model begged and campaigned for online - is another three-legged dog in the bundles

With the exception of of the N7, virtually every loco Oxford Rail have produced seems to be subject to desperate clearance, indicating it's blocking up the Hornby warehouse in large immovable piles. At Warley last year there was a small seperate stall behind the Hornby stand , flogging cheap discounted Oxford Rail including returns sold cheap "as is" . That isn't the first returned/damaged sale from Oxford : it seems to have been an on-going theme for a while, and that must indicate a high level of returns, which are not economic to repair. Frobisher has touched on the Mk3 debacle - the models which were going to show Hornby how it's done turned out to be irredeemably flawed and have sunk without much trace 

Another melancholy reflection: lots of people have posted that the problem with Hornby is that they insist on making big green steem , especially eastern steam , and fail to make the small black engines - especially 0-6-0s - that people really want to buy . But Hornby (and Oxford) have made the small black engines , especially 0-6-0s: and here they are , unsaleable in the warehouse... Dean Goods , J15, J27, D16/3....

To be blunt, it looks horribly like nearly everything Oxford Rail made was some kind of commercial failure. There also seems to have been a serious QC problem.

The brand may have been protected until recently by the fact that it was the CEO's baby. But the new regime , we are told, are focussed on sales , and it is being suggested that they are going to require strict commercial  justificvation for any proposed new models, to staunch the bleeding through cool bright ideas that doesn't quite work and leave a litter  of unsold boxes in the warehouse.

To me, this looks like the new regime moving to cauterise a wound in summary fashion. A newly-tooled  Cowan Sheldon crane is just the sort of expensive esoteric item likely to fall foul of the new regime. And when it comes from a sub-brand which has turned out a string of commercial failures contributing to the inventory problem - no chance

For the same reason I reckon the J26 is dead as a door nail - imagine the new regime signing that one off when they still have piles of J27s unsold? Similarly integration of the J27 into the Hornby range is pie in the sky - who would dare go to senior management and propose a fresh batch when part of the first run is still cluttering up the warehouse?

The tooling for the Oxford Mk3s will never be used again, and nor will that for the Radial.  I suspect the same goes for the the Dean Goods tooling. Possibly  the only items that might resurface are the N7 and a number of the wagons

The only purpose for retention of the Oxford Rail brand would seem to be as a bucket shop to offload the residual stock.

Oxford Rail looks like a failed venture, which is now being liquidated

9 hours ago, charliepetty said:

I take it the Hornby Direct sale approach did not work then !!!!

 

More people to retire I assume.

Most TT items - particularly sets - seem to have sold out via the Hornby website , often several times , then reverted to pre-order awaiting the next batch. The main exception has been the 08, which was not made available in sets, and is the most recent loco.

Given that the Financial Report and Annual Report both say that they have struggled to keep adequete stocks of sets in the shop (you can be selective in what you say and apply positive spin in such documents, but you can't tell investors actual  lies), the website could equally well be seen as a way of rationing supply down to demand. Everything produced available to meet demand , no dead stock sitting at A while B turns away buyers .. You can't actually sell more stuff than you produce

Hornby are in fact copying the business model of many of the "new boy" manufacturers - start by selling only direct and largely to pre-order , then widen out to a small number of  selected stockists . The "Aussie model" - see the likes of Eureka, Aucision - or closer to home Cavalex and RevolutioN.  This is a niche scale, after all. Not every model shop stocks Gauge O - and many have only a small sprinkling of items 

Trying to promote TT:120 as a a random handful of boxes in a dusty corner of every model shop in the land makes little sense . The idea of launching it as a single sample set in every model shop in the country just doesn't feel sensible . Having a small number of specialists who hold the range in depth would seem more effective . How that would sit with Hornby's existing relationships with the retail trade was always a moot point

It is probably unsurprising that a number of substantial mail-order box shifters are involved (Cheltenham Model Centre, Gaugemaster, TMC - and I gather Chester Model Centre are a substantial operation) . What is more of a surprise is to see some smaller shops like Bure Valley listed. (Personally I don't expect to see the list of retailers expand very much in the short term)_

It is also interesting that Kernow, who were thought to be on board, are not. Hornby TT is not being listed on their website - there are several suggestive empty sections there.

Meantime Hornby continue selling the stuff vigourously via their website , and the Board are evidently happy enough with sales so far to announce the next tranche of 6 locos going forward for production. That is probably the acid test - are they happy enough with sales to date to approve spending more money on tooling up further models? You can't and don't fake that kind of spending

17 hours ago, britishcolumbian said:

It kinda is, though. The only thing *almost* compatible with a British model railway scale is British N with Japanese N, which is 1:150 - so you could use Japanese road vehicles and buildings and suchlike and vice versa... but that's it.

 

It is also impossible for another number to do, because it has to be a number that the rest of the world uses - and 87 is too close to 76, and 160 is too close to 148, so there's no point in trying to start British outline H0 or N:160, because there's really no benefit over any existing British scale other than being correct to gauge. So this leaves 1:120 as the only possible option.

 

Hooray for us hardcore TTers!

7mm /foot 1:43 Gauge O is also used in France, Australia and some other countries

Some thoughts on what "could be done" with the items now confirmed as going forward for production:

- With an HST, 47, 37. 31 08 and Mk3 , Mk2 aircon and M k1 coaches, the ECML in the late 70s onward is possible. Certainly you are missing one signature item -  the Deltics. But Deltic bodyshells are available from Lincoln Locos here and it is well-known that Deltics and Class 37s use the same EE bogies. Since a 37 will be available in TT:120 within 18 months (maybe sooner...) all that is needed is a Class 37 chassis lengthened and stuck under a Lincoln Locos bodyshell and - bingo! TT:120 Deltic

- With an HST, 47, 37. 31, 50 and Mk3 , Mk2 aircon and M k1 coaches, WR main lines from 1975-6 onwards are possible. The missing signature item is probably a Western - but again Lincoln Locos do the bodyshell here  and someone was suggesting a possible donor chassis for a TT:120 Western in one of the threads. A rather nice Hymek has already been displayed in the TT:120 Lincoln Locos thread: I know HSTs and Hymeks didn't quite overlap on the WR but it was a very near miss and modellers licence might permit a single Type 3 hydraulic...

- With a J94 (in NCB guise) a 57xx and a 37  21T minerals and Peco wooden PO wagons , a South Wales Valleys colliery in the 1960s could be done (you could add a Lincoln Locos Hymek for good measure). Osborn Models have released a 3D printed GW brake van and a decent range of other laser cut wagon kits, mostly GWR

- With an A3 , A4, 31, J94 and marginally a 37 and 08 , a layout based on the last years of ECML steam starts to look plausible . The main gap is a V2 , and Lincoln Locos don't currently do this one. Motorising a Class 40 bodyshell may need some thought

Things are starting to open up

12 hours ago, andrewshimmin said:

There's a reference to Hornby announcing six new locos - if so, I've totally missed it! Can anyone enlighten me?

10 hours ago, andrewshimmin said:

 

I'm really hoping this is the Midland 0-4-4T, the Highland Skye Bogie and the Furness Baltic tank I've been badgering them for 😉

The new locos in question are :

Class 37

Class 47

J94

57xx 

Castle class.

Class 31

I'm calling them a new announcement because Hornby have announced they are going forward to be produced.

Yes they are in the initial brochure, but there has been very widespread scepticism about if and when most of the items in the brochure would actually be produced . Look back at the early pages of this thread and you'll find poster after poster suggesting that TT:120 would never get past the Phase 2 models, that it would be quite a few years before Hornby got as far as those, and the more hardline opponents were expressing extreme scepticism that anything more than the launch range would ever appear.

The whole of Phases 3 + 4 were widely dismissed as vapourware or brochureware , and anyone who took any of the Phase 3 + 4 announcements seriously was treated as so obviously naive and unrealistic that their opinion could simply be ignored.

Now, just 9 months after the launch we have Hornby stating that 6 locos from Phases 3+4 are going forward for tooling and production . They enter the world of TT-numbers and pre-order off the website (although they haven't yet been added to the Hornby shop)

You can't have it both ways .

- Either you have to discuss the available range as "everything in the brochure" at which point you have to stop saying "but what can you do with a couple of Gresley Pacifics and an 08?"

- Or you accept that Hornby have just announced a near doubling of the locos available in TT:120...

For the record , I count as Phase 2 :

Class 66

Duchess

HST

Class 50 

Stanier coaches

Mk3s 

KFA wagon

MDO 21T

TTA

HAA

It was originally suggested the Phases would each be 6 months , with Phase 1 running to Easter, Phase 2 till October 2023 and so on.. Clearly that has slipped - Phase 1 took about 9 months, which would then imply Phase 2 running until the end of Q1 2024.

But I simply don't accept that Hornby are going to leave a gap of over  a year without major releases in TT:120 , from the 08 in May 2023 to a next significant release in July -August 2024.

Not when we've seen EPs of the Stanier coaches and the HST power cars at Warley , we've seen trial shots of the 50 and we know that the J94 and 57xx just announced in fact went out for tooling 6 months ago

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

And amid all this I see that nobidy has yet mentioned Hornby's commitment to TT120 clearly spelt out in their Annual Report which has been published today,  This repeats and builds on the commitment to TT120 included in their Financial Report a mont or so back.

 

No need to argue, no need to invent any sort of things pro or anti their new scale - just listen to what they are saying.

It is noticeable how entirely negative the mood has become. A week or so back Hornby announced 6 new locos for the scale. There has been , in practice, zero reaction on RMWeb to that announcement. That is unprecedented. The frothing over the slightest RTR product or news is notorious. But 6 new RTR locos announced - and not only is there no thread, I doubt if the number of posts on the entire forum mentioning the fact is in double figures.

Perhaps our  2024 New Year's Resolution should be to focus on what can be done with TT:120 , rather than how and why TT:120 isn't going to work.

A lot of stuff has already been sold - perhaps close to 10,000 Gresley Pacifics, maybe 25,000 Mk1 coaches, perhaps 10,000 Pullmans. Hornby will continue to pump it out for the foreseeable future. There comes a point where there is so much of the material out there that the established hobby cannot simply carry on ostentatiously looking in the other direction.

At som,e stage people will start to build model railways in 1:120 scale - just because there is going to be far too much stuff in existence for this initiative to vanish without trace.

In the meantime those buying TT:120 are very largely new to the hobby. Maenwhile the scale's penetration in the established hobby is minimal , if that. You could have spent all day at Ally Pally , all day at Railex, and all day at DEMU Showcase (3 very different shows ) and never guessed that there was a 1:120 scale.

I've never seen such a divisive situation in the hobby. What precisely is the established hobby going to say to all these newcomers when they bump into us ? "You're not part of the hobby I'm in"???  I hope not.

A ladder on the DB 08 is an unfortunate mistake. I don't think authentic autocouplers is a realistic demand in this or any other scale. The compromises inherent in fitting model railway couplers to models are something we have to live with.

Detailed comments on the particular light clusters correct for particular locos at a particular point in their long carrier in a class of 900+ may be pressing detail accuracy beyond what can sensibly be expected

The need for the tooling suite for the 66 to cover all varients was cited by SK at the start of the year as a reason why the 66 had only just gone out for tooling. Apparently that includes the European varient, so it does seem they intend to tool up something that can represent more than a "generic 66"

For what it's worth , Gaugemaster show what seems to be a photo of an actual DB 08 , anf it does have ladders.Gaugemaster - DB 08. Until someone has one in their hot sticky hand , it is difficult to know where exactly we stand

There is in fact a  separate thread for the TT 08 (gasp!)  here so perhaps detailed comment could be taken there, where it will be easier to find in future

47 minutes ago, Mike Harvey said:

 

Thank you for quoting my reference to NMRA wheel profiles..... and then ignoring it. You obviously have a bee in your bonnet about N gauge standards and maybe, just maybe, restating your displeasure at intervals in the Hornby TT:120 thread is not going to give it the airing you desire.  After 50 years modelling in N, but only the past 15 or so years modelling British N,  I am surprised that I do not have the operational issues you seem to.  All of my previous layouts have used Fleischmann Profi track (with lots of flexible track) and only in the past year have I switched to Kato Unitrack for a post-bereavement project where I was seeking quicker progress. And just to be clear I use a standard back-to-back of 7.45mm whether using Fleischmann or Kato track. I will resist responding the next time you bring up the N standards in this TT:120 thread.

The "issue" may in fact be that you have been using Flieschmann and Kato points , whereas I bought Peco Code 55 because Peco seems to be the norm for British N gauge modellers and I assumed that with Code 55 Streamline I was buying a modern "finerer" track product .It appears I have not.

I might speculate that as Kato make both stock and track they might take the trouble to ensure they are compatible, an d perhaps the crossing flangeways are finer than those of Peco . Similarly MOROP's NEM standards do have some weight with Continental RTR manufacturers and therefore the sort of incompatibilities I've described ought not to occur. However the NGS clearly have no interest in the subject, judging by their presentation of two standards drawn up by others, neither of which actually apply to anything. As a result British N is where it is.

However the most productive way of taking this particular discussion forward would  be for someone to measure the crossing flangeways on Kato Unitrack and Flieschmann Profi points using a feeler gauge, and post the values found on here somewhere. 

If it is found that both are finer, and more compatible with modern wheels than Peco Streamline then that would be an objective reason for using them on layouts in preference to Peco. (I assume the sleepering isn't much different). Unfortunately I've already laid the track on my project so I'm now committed committed to Peco..

I'm grateful to Roy L S for advising that 7.45mm is an accepted B2B figure among N gauge modellers and pointing me to a source of gauges . I wasn't aware of that supplier, and I rather think I will be doing some business with them. Sadly this info didn't  make it into the relevant bit of the NGS Manual.

(To pick up one point:  current Farish and Dapol wheels aren't to current NMRA profile . The NGS Manual notes that Farish are bitwixt and between and my own measurements confirm it. Most British |n wheels are thicker and have deeper flanges than NMRA profile)

7 hours ago, Mike Harvey said:

 

Whilst I accept that some of the N scale standards are coarser than TT:120, I am surprised that you question the consistency of standards in N gauge. I accept there is no worldwide N standard but for users with less eclectic tastes than mine, the local standards for any given market are just that - standard. For about the past 15 years almost all the makers of UK rolling stock have switched wheels to NMRA profile. Almost all the continental manufacturers have continued with the coarser NEM profiles, although several are now offering their latest production with NMRA wheel profiles. As to running standards, I am using N powered and non-powered rolling stock from Arnold, Fleischmann, Minitrix, REE, Roco, Kato, Bachmann Farish, Peco, Revolution Trains, Rapido, NME, N Gauge Society, AFAN, Lemke, Artrain, Hobbytrain and several smaller producers.  Running these several times a day on Kato Unitrack (horribly Code 80!)  with 19 turnouts and a minimum curve radius of 282mm, I haven't experienced the bumping and lurching you mention, and I really cannot remember the last time I had a derailment or unintended uncoupling. Shunting uses the Dapol Easishunts (using permanent magnets under the track) and N Gauge Society, Bachmann Farish and Arnold shunting locomotives.

 

I do understand that some people struggle with making N work, as they may well struggle with making TT, 00 gauge or 0 gauge work, but even with my shaky 75 year old hands and dodgy eyesight, I seem to have managed very well with the layout built over the past 12 months. I wonder what I am doing wrong. I really do not expect to have a problem with a TT:120 shunting plank when Hornby produce some modern freight rolling stock.

Let's expose the slum that are current (non)-"standards" in N gauge: actual wheel and track dimensions in current British N

It is quite untrue that "I accept there is no worldwide N standard but for users with less eclectic tastes than mine, the local standards for any given market are just that - standard. For about the past 15 years almost all the makers of UK rolling stock have switched wheels to NMRA profile."

When I actually measure them , I can't find any consistancy between wheelsets on N gauge models from the same manufacturer, never mind different manufacturers. And as I said in the original posting, none of these wheel sets comply with either of the wheel standards printed in the back of the NGS manual , or with the NEM values 

The idea that they do  is a comfortable but unfounded delusion. And I'm making a song and dance about it in the hope that once the stone is lifted and the creepy crawlies wriggle out something might actually be done to clean up the mess. Which would result in N gauge being rather better than it currently is..

The technical name for the bumping and lurching at pointwork is "drop-in" . It is the result of the gap at the crossing being larger than can be spanned by the wheel tread - which therefore drops into the gap. It is a well-known issue to anyone familiar with wheel and track standards. And since Peco code 55 points date from the late 80s (so I'm advised by a well-known modeller in  N) they are engineered to take the very coarse N gauge wheels of the 1980s with a big gap at the crossing. Consequently "drop-in"  occurs with all modern N gauge wheels , and especially the much finer profile used by the likes of Revolution. I am certainly seeing this with all stock as it runs across all Peco code 55 pointwork. It is not the result of some "personal negative force-field" of mine : it comes from a fundamental incompatability in the wheel/track interface

This sort of thing will do nothing for electrical contact to the wheels of a short-wheelbase loco crossing a point

(The ghastly MOROP/NEM bodge traditionally used on the Continent to get round "drop-in" is to make the flanges so deep that the wheelset "grounds" at the point , and runs through the crossing supported on the tips of its flanges, instead of on the wheel tread. Hence the notorious "pizza cutter" flanges on Continental RTR in HO and N)

And while we are about it - West Hill Wagon Works sell "Back to Back Gauges for N/OO9" which come with no stated value on the packet. When I measure them, they appear to give a back to back setting of 7.85mm, which is way outside even the current NMRA back to back , that nobody attains on any British N gauge RTR. At that extreme value you will certainly render the check rails on all pointwork completely ineffective , which won't help reliable running either. (That was a couple of quid down the drain at DEMU Showcase...)

I'm afraid the "Everything is for the best in the best of all possible worlds. Move along now, nothing to see here"  attitude has not served N well , in allowing this mess to come into being while everyone assures each other "It's all fine, fine, fine"

Since Hornby are sticking to the established NEM standards for 12mm gauge, and so are Peco, TT:120 comes with a consistant coherent wheel/track package so that the components of the wheel/track interface actually work properly together. That is a distinct advantage.

At the  moment I can't do anything myself to try and sort out the issue in N , because I haven't even been able to identify a source of a back to back gauge that complies with any known standard....  (DCC Concepts advertise their N gauge B2B gauge as setting at 7.65mm. That is again outside the latest NMRA value of 7.54mm , never mind the NEM value or the "old" standard of 7.2mm)

I can't even set the rolling stock wheels at a correct or sensible back to back value...

It is a complete mess

9 hours ago, teletougos said:

Part of the aim here, from Hornby's perspective, would be that all the speculation prompted by the confusion they have created is free publicity, when the fact is that not much is happening. 

 

Guess it also distracts attention from other things, like the awful NEM wheel standards.

 

One of the advantages of TT modelling had been the opportunity to have  a semi-finescale look. 

 

HP Products wheels, from 1946 at the start of TT, are code 70. 

The wheel and track standards are considerably better than N .

Firstly , if you use the same code rail in a scale 25% larger, the effect is finer. Ditto the same flange/tread dimensions...

Secondly - for the first time ever we have a scale launched with a coherent consistant wheel/track standard. A wheel /track interface that actually works properly.  N gauge is a horrible mess in that respect: I can't find much commonality in wheel standards between different items from the same manufacturer, never mind different manufacturers. Consequently N gauge bumps and lurches all over the shop. TT:120, with a coherent wheel/track standard should run smoothly

We've just had SIX new locomotives for this scale confirmed as moving forward for production , 6 months ahead of the date when I timidly suggested Hornby might announce a couple of new items.

And you are arguing that nothing is happening? The page upon page of frothing and politics we'd have had if anyone had announced a new Class 37 in any other scale.... But it's TT:120 , so there's not even a new thread about the announcements

On 26/07/2023 at 16:52, teletougos said:

Does anyone know how or have recent experience of getting to the Bure Valley Rwy on public transport? 

If the Sheringham branch is running , its a short walk between the two stations at Wroxham