kevinlms

We'll let you get away with that repeat, but for today only!

Almost nothing is mentioned about the products, except that nothing at all was done to improve the production efficiencies and the deterioration of the product quality. It would be interesting to read about how the change from 3 rail to 2 rail affected the business, but there is nothing. But you are correct, there was only one thing that was going to happen - Meccano's demise. As for the Hornby name, as others have stated, the Tri-ang name had been sold off, so reusing the Hornby brand, was the obvious thing to do. Like it or not, there was no real choice in this matter.

And 9F's

Why was diversification into 2 rail a mistake? Surely the best way to increase sales, was to make their products available to a larger market? Making models they were largely compatible with Tri-ang (already a large percentage of new sales to new modellers were to this upstart) has to be seen as an advantage. The whole issue of compatibility was strongly advocated by the US NMRA, the idea being to make different manufacturers stock interchangeable in 4 key areas - track, wheel, coupling and electrical standards. That way purchasers could buy any conforming model and it would just work, with others that already conformed. Hornby Dublo 3 rail has its place in the nostalgia market, but suggesting that it ought to have continued and had further resources invested in a declining market, seems like a good way of going broke quicker! Trix was also going 2 rail, even their 3 rail system wasn't 100% compatible with Hornby Dublo. Where would Hornby Dublo 3 rail have sat, if it had still been around in the mid 1970s, when the likes of Airfix, Mainline and Lima, started producing large quantities of cheap 2 rail models?

That seems to be an issue at Boeing!

Another factor that needs to be considered, is that the weight on each axle of a locomotive (steam in particular), are not all the same. Pony/bogie wheels usually less than driving wheels. Might not be a huge difference, but the civil engineer will want to know! I suspect the unevenness was a reason why some loco classes were banned from certain bridges and so lines. Most 4-6-4Ts were notorious and so banned from the very lines they were especially built for. The LT&SR 4-6-4Ts come to mind, as not being allowed to enter Fenchurch St and the approaches - so useless for their intended purpose! I do remember reading somewhere, that for a Stanier 8F, the heaviest loaded axle was actually a tender axle, but it doesn't matter so much, as these axles have no hammerblow.

But in the case of the 2 multimeters in the photo, the black one is almost certainly closest to the actual voltage and should therefore be the one used for checking DCC voltage. The orange/black one is reading far too low, assuming the actual track voltage is adequately running trains.

The main concern is that the LEDs will let the smoke out, rather than the controller! While there is a limit for the controller, the LEDs are much more sensitive to over voltage.

The overall power is the key to these entry level units. If a certain amount of power is being used to run the train, then it is NOT available for other devices. Look at the separate power supply and find the ratings of that. This will provide the overall power available in total.

Never heard of a CME called Puzzles!

I just couldn't resist sharing this: "I was in the McDonald’s drive-through for lunch today and the young lady behind me leaned on her horn because I was taking too long to place my order. “Take the high road,” I thought to myself. So when I got to the first window I paid for her order along with my own. The cashier must have told her what I'd done, because as we moved up she leaned out her window and waved to me and mouthed, "Thank you", obviously embarrassed that I had repaid her rudeness with a kindness. When I got to the second window I showed them both receipts and took her food too. Now she has to go back to the end of the line start all over. Don't honk your horn at old people.

Regardless of which power source you use, surely you'd be better off with one at each end, rather than one in the centre?

The problem is that the Pullmans were originally sold as a set of 3 for the toy market. So the bulk of sales were power, dummy and 1 centre car. The centre car was sold separately but probably only in small numbers, perhaps a few purchased 1 extra and even less more than 1. Thus making it difficult/expensive to buy a rake. Luckily, the Pullman doesn't interest me!

Perhaps someone will put in a bid, because they want the box?

Special pink wires, maybe intended for girls? But I see that it is broken. Obviously the sellers wheely bin is already full.

Well at least that made it easy to identify, which parts belonged to each model!

Well, it does sound Scottish!

A variation on the Transfesa ferry van. http://www.hornbyguide.com/item_details.asp?itemid=297

One loco has the light wired backwards!

'Standard' locos like the BR 4-6-0s had different tenders on various batches, depending on their intended usage. Often it was a matter of changing the coal/water ratios. Especially for those on the Southern Region, where they needed more water, because there were no water troughs.

Don't forget that Webb saw off George Westinghouse, when the latter offered him a bribe for the LNWR to adopt the Westinghouse Air brake. I wonder if any other CME did take the bribe or was Webb the first business appointment in Britain & so Westinghouse realised that bribery wasn't going to work in Britain? The attempt at bribery, probably did lead to various experiments on brakes by the LNWR, leading to adoption of the notorious Chain Brake. Probably would have been better to throw an anchor out the back! Don't forget that for every 2-2-2-0, there were many 2-4-0s, 4-4-0s, 2-4-2Ts, 0-6-0s & 0-8-0s, all of which performed the job adequately. Nothing wrong with a bit of experimentation to try to improve the efficiency of standard locomotives, although you do need to quit, when things don't work out. The various 2-8-0 compound freight locos were a case in point.

Wikipedia says this When John Aspinall was appointed General Manager, Hoy became Chief Mechanical Engineer. His principal contribution was the design of an electrification system for the Liverpool to Southport line, including motor bogies. So he's prime reason for appointment, wasn't for steam locomotives?

6 months supply is clearly nonsense.

More importantly, it was claimed by an article in the news, that crowds of people were swarming small country town supermarkets, stripping the shelves bare, on organised (mini)bus trips. It was suggested that it was the Asian community to send overseas. However no evidence was ever produced, by these supermarkets of even car parks with a small number of buses. So fake news. It doesn't matter whether it's true or not, if you see every trolley with even a couple of packs of toilet paper, what are you going to do? - I picked up one. Things like a proper rationing system (such as during WW2), take a little bit of time to set up properly. Indeed the UK rationing of food items didn't start until January 1940. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationing_in_the_United_Kingdom#Second_World_War_1939-1945