Class 50 locomotives

[Tim Allen]

Oh I've emailed my thoughts to them when asking for a returns. I've also asked for a replacement and not a repair.

[Baz657]

2 hours ago, Tim Allen said:

Well I was going to post pictures of the Class 50 with a freight rake but unfortunately it just now spins its motor and moves slowly. Yet again Hornby's quality has failed. I found the drive shaft on the track nearby. Same thing happened with 3 HST's that got returned. There was neither a derailment or collision, literally went to change the coaches.

It does make me wonder if the packing has anything to do with it. While it was well wrapped in bubble wrap, the box it was put in did allow it to move around during delivery.

To say I'm annoyed is an understatement.

I was expecting two but only one arrived in exactly the same condition - small box rattling around loose inside a bigger box with no padding at all. I won’t get a chance to test until next week. Here’s hoping…

 

[Moccasin]

I seem to recall reading about similar issues with packaging of OO models. I wonder if the logistics staff are cutting corners due to workload/targets.

Suggest it’s worth anyone receiving such poorly packaged deliveries taking photos of how they’ve arrived as soon as they’re opened, so that evidence can be sent to Hornby if needed.

Hornby presumably won’t be happy if models are arriving with customers in a damaged state and they can take it up with CCL if it becomes a common problem. 

[Loewietje]

My latest OO models came all in the Hornby Dublo-style packaging other manufacturers now also use, inside a cardboard box fixed with foam fasteners on each end. Very impressive, might be needed for TT it seems. 

[moawkwrd]

Are we sure that the lack of padding in the outer box can be the cause of these issues? Surely the locomotive is secure in its box with foam packaging regardless so can’t move even if the inner box itself can. Otherwise it’s no different to the outer parcel itself being knocked around in transit, no? And that will certainly always happen even if padding is added to the parcel.

Seems more likely that the shaft is loose from the factory if refitting it immediately solves the problem and it doesn’t come out again on its own? The alternative is just that the shaft can become loose too easily but I don’t think we’ve heard of cases of it happening repeatedly?
 

Does anyone want to volunteer to violently shake their Class 50/43? 🫡

Edited May 26 by moawkwrd

[Tim Allen]

4 hours ago, moawkwrd said:

Are we sure that the lack of padding in the outer box can be the cause of these issues? Surely the locomotive is secure in its box with foam packaging regardless so can’t move even if the inner box itself can. Otherwise it’s no different to the outer parcel itself being knocked around in transit, no? And that will certainly always happen even if padding is added to the parcel.

Seems more likely that the shaft is loose from the factory if refitting it immediately solves the problem and it doesn’t come out again on its own? The alternative is just that the shaft can become loose too easily but I don’t think we’ve heard of cases of it happening repeatedly?
 

Does anyone want to volunteer to violently shake their Class 50/43? 🫡

Either way it’s quality issues they need to address. 

[Rallymatt]

From an engineering perspective, the cup holding the cardan shaft has to have a shallow throat to allow the articulation on model railway curves. In the same way that backlash has to be engineered into gearing a degree of freeplay must exist in the shaft/cup. In a perfect world it’s all good but there is not huge margins. I doubt it can be shaken out, usually changes in direction on curves pop Cardan shafts out. Roco had huge problems a few years ago, Märklin are still having issues but their shafts usually snap. The fact of the few Hornby ones that have popped and been customer refitted with no further issues does suggest an assembly issue rather than a design issue. 

[Moccasin]

5 hours ago, moawkwrd said:

Are we sure that the lack of padding in the outer box can be the cause of these issues? Surely the locomotive is secure in its box with foam packaging regardless so can’t move even if the inner box itself can. Otherwise it’s no different to the outer parcel itself being knocked around in transit, no? And that will certainly always happen even if padding is added to the parcel.

Seems more likely that the shaft is loose from the factory if refitting it immediately solves the problem and it doesn’t come out again on its own? The alternative is just that the shaft can become loose too easily but I don’t think we’ve heard of cases of it happening repeatedly?
 

Does anyone want to volunteer to violently shake their Class 50/43? 🫡

I seem to recall reports of OO models arriving with customers badly packaged and also damaged in transit. It may or may not be a cause here but if there’s a link they need to deal with it. 

[Simon M]

1 hour ago, Rallymatt said:

From an engineering perspective, the cup holding the cardan shaft has to have a shallow throat to allow the articulation on model railway curves. In the same way that backlash has to be engineered into gearing a degree of freeplay must exist in the shaft/cup. In a perfect world it’s all good but there is not huge margins. I doubt it can be shaken out, usually changes in direction on curves pop Cardan shafts out. Roco had huge problems a few years ago, Märklin are still having issues but their shafts usually snap. The fact of the few Hornby ones that have popped and been customer refitted with no further issues does suggest an assembly issue rather than a design issue. 

I’m with you on this one. I would be very surprised if it’s the outer packaging causing shafts to pop out. From experience of re-fitting my HST one, the bogie has to be turned on full lock plus flexing the shaft(whilst flinching) to re-seat. As the blister packaging holds the bogie straight, it must caused from the assembly line, but I don’t understand why mine ran ok for a few hours so it also could be a specific sequence of events on track e.g position of the drive cups at a certain point in curve, joint, point etc, so very difficult to prove/replicate. 

[Tim Allen]

30 minutes ago, Simon M said:

I’m with you on this one. I would be very surprised if it’s the outer packaging causing shafts to pop out. From experience of re-fitting my HST one, the bogie has to be turned on full lock plus flexing the shaft(whilst flinching) to re-seat. As the blister packaging holds the bogie straight, it must caused from the assembly line, but I don’t understand why mine ran ok for a few hours so it also could be a specific sequence of events on track e.g position of the drive cups at a certain point in curve, joint, point etc, so very difficult to prove/replicate. 

I literally took it out the box and onto the track, ran 30mins each direction, connected the mk2s and ran it while taking pics and video, removed the mk2s and went to move onto a different loop - motor just spinning.  With the HST 2 failed straight out the box, didn’t even get to run in. 
 

I’ve cancelled the Duchess order with coaches, class 66 and the J50 due to this. Not happy paying money for stuff that fails on delivery. If it was a one off then fair enough but it’s wearing a bit thin now.

[Generic Hornby Username]

14 hours ago, Rallymatt said:

It’s a difficult one as we hate sending things back but Hornby need to know so they can get on it. 

This feels like something to ask Carl next time he’s on a Q&A. I’d love to ask if the models are put on a test track of sorts before being shipped to customers. The Piko plant puts their locomotives through a brief test run after manufacture. It’s only a small loop of track, but I think it’s smart. 

Suppose Hornby had each locomotive run forward and backward on a small loop of radius 2 track. That simple procedure would catch many issues we’ve experienced. Most notably, this would detect a faulty motor, derailments, or pieces of decoration interfering with running (like the A3’s steps). Obviously, there are some issues that only emerge after 30 minutes of running or they might experience damage in transit. It’s not a perfect procedure. But I think they could reduce the number of returns/repairs dramatically by doing this. 
 

It’s possible it’s not financially feasible to do this… But I think what I’m describing would only take a minute per locomotive. Say Hornby’s Chinese partner manufacturers 1000 locomotives. Two employees doing this procedure can get through the 1000 locomotives in a little over 8 hours. The two employee’s wages for the day in China would only cost about 100 USD total. All Hornby needs to do is catch a handful of defective units to make this screening procedure worthwhile. Plus, they’d improve their brand perception. 
 

And it’s possible that they’re already paying to make sure this procedure is done. And if they are, Hornby should send an engineer to their Chinese factory to make sure they’re not being ripped off. If they’re paying to have their models tested, and issues are slipping through that should have been caught in testing, that’s a reason for concern. 
 

It’s always best to catch an issue at the factory. 

[Simon M]

Fully understand as you have had so many failures, it would be interesting to see reports on return %, root cause per model type etc. 

haven’t tried my 50’s yet as still doing some track work but fingers crossed they run ok .

[Silver Fox 17]

14 hours ago, Baz657 said:

I was expecting two but only one arrived in exactly the same condition - small box rattling around loose inside a bigger box with no padding at all. I won’t get a chance to test until next week. Here’s hoping…

 

Mecanno had a vast testing area for their clockwork and Dublo trains.

At one time every Dublo model was rolled down a curved incline to test the chassis before the motors etc were fitted.  

I think this was their clockwork one but look how many "layouts" are there.

I am not saying Hornby go to these lengths in China but I agree a couple of layouts would be ideal for all stock not just locos but coaches which would pick up the wheel catching issue, and goods wagons which would spot the poor running of the original tankers.

[Postman On The Rails]

Decoder installed and updated and all working, running now

[Stephen-1260829]

3 hours ago, Generic Hornby Username said:

This feels like something to ask Carl next time he’s on a Q&A. I’d love to ask if the models are put on a test track of sorts before being shipped to customers. The Piko plant puts their locomotives through a brief test run after manufacture. It’s only a small loop of track, but I think it’s smart. 

Suppose Hornby had each locomotive run forward and backward on a small loop of radius 2 track. That simple procedure would catch many issues we’ve experienced. Most notably, this would detect a faulty motor, derailments, or pieces of decoration interfering with running (like the A3’s steps). Obviously, there are some issues that only emerge after 30 minutes of running or they might experience damage in transit. It’s not a perfect procedure. But I think they could reduce the number of returns/repairs dramatically by doing this. 
 

It’s possible it’s not financially feasible to do this… But I think what I’m describing would only take a minute per locomotive. Say Hornby’s Chinese partner manufacturers 1000 locomotives. Two employees doing this procedure can get through the 1000 locomotives in a little over 8 hours. The two employee’s wages for the day in China would only cost about 100 USD total. All Hornby needs to do is catch a handful of defective units to make this screening procedure worthwhile. Plus, they’d improve their brand perception. 
 

And it’s possible that they’re already paying to make sure this procedure is done. And if they are, Hornby should send an engineer to their Chinese factory to make sure they’re not being ripped off. If they’re paying to have their models tested, and issues are slipping through that should have been caught in testing, that’s a reason for concern. 
 

It’s always best to catch an issue at the factory. 

From a quality assurance process point of view, it likely that Pre-production models would be 100% tested/inspected. Once signed off and the production process gears up, there is likely to be batch inpections using statistical proces control (SPC) (x units inspected per 1000, etc) - there is a british standard for sample inspections for normal/reduced/tightened testing but these would not generally be of all the parameters.  Feeding back issues to Hornby would ensure that they direct the supplier to add these checks into in production examples however, over time (once resolved) the batch inspections would reduce back to the normal.  

I would have thought that there would be some samples taken from the batches for running tests.

The addage here is ...there is price for quality...

(most of my working life has been within the production/inspection/QA and certification/assessment body arena within the defence/medical and certification sectors)

 

Edited May 26 by Stephen-1260829

[Martin-369195]

3 hours ago, Generic Hornby Username said:

This feels like something to ask Carl next time he’s on a Q&A

I agree. It's just never mentioned in interviews.

[Stephen-1260829]

1 minute ago, Martin-369195 said:

I agree. It's just never mentioned in interviews.

it is also very likely that there is one or two model railway manufacturing plants that fabricate for Hornby and other model railway brands.

These would have generally a good understanding of the production issues realating to OO/HO/N scale but they are probably learning what the limits are with this scale.

As a 'customer' when I had problems with a supplier.  Although the defects were annoying and brand reputation/cost implications, could be negatively effecting the company,  it was always the speed of response and resolution of the issue (how many times it to took to satisfy the complaint) that was key to me.

I have found Hornby customer services to be open and keen to resolve issues (no quibbles) if this remains so, then I am going to open to benefit of doubt with Hornby.

We are all "early adopters" in this scale (not my usual approach - being generally low risk in attitude) so I am anticipting some problems in the short/medium term.

 

[Tim Allen]

I did mention it to Carl in Birmingham and he did say he would look into it. Unfortunately these models would already have been made and on their way over at the time. 

[Stephen-1260829]

3 minutes ago, Tim Allen said:

I did mention it to Carl in Birmingham and he did say he would look into it. Unfortunately these models would already have been made and on their way over at the time. 

Hornby have lost a fair chunck of money with your decision Tim. 🥵  They need to be more sure of the quality of the releases or they will suffer.  From the very earliest releases of the A1/A4 locos there have been issues and I can't believe that Hornby have not been hammering this home to the manufacturer.

I hope that the customer service team can resolve the issues and you feel listened to.

 

[Silver Fox 17]

1 hour ago, Stephen-1260829 said:

From the very earliest releases of the A1/A4 locos there have been issues and I can't believe that Hornby have not been hammering this home to the manufacturer.

Well they did sort out the bogie issue and redesigned it. They also modified the moulding for the MK1 underframe to prevent the wheel scraping.

[Andrew-372848]

Eventually got around to running my 50 this afternoon after a late arrival yesterday evening and it is everything that's been said before. The only minor issue I have is that the little stepladder on the leading edge is catching on one of my point motors coming out of a 2nd radius curve. Just a little rasping sound as it passes, no impediment to travel. I guess one or the other might eventually wear down! 

[John-L]

8 hours ago, Tim Allen said:

I literally took it out the box and onto the track, ran 30mins each direction, connected the mk2s and ran it while taking pics and video, removed the mk2s and went to move onto a different loop - motor just spinning.  With the HST 2 failed straight out the box, didn’t even get to run in. 

Shame you’re having these problems. Three locos with the same fault is really unfortunate.  So far I’ve been blasting my Class 50 and it’s taking it like a champ.  I know that’s not helpful to your situation right now, but hopefully your replacement loco will be as good as the rest of them seem to be.

[96RAF]

3 hours ago, Andrew-372848 said:

Eventually got around to running my 50 this afternoon after a late arrival yesterday evening and it is everything that's been said before. The only minor issue I have is that the little stepladder on the leading edge is catching on one of my point motors coming out of a 2nd radius curve. Just a little rasping sound as it passes, no impediment to travel. I guess one or the other might eventually wear down! 

If the surface mount point motor is on the inside of the points curve it can snag on some locos. I took the file to mine and eased the case where it was catching. They are best mounted on the straight side of the point.

[Rallymatt]

I clipped the tie rod pips and actuation rods right down to clear this issue. 

[Andrew-372848]

I’ll need to make a closer inspection (video perhaps) to see exactly where this is happening. Poor lighting and incorrect specs didn’t help. 🙂