What About The Bee

Palmer's diagram is far more than vertical pistons. The unique feature set is the longitudinal drive axle and bevel gears. The Shay locomotives have just that, but instead of the scissors coupling, they used a splined axle coupling to take up the longitudinal flexibility. The front and rear biggies rotate just like any other on the Shay. While Palmer may not have physically realized his design, the design is actually functional Bee

Hi LT&SR_NSE I think that moderating is a hard job and further that the lads do it well. But that has little to do with my suggestion. I simply cannot understand why Hornby goes through all the effort to create a forum for enthusiasts without participating, even peripherally, in it. It seems like a miss to me. When someone writes in with a genuine complaint, first they have to know to look for a response (no notification) and then if they do manage to find a response, they read that they have wasted their time. Why? Incomprehensibly, Hornby doesn't participate in their own forum. That person then needs to write the same message again, only this time to an email address. To the same customer service representative who could have seen it here. This has little to do with the moderators, except that the moderators may have to write the email saying 'please contact customercare@hornby.com Hornby doesn't monitor these pages' instead of one of us saying it. This is just my thought. No one is obligated to do anything with it. Except if I win PowerBall tomorrow! Bee

Hello AndyMac You asked, how much would an online a Hornby Representative cost. My answer: £0.0 There are already customer service representatives who handle issues most adroitly. Simply have the existing representatives respond. In essence, they do already. Person who approach the forum first are directed to a customer service representative. What is the cost benefit ratio? I have mentioned the goodwill engendered and further mentioned the confusion encountered by many. This eliminates the confusion, adds good will. A ratio is a computation. Division by zero yields infinity. I do understand that the existing reps might be too busy to also handle issues here and there may therefore be an associated cost increment. But I have no evidence of manpower loading in any department at Hornby, let alone customer representatives to make an informed judgment Bee

Spot on Barry. I have seen any number of persons come here, thinking that they are speaking directly to a Hornby Representative. It is frankly astonishing to me that Hornby does not have a customer service representative monitor these pages. Even better would be a dedicated area, like Wish Lists or General Discussion, termed "Talk to a Hornby Representative", wherein the correspondent gets exactly that. Goodwill is created when others see reasonable issues handled in a professional manner. Example: suppose my locomotive came without a part and I write a post. Hornby responds with an apology, and says, we will send you that part. If this is in a public arena, you will see this and say to yourself, 'If something happens to me, Hornby has me covered." I know the moderators meet with Hornby representatives, perhaps the issue can be raised in that meeting Bee

Hello Paul A DCC ready locomotive does NOT have a decoder. It has a shunt, to permit DC operation. For this reason, there is no decoder to interrogate and no response will be forthcoming Bee Edit: yup, not familiar with the set and mislead by the terminology OP used. My mistake.

I could see using a PLC to switch signals on a DC layout. I've used them in other, professional applications and could easily see them used there. Yet for a DCC layout, the logic would be better located elsewhere. Bee

Welcome back to this month's installment of Railway Oddities, the result of my survey of early railway books. During last month's discussion, Rana Temporia mentioned crank axle driven locomotives. Feast your eyes on the 1823 method of "propelling railway carriages" In the front of the locomotive, observe the two vertical pistons and the crank axle below. The front axle appears fixed in angle relative to the carriage, but the rear axle rotates relative to the long axis of the carriage. There is a scissor type coupling to take up axial displacement, as the carriages are chained together. Additionally, a universal coupling is added to take up angular displacements. When I first observed this image, the engineer in me started thinking about the torque being driven through the scissors coupling and the utter impracticality of the arrangement. However, in a moment of clarity, I remembered Shay Locomotives, which have just this arrangement, albeit without the scissors While this has nothing to do with the LMR, RT's remark brought this image forward! Enjoy! Bee

I've been a member of various forums and discussion groups for decades. I just happen to think that this forum is one of the most polite and good natured forums I have ever been on. From my viewpoint, even when there is some quibble or misunderstanding, it is handled politely and without rancor. I also get that sometimes I may stray and don't mind being shoo'd back into line. The "no notification" policy is so unique that it is entirely unexpected. Folks ask for help and get the sound of crickets. There may be 100 helpful suggestions, but they aren't seen, as there is no notice. They do not expect that, given the nature of all the other comment boards. And no, a first time poster, asking for help, is extremely unlikely to wade through rules and regulations in long form text. If I help someone, and they do thank me, I think that very nice. If they don't, I get the internal satisfaction that I tried. Maybe the person being helped didn't like my answer or suggestion. Maybe I was dead wrong. Maybe they were having a bad day. Let it go, a thank you isn't a requirement. It is very nice to hear, and a plus when it happens. Celebrate the win, enjoy the moment. Bee

Tender Development I left off with a tender that was too tall and suggested I needed a shorter tender. The baseline was the Hanazono motor boggie. The question then being, can I fit the appropriate tender size around it. In this image, you can see the tender. Currently, the top of the tank is 26.5 mm over the rails. As a reminder, the top of OO Planet's firebox is 27 mm over the rails. So, if anything, this tender is just a pinch short. In this image, the Hornby tender for Tiger is photographed. The calipers are set to 0.5mm. We can observe that the rivets are at that dimension. This matches nicely to the rivet spacing presented by Armengaud. Scaled to OO, the rivets are 0.54mm apart. Here, I show the proposed rivets for my tender. I do think a resin printer should pick some of these up. Fingers crossed. Finally, we come to the handrail. James Nasmyth and Issac Shaw both show a tender with a handrail. Both are known good observers. I can see one possible reason why the handrail was dropped and a flange added. Drawing the handrail has lots of little parts, all of which would need making and assembling. Far easier to wrap a flange and rivet it to the tank. But for authenticity, Planet's tender should have a rail, just like Issac Shaw illustrated. It should print quite nicely. Pity the reproduction at the museum didn't follow the Shaw illustration What's next Coupling Attachment points, and the draw bar to OO Planet. Valve handles to permit the flow of water. Springs and Horn guides. Some more seams and rivets on the tank Tank fill port. Bee

James Nasmyth was a notable engineer of the 1800s. One of his inventions was a machine for the production of hex nuts. Prior to his invention, hex nuts were hand filed, but as you can imagine, this did not yield repeatable results. While it may seem obvious to a modern machinist, Nasmyth coupled a rotary indexing table with 6 detents and a grinding wheel to cut the 6 sides. Nasmyth had many other inventions, for example the steam hammer. He was such a noted inventor that Samuel Smiles provided us with his biography*. In the biography of Nasmyth, we find that he is an observer, albeit briefly, of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway. Known Good Observer He arrived in Liverpool to observe the LMR, just before opening. As he states, he observed George Stephenson acting as engineman and Robert Stephenson the stoker (fireman) working a locomotive in multiple short trips. Nasmyth mentions them attaining 30 miles per hour, "a speed then thought almost incredible". Then, at last, the locomotive came to a halt for about an hour at midday. Nasmyth took the opportunity to sketch the engine. "I eagerly availed myself of the opportunity to make a careful sketch of the engine, which I still preserve." This makes him a known good observer. This is that sketch, unavailable elsewhere online. Rocket / Northumbrian Confusion Throughout the paragraphs of text, Nasmyth refers to the locomotive as Rocket. Indeed, the sketch itself includes a note referring to the engine as Rocket. He also notes that Rocket led the procession on Opening Day. The only problem with this is that the order of the procession on Opening Day is formally preserved and well known. The first locomotive in line was Northumbrian, hauling the Duke of Wellington's carriage. Nasmyth's sketch of the locomotive matches other known images of Northumbrian. Nasmyth's confusion over the name can be forgiven. Northumbrian was the last locomotive to arrive at the LMR just before Opening Day. It was also the best locomotive, and straight out of Robert Stephenson's locomotive works. Hence the Stephensons' excitement in working the locomotive and why it was selected to haul the Prime Minister, aka the Duke of Wellington. Nasmyth likely assumed that Rocket, which won the Rainhill Trials, would be the engine exercised by such famous engineers as the Stephensons. Alas, Rocket was already antiquated! The Tender Northumbrian arguably had the first generation 3, or modern tender. In the image of Opening Day, we can observe 3 locomotives with a generation 1 tender, or the barrel on a utility wagon type. The fourth locomotive is Northumbrian, coupled to the Duke's fabulous carriage, image by Shaw Understandably, that is a bit hard to see. The locomotive is on the left, under the arch. Focusing on that part, we have Shaw, a known good observer, also presented us will a detailed view of Northumbrian. Firstly, no tophats, again. Apparently only gentlemen wore them, not the working class. Secondly, the tender had a handrail! Why would that be? Armengaud gives a dimension from the floor of the tender to the top of the tank. 650 mm or ~25". Knee high! In consideration that there would be coal there, the tank would be shin high. The stoker stood every chance of falling out. A handrail was necessary. Nasmyth also provided us with a partial sketch of the Liverpool Rd terminus station in Manchester. There may be other sketches by Nasmyth of the LMR, tucked away in one of his notebooks stored in a museum in Scotland. Alas, the content of those sketchbooks is not online. Bee *Samuel Smiles, you may recall, also provided us with the biography of George and Robert Stephenson.

Perhaps now you may see why I have proposed an encoder. The number of vanes does not correspond to the number of chuffs per revolution for an encoder. Rather, it serves to divide up the disk into parts, termed "counts". Once the reference is found, we can can keep counting up or down as each count occurs. Thus the cuff occurs on a specific count total. But Bee, I hear you say, if a count is a vane, it is the same thing, isn't it? Nay Nay! Put a light receiver on one side of the vanes, an emitter of light on the other side. The vanes alternatively block and permit light. Properly grated, the receiver will detect a sinusoidal light level. Put two emitters, and shift one such that it is 90° out of phase to the other. Now you have Sine and Cosine! With Sine and Cosine, you have a circle (lissajous) for each vane. Divide that circle or lissajous mathematically into 8 parts (45°) and now you have 8 counts per vane or 64 counts per full disk revolution. You may see that I can divide the lissajous into any number of arbitrary counts. The multiplier we used, back in the 1980s, for our own self designed encodering systems was 256, or 256 counts per lissajous. 8 vanes then yields 2048 counts per one disk revolution. Assign a chuff to occur at counts 512, 1024, 1636 and 2048. Viola! Works for any number of chuffs. 6 chuffs per disk revolution? Divide 2048 counts by 6. 8 chuffs per revolution? Divide 2048 by 8, yielding a chuff every 256 counts. Therefore, one disk works for every/any locomotive, independent of the number of chuffs per encoder disk revolution. Its done mathematically, not a direct trigger. I think the easiest way to see this effect is to put the palms of your hands together, fingers spread. Rotate one palm against the other, observe the light coming thru your fingers. We can sample that light, and determine its intensity. That gets you Sine, as per above. Again, I have no insider knowledge and could be absolutely incorrect. This is just my guess. An educated guess, based on experience, but still a guess. Bee

Hi Tolak Diplomatically, the name of this thread is "Black Five smoke unit". Forgive me if I am wrong, as that locomotive isn't in my era, but I thought it only had 2 cylinders. I could be wrong, but .... So 4 chuffs, 90° apart. Consider the disk with 8 vanes. Rising edge triggered, you get 8 triggers per rotation. Falling edge triggered, you get 8 triggers per rotation. Level triggered will require a low pass filter to inhibit a stuttering trigger.* But even that will be 8 triggers per rotation. Of course, we can skip every other trigger, getting back to 4 triggers per rotation. But if you pick the wrong edge on power up, you can be 45° out of phase with the valve gear. So you rotate the disk relative to the shaft to align it. Power down, and back up. Did it pick the right edge? I look forward to seeing how Hornby do this. If the phase relationship is only good to 45°, however, customer dissatisfaction will be very evident. Bee *watch out for higher speeds, such that the low pass filter doesn't filter out required triggers.

Hi Atom Agreed, and they are not! I would suggest that they are almost never in synchronous timing. The two sets of valve gear are independent on the prototypes. There is no guarantee that driving set one matches driving set two. Maybe on a model, but frankly, that isn't prototypical. Bee

For those who need the link Bee

I agree with the others. Cupping her ear to hear better Bee

I think we can agree that it is an encoder of some type, the only disagreement is the method by which the encoding is resolved. My guess was a true optical encoder, complete with lissajous that can be further resolved with Sine and Cosine. It is just that, however, a guess. I have no insider knowledge whatsoever! Tolak has an optical trigger. I would counter that the system could not tell which of the 6 vanes would be "the one". It could be made to function that way, indeed, that is essentially the Lionel solution. One pulse per revolution informs the entire chuff system. 96RAF has reported a magnetic ring. Magnetic encoders are a well accepted encoding solution. For this, I would question the need for optical vanes whatsoever, a simple disk with magnets glued on would suffice. Yet all of these, my guess included, are variations on a theme. If you want the chuffs to come out right, you need orientation of phase. I am happy that Hornby appear to be making strides in this direction! Bee

Hi Tolak Every decoder on the market today has non-volatile memory on board, preserving CV settings. No reason at all why one of them could not be the offset from home pulse to TDC. Any further adjustments of the chuff timing whilst operating be handled programmatically, for example, the reverser. That disk displayed in Sam's video has all the characteristics of a simple rotary encoder. That is, uniform blanks and openings around the circumference of the disk. The encoder reader head, not present in the video, will have two channels, phased 90° to each other, with the corresponding equivalent grating to the disk. The technology is fairly simple and well known for at least ½ century. In consideration that the encoder resolution need not be in the millions of counts per revolution (I dare say 256 counts per revolution would be more than adequate), the expense of such an encoder will be low. Just my comments from the peanut gallery. Bee

And that, boys and girls, is why the Jubilee locomotive will never retain rarity or top £ figure. Nearly all of them will be nestled into their boxes. So there will be 2500 of them, less a handful like yours Colin, just waiting. When the current owners go to sell, they will find that "NOS" and "NIB" is common. Bee

Hi RT Perhaps a capstan for a model boat. The steel peg goes down into a hole and rope (string?) wraps around the semicircular depression up top. I was on a commercial vessel yesterday, and saw one. Your part immediately jumped to mind Bee

In light of the scaling results, I am now committed to a OO Tender that meets OO Planet's requirements. The Hanazono Motor Boggie is the starting point. If I can get a tender to work with that boggie, great. If not, then the gear train in OO Planet needs re-thinking. Begin at the beginning. The Hanazono Motor Boggie The attachment is the screw on top. The hole behind the screw and the rectangular aperture on the side is to exhaust heat. The copper tabs are power take off. I didn't bother to sketch in some details, like the motor internals or the pickups. For the purposes of this exercise, that is unimportant. Bee

Note: every purchase should be inspected at the earliest possible moment. It doesn't matter if it is Hornby, a trusted eBay seller or a guy under a bridge. "Stuff" happens. Take a look. Try it on track Bee

So many sidings on that layout! I like that passenger train! Bee

AndyMac The link you provided is an orphan link. That is, you cannot arrive at that page by any path starting at uk.hornby.com. That page is therefore technically withdrawn. Whomever Hornby pays to maintain their website is not doing a great job. That firm thinks if you break the links from the root page, the page is dead. Nope. That no one will ever have bookmarked the page. Nope again. The page still functions, yet no updates to the page are made. Hornby is not maintaining it, the information it contains is out of date. I attempted many different ways to get to that page, without any success. Unless shown otherwise, that link is an orphan. Bee

Hello LT&SR_NSE "How hard could it be?" I said to myself. "A few strokes at the keyboard, and I will have a OO Planet". What a humbling, yet educational experience this has been. I would urge every person who has a complaint vis locomotives and schedule, to try their hand at it. About that purchased tender I do not fault the designer of the tender. He offers several designs, Rocket, Lion, Northumbrian as well as other era 1 items. I am convinced they are consistent within his group. About OO Compromises The lateral compromises are harsh. A primary example of this is boiler diameter. If I scale the diameter of the boiler properly, then there is difficulty in getting room to fit the valve gear and wheels. Shrinking the diameter causes height issues. My choice is a smaller diameter boiler, just higher up. I do want the model to present as Planet and for it to be recognizable as such. This is as much art as it is engineering. About conversion from N to OO I think that this was generated, by the designer, as a tender for Lion, which is also on offer by the designer. How much commerce that will get, now that both Hornby and Rapido offer Lion, is debatable. Perhaps the designer did not care that Planet's actual tender was smaller than Lion's tender. It is rational to expect that tender capacity increased as locomotive size increased. But if that detail did not trouble the designer, then Lion's tender would have sufficed. He just scaled his Lion tender up to OO, inevitably a close match for the Hornby Lion tender. The existing, too tall for Planet tender will not go to waste. I will use it elsewhere About Compression and the Hanazono motor boggie It isn't a great deal of work to design a static shell that accommodates the Hanazono boggie. Unlike OO Planet, there is no exotic valve gear or oodles of detailed parts. Will I over do it? Seriously, have I ever shown any propensity of that? [self depreciating sarcasm fully intended] I did need to convince myself that modifying the existing, too tall tender isn't feasible. The compression helped me to decide. Something not asked. Why did I bother showing all those comparisons? In another thread discussing 3D printed ideas, a point was raised about scaling upwards or downwards to get the desired model. I did want to demonstrate the issues of scaling, but thought the discussion of scaling for OO Planet belonged here, instead of there. It was a choice I debated internally. This thread won out. Bee

I periodically check Smoke Generator models. I remember that the Flying Scotsman present for quite some time, but a customer could not order it. I suspect that it sold out, but only Hornby Customer Service has the authority to confirm this. I suggest you write to them directly. customercare@hornby.com Under no circumstances should you cancel this existing pre-order. Let it ride! Bee