What About The Bee

I've just received LMR58 Tiger. I'm very pleased. I did want to share my thoughts Website and Process Tiger was part of the 2023 Range Launch. It was originally set for Winter 2022/23 arrival. I thought that must be an error, and was happy to see Hornby update this to Winter 2023/24. They caught the error! On 13 Feb, the arrival season went blank. I pinged the website repeatedly and 2 days later, it showed "in stock". It was shipped shortly thereafter and arrived today, 21 Feb. Assessment: The arrival date shifted out a year, and then back a year. I think this due to the "Winter" phrase. Hornby should simply pick month and year. It would lead to less confusion at Hornby! On the plus side, it shows as "despatched" and not "processing", so there is website progress!! Tiger The locomotive reasonably depicts Lion, as found and documented in 1929. Trans. Liverpool Engineering Society, Vol L, 1929. × As Lion and Tiger were sister locomotives, built at the same time, using Lion's image as the inspiration is fair play. Hornby has taken its model of Lion and substituted in the firebox as photographed in 1929. Different chimney. Same crew. The instruction sheet says "Lion". The entire model is mechanically the same. If you were happy with Lion (and I am), you will be happy with Tiger. It matches what it says on the tin. The Wagons These diminutive wagons are precisely what everyone thought. They are indeed the same tooling as Rocket's tender. A door has been added to the front, giving four sides. The coal load and barrel removed, a wood floor replaces that. They look too small behind Tiger, and they should. These are the wagons used at the Rainhill trials, and Tiger was a freight locomotive after a decade of evolution and practice. Tiger would have been capable of large consists and these tiny wagons are simply not. They do, however, look terrific behind Rocket. Again, I'm quite pleased overall. Hornby made good use of the existent tooling to provide another locomotive for the fleet. As well, good use of existent tooling to provide another bit of rolling stock, expanding selection. Bee

Hi WeyMatt 👋. Before I begin, I will point out that I suffer from CDO. This is the same illness as OCD, but in my case, the letters are arranged properly! A joke obviously. I do not have this affliction. But it serves to highlight what follows. I've carefully studied this portion of the plan. I include the reference image so you can understand what I am talking about Firstly, yes, you need that isolating section. You do understand that the length of any train you run MUST be less than this isolated section. How long is it, in inches? There are a few track difficulties. Right at your curved point cross over, I see this gap. My CDO demands that you close it. There are these two 6.8" flex tracks that overlap. Neither completes the circuit. My CDO is twitching. In this area, R8072 does not properly connect to R8073. In this area, you've selected Marklin double slip 24624 and connected it to Hornby R8073 point. R8073 doesn't connect properly after that. Have you considered the track code? The relative heights of the tops of the rails? Whilst they can be made to join, they will not simply clip together. Different systems, different attachments. There is lots to consider here. Now my CDO is making me nervous! And finally we come to this. You have R8072 and R8073 laid directly on top of each other, and have created a three way point. My CDO has the best of me now!! Yikes Please go over your entire plan. Make sure every bit of track connects without overlap or gaps. Use the track planning tool to generate a plan that can actually be built. How will you know? The tracks join. While you can "force it" when confronted by actual track, the best approach is to eliminate these dilemmas before you pick up a single piece of track. Bee

Hi ThreeLink You asked about the open work below the solebar. The answer is yes, it obscures, the Hanazono is a rectangular block that sits between the wheels. If you go back a post or two, I show the Hanazono without the tender. Here is a view of the tender I used for test Pay no attention to the wire, that was just to test current draw during axle alignment. I attempted to take a square on, track level image of the tender. The Hanazono can be seen, but you have to look mighty hard, as it is black. From a normal viewing angle, it is mostly invisible. I can live with this, but I respect that your opinion may differ. I went and measured the coal bin area. Treating it as a rectangular cavity, I get 14.9mm × 11.9mm × 23.9 mm or 4.238 cm³. Density of Lead is 11.29 grams/cm³, so if I was to fill the cavity with a (very unrealistic) rectangular block, it would be 47.8 grams. Of course, if I hack away at the lead, I can create a more realistic shape and glue on a layer of coal. Say 30 grams total. I could use other elements. I will of course avoid radioactive or toxic materials. Osmium is 22.6 grams/cm³ but is ~ $38/gram. Too expensive. Tungsten is 19.35 grams/cm³ and only ~$1/gram. Unfortunately, very difficult to cut. I do have a large diamond chop saw which would work but would make a lot of tungsten dust and therefore waste. Maybe. Tantalum is 16.65 grams/cm³ and is ~$2/gram. Tantalum can be machined, unlike Tungsten. In the end, I have to consider how many carriages/wagons I intend to haul and what the prototype offers. There is this period image of Planet, which appears in Walker, 1831. Note the horizontal cylinders under the smokebox. This image has been stolen and redrawn many times with many variations, but this is the grand daddy of them all. The original depiction. I get 10 flat wagons with freight. Do I need 66 grams, so that I can haul 27 wagons? Probably not. Bee

Absolutely not! Not at all. After quite a bit of conversation, it became quite clear that the biggest assist you needed was understanding polarity. Quite a few spotted this. Understand that we are not judging you as a person, we are simply assessing technical level so as to provide the best help that will be most meaningful to you! You were left with a simple puzzle in polarity. Some DPDT switches and a simple straight track. This puzzle, WeyMatt, will absolutely help you directly to the next level of understanding. We await your solution and diagrams. Patiently and with hope that you can solve it. We have confidence that you can solve it. I would suggest to you that you try to solve it. Why? Because you need to understand polarity to make your layout work. Bee

Hi ThreeLink You asked about Hanazono motor bogies and hauling power. Today, I did the testing. Wow! I installed the tender body onto the bogie such that the axles were NOT touching the bearing boxes. There is a screw attachment point on top of the Hanazono bogie, so the tender body was firmly fixed in place. I tested the assembly on its back, still drew the same current as before. This guaranteed that the axles weren't rubbing. I weighed the assembly, 27 grams. I started out with 33 grams of weight, for a total of 60 grams. Using this, I was easily able to haul all of my modern era 1 stock, to wit: 15 carriages/wagons. The current barely budged! So I grabbed the three carriages in R796, the 1980s Rocket consist, now with fine scale pegs. No issues adding them! Still barely a murmur in additional current. Mind, (15+3) is more than any one of the Hornby locomotives can pull. 1980s Rocket hauls the three 1980s carriages and that is it. Lion can pull 15 modern, but needs double head help from modern 2020 Rocket. The challenge was laid. I pulled out the 9 Accurascale Chaldrons. Lion can NOT pull 9 Chaldrons by themselves without assistance. Finally, I saw the Hanazono struggle. But it was all wheel slip. I added another 33 grams, now 93 grams total for the tender. The Hanazono pulled all 27 carriages / wagons without real issue. The current was in the 0.160 amps region. Above ideal, but certainly not dangerous. In an effort to see if I could push the current up to 0.200 amps (40% of stall current), I kept increasing the velocity. Eventually, it was flying around the layout, hovering around 0.190 amps. Just a pinch more I thought. The weight fell out of the tender, and there was a horrible train wreck. No damages incurred but it was spectacular!! So 27 carriages / wagons at warp speed could not get me to 40% of stall. This is by far my strongest puller. Next to determine the volume of lead for 66 grams and see if I can get it under a coal load. I recommend the Hanazono, without reservations. Cheers Bee EDIT: Best crawler of the lot as well. Slower and more stable at slow speed.

With the photos approved, I do believe they are the same board. R0 and C1 are the RC network to suppress noise, the RC network that appears on many a model. Not sure what L2 & L3 are. Is the black on the back of your board an applied material? That's where the Peters Spares board has the nomenclature. Bee Edit: are L2 & L3 resistors for Led 2 and Led 3?

Brew Man Does your board look like this X7507 from Peters Spares? Bee

Excellent! For others with X7507, a searchable record is created. Thank you Brew Man! Bee

Referencing Teditor's model number, we have X7507 PCB holder and blanking plug. Bee

Perhaps we can trace it a different way. Does it have a Hornby spare parts number? Bee

My apologies Brew Man. I will mark this down to the great aluminum / aluminium debate! Your PCB board will have printed text on it. Some of that text will be for manufacture, chip orientations and the like. There will be some text which identifies the board, and may include a revision number, etc. The name of the board, as used by Hornby, for internal purposes. It will simply be a string of characters which have no other purpose. Bee

Hi Richard For posterity, would you mind detailing what was hauled in the "Signal Works Engineer, Colchester" wagon? Typical consist? Locomotive used? Purpose? Etc? Whilst this isn't my era, it occurs to me that this is a rare opportunity for Enthusiasts who want to mirror prototype practice. If you wouldn't mind sir? Thanks Bee

Hi Brew Man Firstly, permit me to retract the commonality remark and insert a "it was the identical problem" statement. PCB boards typically have nomenclature on them which serve to identify them. Given we now have two PCBs with this issue, I would urge you to post up that nomenclature for others who might experience the same issue. And yes please, Teditor, the nomenclature on your PCB as well. Bee

My results so far in the Hanazono bogie haul test. The first result is to determine stall current. Stall current happens when the rotor of the motor no longer turns but draws current. I approached this in two ways. Firstly, I simply measured the resistance of the motor. 24 ohms. The design voltage is 12 volts (DC). Therefore, stall current by this method is ½ amp. Secondly, I applied a very low voltage to the motor, insufficient to get the rotor to turn. 0.407 volts. This was measured across the solder tags, in parallel with the motor under test. Next, I measured the current draw in series, without touching the position of the rotor. 0.018 amps. Using ohms law, I find the resistance to be 22.6 ohms and, when used at rated voltage of 12 volts, the stall current will be 0.530 amps. Those results are close enough to be a meaningful result. I will use the more conservative ½ amp for stall current. This will establish some limits as I add weight and perform the haulage test. I never want to exceed 0.250 amps continuous current, as this will lead directly to thermal failure. 0.200 amps continuous is acceptable but will shorten motor life. Ideal would be 0.125 amps continuous. I ran the Hanazono motor bogie suspended in air, wheels up, such that the bearing surfaces, such as they are, were engaged as if the bogie was sitting on track. In forward, the motor drew 0.083 amps on average. In reverse, the motor drew between 0.096 and 0.120 amps, randomly. [Edit: not 0.96 amps!!! Hahaha] It was very inconsistent. Still, within ideal bounds, so I moved the wheels in both directions for ~20 minutes each. Next step will be to service and lubricate. I will then test its ability to get around track while monitoring current. Add weights under self haul test, monitoring current, and then and only then, propel some carriages! Bee

Hi RDS Now that I understand the issue is I can easily avoid it. Its at my end and can control the rotation quite readily. Thank you kindly for the offer to rotate my image. I've simply deleted the strangely rotated image and let the corrected one stand. No sense in making extra work for you gentlemen! Difficult enough as it is. Bee

Hello Richard 👋 The artwork on the model is likely because the wagon at Tamar Belle still retains your signature paintwork. If so, the mystery is solved. Bee

I have no idea why the image would be rotated, but I did notice this occurred previously. I've processed the image, to see if I can correct the issue. Hopefully this appears correctly. If it does, I can insure I won't get this issue again. Apologies for the extra work mods. Bee

Hi Rana 👋. You have read my mind! Ha! I've gone for Hanazono motor bogies, with spoke wheels. Here is an image, comparing some 'generation three' tenders with the Hornby Lion tender. [EDIT: corrected image below.] The tender in back is installed on the top of a bogie, whereas the tender in front is not. The Hanazono motor bogie is displayed. Will they pull or push much? Welp, they can certainly haul themselves around. I will try to propel a few carriages and report back. Bee

Brew Man, you wrote: I agree with the commonality, and I absolutely do not think you are hijacking any thread. We are troubleshooting an issue. Positing theories may lead to resolution. Brainstorming may take many twists and turns. Your idea may be the one. Never give up! If we are to discard the mechanical binding theory, and are focused on the DCC ready PCB, then I would consider intermittent shorting. A bit of kapton tape around the PCB will completely isolate it from any arc to ground. Teditor is about to eliminate the PCB with direct wiring. This will prove instructive. Bee

Hi WeyMatt 👋. Just tap your circular icon in your current post, and it leads you to every one of your prior posts. Quite convenient Bee

Hi DRC 👋. Of course, I don't own any of those coaches, completely out of my era. But tractive effort is not reserved to one model. In my view, numerical values will prove useful. How much tractive effort do your locomotives supply? How much drag do your coaches offer? This light duty spring scale https://www.google.com/shopping/product/4591460253409083003 has a 50 gram capacity, 3% accuracy, 100 graduations. 0.5 grams per graduation. There are heavier duty spring scales, at 100 grams, 250 grams, etc What you need DRC, is a Dynamometer Car. As do I. Science! Bee Edit: Pesola Spring Scales are available down to 10 grams capacity! If we assume the same number of graduations, that is 0.1grams per graduation.

Interesting. Hyperlinks no longer have any color indication that they are links! They just look like bold text on my mobile device Edit: same on my laptop They function as links, but there is no indication that they are links. Bee

Hi Brew Man 👋 OP suggested that he is using a blanking plate, so there is no decoder. It is a DC model. You wrote that it seems to be a power transmission problem. That is what I was after. A suggestion of something binding as it runs. OP states that it runs for a bit, and stops. Reverses, runs for a bit and stops. Perhaps that is consistent with your experience? I make no claims of clairvoyance or ability to diagnose an issue without examining the evidence first hand, I merely provided a possible mode of mechanism binding. Could it be other bits? Sure. Have you tried removing the slide valve and connecting rods, and treated it like a diesel? That is, gears rotate wheels and nothing after that. Divide and conquer! Bee

Planet is certainly on my Hornby wishlist. Yet a sensible person can easily see that Hornby will not be shipping a Planet model anytime in the near future. Maybe someday, but not soon. One option, then, would be to scratch build Planet. Planet, Liverpool and Manchester Railway #9, represents the first major step away from the Rocket-type locomotives. Planet was a railway revolution. The pistons and cylinders moved under the smoke box and were arranged horizontal to travel. This eliminated the Rocket-type's ungainly side to side wobble, due to the pistons working against the undercarriage springs. Further, the location under the smoke box pre-warmed the cylinders, which inhibits condensation upon initial steam admission, limiting hydrolock. One of the most visually defining features of Planet are the oscillating handles¹ on the footplate. Those handles are a Robert Stephenson design. What are those handles? What do they do? What is a steam locomotive without the operating mechanism to draw in the eye? They are quite noticeable in all the videos of the replica. Link: Mr. Dawson provides an excellent explanation of how the Planet replica functions. I recommend this video unreservedly. The handles are indirectly connected to the slide valve rods. As the slide valve rods move, the oscillating handles follow. Slide valve rods also move the slide valves, which provide for the admission of steam to the piston. There is a pedal on Planet's footplate which selects the locomotive direction. If the pedal is up, the locomotive runs in reverse. If the pedal is all the way down, the locomotive runs forward. In either of these two positions, the timing of the slide valves, and therefore the positions of the oscillating handles, are controlled by the rotational angles of the eccentrics. But if the pedal on the footplate is at the midpoint [there is a detent for this] the sliding valve timing is disconnected from the eccentrics and the slide valves may then be controlled by the handles!!! That is, the enginemen can admit steam to either cylinder, on either side of the piston, at will, via handle manipulation. This is their purpose!! The enginemen used the handles to shift the slide valves, to get the locomotive started in the correct direction. Once the locomotive was going in that direction, the enginemen would then move the footplate pedal to either up or down and let the eccentrics take control. To better understand how this works, I decided to make a constrained mathematical model which functions as Planet would, albeit with numbers and equations instead of mechanisms and steam. Link: As the wheel turns, an axle mounted gear, red, drives a secondary gear, also red. The eccentric is the small yellow circle in the center of the secndary gear. Planet has the eccentric as part of the main axle, but for clarity and ease of modeling, I placed the eccentric on a secondary gear. Note that the radius of the eccentric defines the travel of the slide valve and eventually the angular travel of the handles on the footplate. In the side view, the yellow rod follows the eccentric around. This is connected to the slide valve rod, yellow, at the large red dot, representing a hinge. The slide valve rod drives the slide valve forward and back. You should see that the linear travel of the slide valve rod is defined by the radius of the eccentric. As the steam chest holds pressurized steam, there must be packing to constrain that steam from escaping alongside the slide valve rod. This constrains the slide valve rod to strictly linear motion. The slide valve rod protrudes out of the front of the steam chest. There is a Scottish Yoke² that drives a crank. A Scottish Yoke changes linear motion to rotary motion (or visa versa). The Scottish Yoke is depicted as two short vertical members in yellow on the slide valve rod, capturing the top of the crank. A purple crank is connected to the front pivoting lever, brown. The pivoting lever pivots on the center of the three points. As the slide valve rod moves back and forth, the Scottish Yoke forces the crank to rotate, and as it does, it causes the front pivot lever to rotate. The angular travel of the front pivoting lever is therefore controlled by the radius of the eccentric. The angular travel in my model is +/-10°. There are two blue rods that drive the rear pivoting lever, also brown. If you go back and examine the initial image "The oscillating handles", you can now pick out the blue rods and the rear pivoting lever, clearly depicted. The two pivoting levers and the two blue rods form a parallelogram. Whatever angle is created at the front pivoting lever, the rear pivoting lever will match it. So as the Scottish yoke in front drives an angle into the front pivoting lever, the rear pivoting lever is also driven to that angle. Finally, a purple crank represents the handle on the footplate. It is connected to the rear pivoting lever. When the footplate pedal is either up or down, the motion of the wheel causes the purple lever on the footplate to oscillate, in time with the slide valve. Now if the pedal is at the midpoint and the eccentrics disconnected, you should be able to see that the enginemen can move the lever to manipulate the slide valve directly. Link: Nearly identical to the left side, the mechanism on the right hand side is for the right hand piston, slide valve and right hand footplate handle, this time in green. Now a model need not drive the mechanism as illustrated. There are no slide valves to manipulate. There is no steam to admit. There is no pedal to engage, disengage the eccentric. I did think it meaningful to understand the oscillating handle mechanism Planet possess. The animated mechanism may take quite a bit of torque to drive, limiting my pulling power. The numbers, formulas and constraints operate without regard to friction, but the real world is a cruel master. One alternative would be this simple crank. Link: The handles oscillate with almost the same motion. There is a small difference in the position of the handle vs time in cycle. This is due to the difference in drive between the Scottish Yoke³ and the eccentric levers depicted here. The number of oscillations is timed to the wheels, as before. I can either leave the unnatural handle extensions in plain sight through the footplate, or turn the extensions 90° and drive them into the firebox. You would have to be very familiar with Planet to notice these extra extensions. Yet if I was to add the parallelogram levers, rods and then the front slide valve rod, the frictional component is nearly the same as before. The Scottish yoke and slide valve rod would still be present. The sliding friction would be as well. And I would be left with those odd handle extensions to offend my eye. What is a steam locomotive without the operating mechanism to draw in the eye? Nothing. Planet had oscillating handles on the footplate. So does Patentee. So must my models. Thus, the planning begins. Bee ¹ Patentee also has oscillating handles. ² This is the formal nomenclature for the mechanism. I do hope no feathers are ruffled by the use of proper nomenclature. This short video explains how a Scottish Yoke functions. Link: To see the replica's Scottish Yoke, view Mr. Dawson's excellent video at 4:17. You will see the steam chest with the steam chest lid removed. The slide valves and rods are demonstrated. As the camera pans back, you will see the Scottish Yoke on the bottom of the screen and the front pivoting lever, as well as the parallelogram connecting rods. ³

Hi Teditor Just a thought, but may prove worthy of consideration. Suppose the gear mesh on a set of gears is too tight, two pieces of junk in the gear mesh which line up or gear teeth with a bit of damage. The model runs until that particular alignment of the gear train/mechanism is reached, and, representing a retarding force to great for the motor to over come, it stalls the motor. Topcat's current draw test will show this. Gear ratios being what they are, it may take some time for the particular alignment to come around each time. That is, the model will run for a bit, and then stop when it hits that alignment. Reverse, and it runs for a bit then stops upon that alignment. Freewheel rotate the wheels until the entire gear train is cycled multiple times, end to end. Looking for a high point may take several cycles to appear. Just a thought. Bee