What About The Bee

Sometimes, my posts are rejected for use of a banned word. [504 gateway] Now with the list of banned words not published, I am forced to guess which word is causing the issue. This is then compounded by the fact that I am not British and certain words that are banned have no such definition or usage on this side of the pond. I submitted "Her Majesty's Saloon" 3× before I stumbled onto the word needing change. I read, re-read and re-read, trying to guess what the word might be. Painful. Add in some images, yikes!! If the moderators could be persuaded to send the "list" to cognizant adults, I think this would help. I do not want to publish banned words and I have no intention of debating which words are banned. I just would like to know what they are, so I can avoid them without agony!! Bee

In Hornby's 2023 range launch, you may have noticed R40357 "L&MR Coach Pack, Wellington, Globe & Queen Adelaide's Coach". The first photograph is of Globe and Wellington, which are standard 1st class carriages. You are to be forgiven if you didn't scroll to the second image. The carriage presented in the second image isn't the standard LMR 1st class carriage by that name. No it is not! The little brown carriage in the second image is Queen Adelaide's personal carriage, made especially for her in 1842. A royal train carriage is more properly termed "saloon". The Queen, painted in 1832, some time after ascension. The saloon has attracted interest for quite some time. This old composite postcard shows Her Majesty and the saloon. The front of the saloon is on the right. There are three compartments and a small area for luggage in the rear. The center compartment is for seated travel, what the LMR would call "4 inside", 2 facing front, 2 to the rear, legs in the center. The sumptuous furnishings are far beyond standard LMR 1st or even Royal Mail 4 inside. Yet the seating arrangement is consistent with the phrase, 4 inside. I believe the rear compartment is for sleeping. The compartment could be arranged such that Her Majesty could nap. Some external images show long curtains in the rear compartment, which are also in this image. Long bed curtains are consistent with darkness. I might be wrong here and the bed was made up in the center compartment. The front compartment is just two front facing seats, with a glass wall. I think this might be for Queen Adelaide to be viewed by the public as she rolled on by. I can picture her doing the ubiquitous 'queen wave' from inside, to her adoring public. The front buffer beam shows the rich appointment as it is carved and pin striped. That will be a difficult challenge for Hornby. The front, gilded and carved flourishes are quite a noticable feature and yet another challenge for Hornby. Even the door artwork is complicated! Given that this saloon exists at the museum, Hornby will have every opportunity to examine this saloon in detail and as often as they would like. Hornby should do themselves proud. I pre-ordered R40257 within 10 minutes of range launch. I recognized that saloon, and I ordered instantly. Now I cannot state that Queen Adelaide's carriage ever was on the LMR. It did exist during the LMR's time frame of existence but was for a different railway. Yet the saloon is a preserved period carriage and this is my layout. So it will be making appearances. The 1st class carriages Globe and Wellington are a bonus, but frankly, I would have paid the asking price, even without them. A royal carriage on my layout! Bee

@37Lover Hi there 👋 I sometimes go back over my posts to look for spelling errors and grammatical errors. I am fussed about the details, so when I note a misspelled word, I simply edit the post without notice. This enhances the reader's experience, since they focus on flow of, not the mechanics of, a sentence. Occasionally, factual errors creep in, so I may edit the response, but I will note the edit for the readers. I like to own my mistakes. They are mine, afterall. Perhaps you may have noticed an error? Bee

I would hasten to add: The 1st class carriage Adelaide noted above was of the standard design. 6 inside. Yellow. In Hornby R40372, it is Queen Adelaide's personal carriage. Not to be confused with the standard 1st class carriage run on the LMR. May I say that R40372 was in my basket within 10 minutes after range launch. That was the easiest pick ever!! The price for that one carriage, if you do the maths, is much higher than any of the others. I hope that portends a match to Her Majesty's actual carriage in the museum, and a highly detailed one at that. I do not know that Queen Adelaide's personal carriage ever traveled on the LMR, but it is a period carriage and it's my layout!! Bee Edit: The LMR Queen Adelaide eponymous carriage was NOT standard!! Please read about it here: LMR Queen Adelaide carriage; Not to be confused with Her Majesty's Saloon :: Hornby Hobbies

@LT&SR_NSE The nominal 1st class carriage seats 6 inside each compartment in two facing rows. There are 3 compartments. They all look about like this Call it the standard design. This seating arrangement was termed "six inside". The passengers show the seating arrangement. Then we come to the outliers. The LMR did not have many of the Royal Mail carriages. Not only was the train a pure express, the seating was "four inside". Given the carriages were of relatively the same width, the difference can be compared to business vs first class seating on airlines. Re: Lacey & Allen (L&A) While researching the actual carriage list, I found that Mr. Anthony Dawson had covered L&A in his recent book. L&A were the carriage makers who created it, and Henry Booth had it illustrated for his book, published in 1830. Mr. Dawson states 4 inside. I'm not so certain, it could be 6 inside. Ackermann's period prints include a pictorial record of that carriage, but it is very much derivative of Booth. There are no other images I am aware of. L&A must have seemed very familiar to the upper crust in Liverpool and Manchester. It is a horse carriage after all. The standard carriage was the strange one!! Yet 200 years on, with literally dozens of images to examine, the strange one is the L&A. Given Hornby's recent history, the L&A will appear, but only in a train pack! I'm happy you are enjoying the details. This is a significant part of my modeling experience and am simply sharing! Bee

The previous message details the Hornby selection 1st class carriages. This post will provide information regarding actual known LMR 1st class carriages. If the carriage is illustrated in a period illustration or mentioned in writing, it becomes part of this list. Adelaide (Queen) Ariel Aurora Auxilium Booth Early 1st Class* Chinese Liverpool** Clarence Conservative Croxteth Delight Despatch Duchess of Kent Earl of Wilton Experience Fair Trader Fly Globe Greyhound Harlequin Huskisson Lacey & Allen Carriage*** Lark London Lord Derby Marquis of Stafford Melbourne Reformer Royal Mail**** Sir Robert Peel Sovereign Stanley Sylph Times Traveller Treasurer Velocipede Victory Wellington William (King/Royal) Zephyra ÷÷÷÷÷ Which name isn't on this list? Renown R3810 Acceptable, as no preserved list exists. Renown could have existed, so it is fine to have a bit of artistic license ÷÷÷÷÷ *1st class on the basis that sprung buffers were present in imagery and per Booth, sprung buffers only present on first class **1st class based on color of carriage, glazed windows and shown coupled to nominal first class in Ackerman prints ***This is the very strange horse carriage body mounted to a railway undercarriage, as shown by Booth. Mr. Anthony Dawson states that this is a "4 inside" carriage, just as Royal Mail was 4 inside. The premium for 4 inside, vs 6 inside seating was 1 shilling. ****4 inside

You asked about shunting and turntables in the Olive Mount Cutting. Wood "Practical Treatise..", 1838 provides extraordinary information about LMR points and railway turntables in general. A detailed track plan of the LMR has eluded me. We do know, in broad stroke, much of that plan due to early Ordnance Surveys. Yet in detail, there is a great unknown. While it is possible that turntables and or points could be in the Olive Mount cutting, the answer simply is, I do not know. A fantastic resource is Fitzgerald "Liverpool Road Station, Manchester An historical and architectural survey" 1980. The entirety of the track plan at the eastern terminus is given. My count is 48 turntables in the terminal! That is no typographical error, forty eight turntables. I truly wish this type of resource was available for the remainder of the railway. I am hopeful that LMR corporate surveys and track plans were preserved and will someday be published. The Olive Mount cutting will likely not appear on my layout. Impressive an engineering feat as it was, it simply does not lend itself well to a model. The real cutting in 1832 was (up to) 70 feet deep and only 20 feet wide. Double track, single working. In OO, that's nearly a foot deep and only 3⅛" (80mm) wide. A wonderful view of the top of the cutting and no train spotting. Maybe it would be good for an on board camera. A derailment would be disastrous!! But for the period illustrators, the cutting was spectacular. The soaring majestic walls and the observer in the base of an extremely narrow canyon. Ackermann, as an experienced publisher, recognized the economic value of the LMR images. Multiple editions were published and variation among editions do exist. The image above appears in the first edition. While this edition illustrates a passenger consist of 1st class carriages, later editions show a 2nd class carriages. With two guards present, we can observe what you theorized, and may I say, spot on. Both guards are seated forward. This would permit relatively easy communication. The guard in the rear would always have the guard in front in view. Likewise, the guard in front would have the engineer and fireman always in view. When the brakes were needed, the communication from the engineer to the guard in the rear would be relatively fast. A rearward facing rear guard could be day dreaming and completely miss his order. While both the Ackermann and Walker prints of the cutting appear very early, they are not derivative images. It is hard to understand why Walker would illustrate that carriage backwards. But he did, showing us that view of the brake handle in elevation. Thank you, James Walker! Bee

Hello Alberto If it is deep enough, snow should cause temporary speed restrictions on the network. I do hope your engineers are following the restrictions. I like the new title sequence, which shows the movie projector. Evocative! Bee

I found an online calculator which purports to convert monetary amounts into values for the year 2000. http://www.concertina.com/calculator/ Upon entering 20 shillings for 1832, I was informed that this is equivalent to £605.81 in the year 2000. An equivalent fare may be Amtrak, which offers to transport your automobile from Washington DC to Orlando, Florida for £167.92 ($208). This is a distance 1363 km (847 miles).

JJ Now what device did you energize to cause the needle to shift? Be careful to isolate the needle shift to just the one, as there may be more than one device nearby. As RAF stated, it may be your controller. Perhaps, as you show on the video, its the Airfix locomotive. If nothing is on, you have another magnetic source nearby, perhaps in the carriage itself. You now have the tool, excellent. Now find the culprit! Bee

Hi ThreeLink I've just now went through Walker, to see if a description of the guards or the plate would be forthcoming. Alas, no further information is provided. I do have two tidbits. The tightest radius of curvature on the LMR, per Walker, was a radius of 15 miles. Secondly, should you wish to book a passage for your private, four wheeled carriage, the price was 20 shillings (Forgive me if I haven't the slightest idea what value this represented in 1832.) The link to the entire plate was given, but in the interests of ease of discussion, I present it here It very much appears that the guards are communicating by hand signals, just as you suggest. You did suggest that they should both be seated forward for convenience of communication. I agree. Yet, they are not! This lends further support to the inverted direction of that last carriage. Why would that guard sit wrong way around if he could easily sit facing forward and thus communicate more readily? Bee

You are quite welcome DukeDog!

Doh! I am an idiot! It is Henny and not Henry. My apologies. Details are important, and I do seem to have missed this one.🤦 I was wrong, it will not happen again. If I may be so bold, we seem to agree. From experience, we know to examine the page in minute detail. To not be fooled by clever artwork or terminology. If the Hornby website is to be the Hornby storefront, then it should be accurate. That has been my only goal in this particular thread. New enthusiasts will be swiftly put off by apparent misbehavior. Certainly Patricia and her Beatles Train will be. Even if Hornby has the best of intentions in this matter, relying on a buried T&C just doesn't sit right. Getting a message that "you didn't read the text, the images aren't binding" is not going to engender good will. Indeed, here is a further example. R30090 is a Train Pack. It comes with a locomotive and 3 carriages. The last carriage has been under my intense scrutiny, and I am satisfied with it. Booth illustrated early carriage. Strictly as a function of that carriage, I have placed my order. There are 3 carriages in the pack and the two 1st class carriages in the image have names. By detailed examination of the photograph, I can see that the names are "Traveler" and "Huskisson". Should I rely on the image? I've requested clarification, 2×, and am patiently awaiting a response. I have on order R40371, which definitely includes "Huskisson". I've no need for two "Huskisson" carriages. Should I cancel my order for R40371 or keep it? Hopefully, this illustrates how confusion can arise from what is presented by Hornby. How many "Huskisson" carriages will I end up with? 2, 1 or 0? Bee

Hi P-Henry I have a ton of respect for you. You are helpful and polite. Non-confrontational. When I see one of your diplomatic responses, I know it will be considered and reasoned. Respect. May I request you examine R40372. Pray tell, what does the customer receive? Bee

There is a finer point to be considered here. The T&C raised is to cover Hornby when the produced model does not match a CAD rendering. CAD models may not be realized in actual parts. The part could be impractical or otherwise unachievable. That indeed is normal and to be expected. Hornby needs to produce images of a product before the product is produced. Therefore, the artwork in an offering may be a CAD drawing. I accept that as reasonable. That is normal business practice. Showing 2 items and delivering 1 is not "normal business practice"

Was it understood by Patricia (Beatles Train Set)? NO! Did she understand that Hornby shows a picture with 2 items but she only gets 1? I haven't bothered with the exact quantities, and these numbers are merely representative. Which leads me to a simple fix. How hard is it to put text onto images? If you have observed any of my posts, bless your heart for enduring it, but you will have noticed that my images do contain text. Getting the imagery correct is far trickier, in particular, colorizing mechanical drawings is insane, but text is simple. Duck soup simple. If Hornby insists on showing images that contain multiple products, they should so note this ON THE IMAGE. "Your train can look like this! It includes R1, R2, R14 and R3078" There is a term for Hornby's sales practice, which out of courtesy for a company I admire, I will not use. But Hornby is doing themselves no favors. Hornby can hide legalese in some part of their pages which technically provides an excuse. That doesn't mean that the general public will be happy with it. As to contacting Hornby directly on this point, prior responses to the forum indicate that Hornby replies that "the images aren't binding, the item wasn't in the text". In other words, they know the images are misleading.

This exact issue was just raised by an upset customer, albeit for a different item https://uk.hornby.com/community/forum/beatles-train-set-339416?ccm_paging_p=1#end-of-replies Perhaps the person in sales who is approving these images unaware of an unwritten rule of the internet. "Images are part of the terms of sale. What you see is what you get." WYSIWYG Bee

Hello Patricia Hornby does not monitor these pages. The moderators of this forum are not Hornby employees nor are they Hornby representatives. I hear every word. You examined an offering for an item and thought that an image in the offering was representative of the item. That is, you thought you were getting more product, because Hornby showed you a picture with that "more". You will get no satisfaction here. You may contact customer service at customerservices.uk@hornby.com The head of marketing is Mr. Simon Kohler. He does reply to emails Simon.Kohler@hornby.com Bee

Hi JJ I would place the compass on the roof of the carriage, directly over the reed switch. The idea is really quite simple. A compass is sensitive to the tiny magnetic field of the earth. In the absence of other magnetic fields, the compass will point to the earth's magnetic north pole. So if another field is present and not aligned to the earth's pole, the compass needle will move. Where do you want to see if there is a magnetic field? At the switch! So put the compass there. You can easily isolate which component is generating that magnetic field by moving a component closer to and further away from your maglight, checking to see if the compass needle moves. Bee A compass is an incredibly inexpensive magnetometer. It won't tell you the field strength, but it absolutely will tell you if there is a magnetic field present, or not.

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/topic/176765-key-publishing-magazines-removed-from-readly-app/ Link made clickable https://www.rmweb.co.uk/topic/176765-key-publishing-magazines-removed-from-readly-app/

Correct Topcat. The earth's magnetic field will not affect a reed switch. But if the Airfix locomotive affects the compass, we know that there is a magnetic field developed by that locomotive. Which, if strong enough, will change the state of a reed switch. Bee Edit to add: the east-west orientation is to make the magnetic field of the locomotive orthagonal to the earth's magnetic field. This will provide greatest sensitivity to a potential magnetic field of the loco.

JJ's issue got me to thinking. We suspect a magnetic field is developed by the Airfix locomotive. We could jump into a scientific analysis with magnetometers, measuring the field strength in gauss. Yet none of that is necessary. Align the carriage and track on an east - west axis. Literally the directions on the earth. Place a compass next to the carriage. It will point north, of course. Play with the Airfix locomotive, just as JJ shows us on video. If the Airfix locomotive develops a magnetic field, the compass needle will move. The field strength of the earth is actually quite low, and should be easily overcome by a field strong enough to flip a reed switch Bee

That Walker plate is most instructive. Common sense tells us that the braking force should be applied at the last carriage in consist. Yet how is that guard to communicate with the engineer and fireman up front? Interestingly, many of the images include a guard riding in the first carriage in consist. Hand signals indeed! I have looked at that Walker plate for a very long time. Never noticed the handle before, as it blends into the rock face behind. The slog through Wood's excellent drawing provided the spark. I examined each drawing in turn to look for that handle, and there it was! And now my conundrum. Do I add a tiny wire to my Hornby 1st class carriages? This to represent the brake handle and rod running down the face. A tiny gear? Hornby have suffered under an anachronism. Carriages today are double ended and have been for over a century. It is reasonable to assume then, that carriages on the LMR were double ended. Clearly, they are not. All of the evidence supports a singular guard station. Yet Hornby have placed two guard stations on the roof. Its understandable and does afford a sense of symmetry to the design. Hornby gets a bye on this from me. Bee

The LMR brake mechanism is presented. As usual, Nicholas Wood, Practical Treatise... 1838 At the top of the image, we have Jupiter, LMR #14, manufactured by Robert Stephenson & Co in 1831. Jupiter was a 'Planet-Type' locomotive, in 0-4-0 configuration. Behind Jupiter, there is a third generation tender. Behind the third generation tender, there is 1st class carriage Traveler, with guard. Of note, Traveler is definitely in Hornby R30232 and should be in Hornby R30090 (time will tell). In the middle of this image, presented is the original depiction from Plate 6, showing the undercarriage used on the LMR. On the bottom, I have annotated the brake mechanism. The forward orientation of the carriage is the same. Forward is to the left hand side the image. The guard's right hand will apply the brakes, as the handle(1) is to the right of the guard. To apply the brakes, the guard will rotate the handle (1) clockwise, which causes the rotation of the gear (1) clockwise. This causes the gear (2) to rotate anti-clockwise. Gear (2) drives a double pinion. Rotating gear (2) anti-clockwise causes the red rod (3) to move towards the rear of the carriage, as shown by the yellow arrow. Simultaneously, gear (2), via the double pinion, causes red rod (4) to move towards the front of the carriage, as shown by the yellow arrow. The motion of rod (3) causes the sub-axle(5), green, to rotate, as shown by the pink arrow. A reversing rod on sub-axle (5) causes the brake shoe to be pressed onto the drum of the forward wheel, small yellow arrow. Similarly, the motion of rod (4) causes the sub-axle (6), green, to rotate, as shown by the pink arrow. A reversing rod on the sub-axle (6) causes brake show to be pressed onto drum of rear wheel, small yellow arrow. To disengage the brake, lever at (1) is rotated anti-clockwise. This will cause the break shoes to be pulled away from the drum of the wheels, in a reversal of the above description. As (a) the brake mechanism is actuated via the handle shown (b) there only is one handle depicted in the Wood plate, and © the position of that singular handle is on the front of the carriage; therefore the guard should be seated facing forward. Most of the carriages depicted, with a guard, have that guard facing forward. Ackermann, Freeling, Colyer, Crane and Sandars only show forward seated guards. Ackermann, Crane and Freeling go so far as show that there is no rearward facing guard station, even with the rear of the 1st class carriages quite visible. It simply isn't there. Admittedly, Crane and Freeling are derivative images. Yet there is one image which must be examined. James Scott Walker, An Accurate Account of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway ... 1832, has a plate which includes a rake of 1st class carriages in the Olive Mount Cutting. A spectacular image, giving a sense of the depth of the cutting. Walker Plate The first carriage in consist has a forward facing guard. The last carriage in consist has a rearward facing guard. Further, the handle (1) appears to be visible for inspection, mounted atop a long rod! The rod appears mounted to the outside face of the carriage. This is consistent with the position shown by Wood. The gears (1) and (2), must therefore be in the undercarriage. I think you can see the gears in the undercarriage on the full Walker plate, but this is not certain. What ever that is is in the right spot for the gears and, to me, looks like gears, but your mileage may vary. If we accept Wood and Ackermann, and we should, then there is no rearward facing guard station. Therefore this last carriage is being pulled from the wrong end, facing the wrong way for travel. The alternative is that there were two guard stations, albeit not shown by any period illustration I can find. Bee

Hi Threelink When examining these configurations, I think it important to consider context. Before this buffering arrangement, there were coiled springs in leather bags and before that wood bashing on wood. We also know that this buffering arrangement was superceded by Booth's patent of 1836. So it is a snapshot in time. This arrangement certainly was an improvement over nothing at all. Consider the carriages simply crashing into the one ahead. All the energy, dissipated at once, resulting in high deceleration forces. The coiled spring arrangement was little better. Force is linearly proportional to compression for coiled springs. If made stiff enough (k of the spring high), then a lightly loaded carriage will feel the same as crashing without springs. The carriage crashes into a stiff spring and there is no compliance. If the spring is made more compliant to soften a lightly loaded carriage (k of the spring low), then a heavily loaded carriage will bottom out the coiled spring, end of travel, resulting in yet another crash. Was the coiled spring better than nothing? Yes, but still insufficient. The buffering arrangement presented here was better. Greater travel of the spring results in more energy dissipation before crash. From an engineering standpoint, the rearward facing buffers present significant bending dilemmas in the mechanism. The diagonal rods connected to the reversing rods have forces applied in angles away from the axial sense. That results in bending moments. Trying to use one spring for multiple functions is an admirable engineering goal, yet a spring must have something to react against. I specifically did not discuss the reaction force arrangement before. The hard stops of the spring travel, when the ends and middle are moving, isn't really workable over the variables we see here. But was this arrangement better than before? Oh yes it was. The continuum of development pressed onwards, with Booth distributing the multiple functions to individual springs in 1836. Was this better? Oh yes, it was. Context is important. The LMR was a grand laboratory. Rails, sleepers, locomotives, carriage design, and on and on; it was all on! Buffering included. I've now read a few reports, such as yours, of the rough rides on heritage lines. Permit me to express my jealousy. I'd really like to experience that rough ride but alas, wrong side of the Atlantic. The lads running the heritage line are doing the best they can, with antiquated, worn out equipment, on irregular rail. You still got the ride and likely had fun! Still jealous! Bee