My name is Bond

Must admit found track pins problematic into plywood without pre drilling a small guide hole. Tried some old Marklin track fixing screws that I had but the heads could not cope with the amount of screwdriver torque required to fix so again pre drilling required. I will try these screws suggested above complete with the appropriate screwdriver supplied by the seller. If they drive into the plywood without pre drilling or the heads failing because of screwdriver torque then in my book great!

I did so deleted all browser cookies and history and prices remained at the higher level when relaunching the website.

In the old days of catalogues with price lists, prices would remain firm for a 12 month annual period and you could plan your spending, subject of course to products being available in that time frame. You would know that a new price list would be issued in January and so November and December would be prime buying months to still buy at the prices announced in January. This sudden mid term significant price jump without warning, for products already manufactured and in stock, as well as future product yet to be delivered, is a new strategy and unexpected. It has somewhat deflated my interest in TT:120 as the prices are now approaching OO levels if not higher than OO taking into account retailer discounts. Hopefully it is a website glitch and prices will return to their former level for the remainder of the year. But if these new prices are indeed firm, it could be that Simon Kohler and the directors disagreed on this mid term price increase strategy, which could have triggered his “retirement” from the company.

The update is now in the App Store available updates section. I had 8 updates listed this morning including HM7000.

That method is fine for OO/HO rail joiners has anybody tried this method and succeeded with the smaller fragile TT/N gauge rail joiners without damaging the rail joiner? How about using gardening gloves to hold and fit the rail joiner?

I went with Peco flexi track rather than waiting with Hornby rail joiners. In another thread it is claimed Tillig rail joiners are an alternative for Hornby/Peco rail joining. An advantage of flexi track is that it has enabled me to create layout ideas for passing areas with the Hornby point geometry, mainly in sections with curves, that are difficult or impossible to create with Hornby set track. There are no set track geometry limitations so you can create pretty much anything when layout planning. When Hornby do eventually have their straight track in stock they should consider doing a straight track bundle of say 25 pieces for the price of 20 or something like this to reward those who have waited patiently!

IOS16 can be downloaded onto a 5th generation basic iPad and as it happens that is what I use. IOS16 won’t download into earlier generations. Probably not recommended to buy anything earlier but as for earlier versions of IOS for the IPad to permit earlier generations to be used is there anybody out there using an earlier version to run HM7000? One thing to bear in mind though is that, knowing Apple policy on updates, it is very likely that IOS17 when launched will not download onto a 5th generation iPad. So when purchasing future proofing can be a consideration with a later generation. The thread below has suggested IOS13 might run HM7000 so may be worth a read:- https://uk.hornby.com/community/forum/my-first-ipad-but-which-one-350578?ccm_paging_p=1&ccm_order_by=&ccm_order_by_direction=

You receive an assortment of speaker enclosures with the sound decoder. Maybe one could be used or modified?

Is something jammed or sticking preventing the motor from spinning? Can you turn the gearing manually to check that the running gear is free moving? I assume the controller has not cut out due to a short. If it has you do need to unplug the transformer plug for a minimum of 1 minute to reset the internal short cut out safety mechanism. But you have indicated there is power getting to the track. Maybe worth deliberately shorting and resetting the DC controller. Other thing is maybe the 2 pin plug into the power track, plug it in the other way round and see if that sparks some life into the motor.

Frank Hornby did not live long enough to see the launch of the companies OO range in 1938. Given that Hornby TT:120 was 5 years in development he may have seen the start of the initial development of the Hornby Dublo 00 range. But in house development lead in times at the factory in Liverpool we’re much shorter then than they are today. After all products were simpler with less detail and they could be taken apart and reassembled with their nuts and bolts construction. Wonder what he would have made of todays products?

The Hornby track is not higher profile as such. It is an illusion caused by code 80 Peco track being partly embedded in the sleeper moulding giving it the appearance of code 55. The actual distance between the top of the sleeper pins and the top of the rail on both is similar. However, the moulded rail to sleeper fixing pins on Hornby track are wider than on Peco track and so the central clear width between the raised sleeper pins on Hornby track is narrower. The ballasting tool is probably catching on these. Is there any way of cutting a small notch in the part that runs along the rail so that the ballasting tool does not foul the sleeper fixing pins?

A photo of the Hornby and Peco fishplates:-

No is the simple answer. But use Hornby fishplates! There is a YouTube video that compares the two and you will see why:- Video also shows the difference between the rail joiners and points out the disadvantage of the shorter Peco ones. Remember flexible track bends towards the side that has the cut sleepers.

I purchased Peco TT:120 flexible track because I had a return loop to construct at the end of a long straight running along a shelf baseboard. And this is one thing that Hornby seemed to have an oversight with so Peco it was. Also purchased the Peco N/TT rail joiners which proved very tricky to work with so moved onto the larger Hornby rail joiners. I would highly recommend the use of Hornby TT:120 rail joiners for use with the Peco TT:120 flexible track. They are longer, slightly wider and generally much easier to handle, fit onto the track and join the track together more firmly. Their larger size improves conductivity through the rails. Others are probably finding the same which is why they are now currently sold out! I must have purchased the last few packs. One thing to bear in mind is that Hornby rail joiners do have a tongue at one end which helps when fitting track together. It is the tongue free end that is fixed onto the rail. Hard to spot on the smaller TT rail joiner but it is there. Peco rail joiners don’t have this feature so have two way fitting. When cutting Peco flexible track only expose so much of the rail that half a Hornby rail joiner fits on with the rear of the rail joiner pressing against the Peco sleeper. If you don’t do this then when you join two pieces of track together you risk the fishplates sliding further back along the rail so that the fishplate joint is not the desired 50/50 but more like 30/70 or worse which makes for a weaker join and conductivity. I guess it can be tapped back but this also means you have too much bare rail exposed so any sleepers subsequently fitted under to tidy the appearance may be unevenly spaced. Also purchased Hornby track pins as Peco pins are longer and bend too easily. Just thought I would share my experience as a first time user of flexible smaller gauge track.

Have used my “well worn from 00 days” Peco track rubber and things have improved. Thought I would check out YouTube reviews of the OO Class 43 HST models with sound and if the TT:120 versions sound anything like similar we are in for a treat! As for working fans or doors that are fixed not too bothered by these omissions. As long as the look is right.

TT:120 sound profile downloaded successfully first time. Noted a few variations on the function sounds compared to the default profile which actually were an improvement in my view. The main chuff chuff sound remains the same. Yes there is an Easter Egg. :-) So all things considered well worth downloading and at the same time boosts confidence in HM7000 app and decoder use. Now to visit the HM7000 forum to learn what this automatic syncing CV149 is all about.

Two decoders explains the price disparity between steam and Class 43 train pack offerings. Thank you all for the info. I had lost track of recent OO offerings of the last few years as former layout had to be sold off as space required for something else. Model railway developments since 2015 have passed me by. I am one of the returnees that TT:120 has appealed to. Having checked out reviews of 2019 DCC sound versions of the then newly launched OO versions I now have an appreciation of where we are at hopefully with the TT:120 version. One thing I have noted in the reviews of the OO version are the comments about the weight of the motorised car and its ability to pull a full complement of 7 or even 9 trailer cars. Must admit it would be nice if both cars in the Class 43 HST train pack were motorised as only one motorised car may struggle to pull more than 4 or 5 trailer cars. This is based on my Flying Scotsman experience with its 4 coaches on radius 2 and 3 curves and the wheel slip that occurs when accelerating from standstill. However the nature of the beast is that more weight could be included within the body of the motorised power car which would help its hauling power. As long as motor reliability is not affected by this of course. Notwithstanding this looking forward to having the Valenta thrash on the layout. Many happy hours in the past spent at Dawlish watching these leave the station with the scream howling and echoing off the sea front properties.

Any reason why the HST digital sound version is priced so much higher than the equivalent analogue version compared to the price difference for steam locos? Is it that both units are powered and that 2 sound decoders will be fitted in the package? This is not clear in the specification notes. It just says “2 x Diesel locomotives” and “TXS Sound decoders” (plural I note). HM7000 Steam locos state “sound fitted” only. More worryingly the HM7000 logo does not feature in the Hornby website listing for any of the HST train packs. The only sound profile for it in the HM7000 app is the OO version. However the specification notes do say the analogue version has the same Next 18 pin decoder socket as the steam locos so there is hope.

Just had a lightbulb moment and realised that the scale and drive wheel diameter makes no difference to the syncing speed of the sound. The loco simply runs at a lower scale speed. Duh! However your feedback about motor specifications (and gearing presumably) is totally relevant and hadn’t thought of that. What I really wanted here was feedback from somebody comparing the sound notes of the default sound profile with the TT:120 sound profile to learn how different it is to the ear. If the default profile is indeed the A1/A3 for OO scale then the suggestion above by RAF is that the sound will be identical but the syncing will be improved. Had a browse of YouTube and can’t find anything. The only users demonstrating sound are using the default profile. From a technical viewpoint I agree the HM7000 forum is the place to go. PS Please don’t tell me about the Easter egg. I want it to be a surprise!

All good advice on visiting the HM7000 forum to learn more about how to download profiles and trouble shoot. Slightly confused by the conflicting info regarding sound differences for profiles between the two scales. On the one hand “each is tuned for the drive gear train and different running characteristics”. On the other hand “It’s not really a TT:120 issue as sound is specific to the HM DCC decoder rather than the scale.” Logically then the first line suggests that the TT:120 sound profile is more in sync with the piston speed of the scale suggesting that whilst the profile is the same it is speeded up. In my mind this increases the frequency of the sound which makes it higher pitched. The second line suggests the decoder sorts out the syncing with the piston speed anyway regardless of profile used. What I will do is see if there are any videos on YouTube of the TT:120 Flying Scotsman running with sound and hear if I can detect any difference between that sound and the default sound, and view the sync of the sound relative to the piston motion. In due course I will give the profile downloads another go as future loco purchases are planned so it is important to gain experience with this feature. Meanwhile, whilst I may be running with the wrong profile, I am thoroughly enjoying the HM7000 experience with sound and as far as I am concerned Bluetooth running is the future and makes powering up a layout for DCC and operating the loco, it’s performance characteristics, and sound functions simple!

Currently I am running Flying Scotsman with the default HM7000 sound profile as the silhouette looks like a class A1/A3 loco. Trying downloading the actual Flying Scotsman profile without success so returned to the default profile which worked. Now I have recently swiped across the profiles and noted that there is actually a TT:120 Flying Scotsman profile. Not attempted to download yet as I have a “if it ain’t broke don’t mess” approach based on my download experience with what now transpires is the OO FS profile. The default profile is also OO presumably. Just curious but has anybody downloaded the TT:120 Flying Scotsman sound profile into their 18 pin sound decoder and if so does it sound any different to the default sound? This is not really an HM7000 technical issue but more of a TT:120 user topic so more likely to get feedback from TT:120 users here.

I have deleted the post as I understand the issue. If you tilt the tender body whilst fixing clips are locked in place they will snap off. So don’t tilt.

Yes it would. I did exactly that with analogue DC control before fitting the HM7000 sound decoder to the loco. The loco ran on the whole track mat layout. If you do not fit the clips into the points that feed into sidings then you can retain the self isolating function of the points for the sidings if you want to park up a second loco. One loco must be parked in one siding before switching the point to isolate the siding and then controlling the second loco parked in a separate siding where the track is now live with the point switched appropriately. If you have 2 locos on live sections of track using this method they cannot be controlled independently with the single DC control unit.

Stand corrected and showing my age. I’m used to seeing SEEP points with blue packaging and call any Peco point motor a SEEP when it clearly is not. Also the HM6010 unit supports 4 accessories not 8 that I stated in the earlier post. So the unit works out at about £9.50 per point motor to convert to Bluetooth depending on price paid. Always assuming you don’t need to purchase an accessory transformer to power the unit. There is another thread which discusses whether it is possible to connect 2 points to a single HM6010 port for double switching for passing loops or other situations where 2 points need to be switched together.

If using the HM7000 app there is a possibility of using the Hornby HM6010 accessory controller, wiring up to 8 point motors directly into this unit, and linking the point control with Bluetooth to the HM7000 app. Peco SEEP surface mounted point motors may offer a solution wired into this unit if the Hornby motors won’t work. Might be worth trying one to see if it works. Has anybody done this? A potential low cost point control solution for DCC point control for those using the HM7000 app. Still need the motors of course.