Class 92, By Accurascale

[St. Simon]

1 hour ago, Accurascale Fran said:

Anyway, may we return to the Class 92?

Hi Fran,

 

I’m sorry if this has been asked, but I can remember seeing it, is a sound decoder and the Accurathrash Speaker going to be offered as a separate item for non-sound models?

 

Not sure I can afford two sound fitted models right now!

 

Simon

[Accurascale Fran]

20 minutes ago, St. Simon said:

Hi Fran,

 

I’m sorry if this has been asked, but I can remember seeing it, is a sound decoder and the Accurathrash Speaker going to be offered as a separate item for non-sound models?

 

Not sure I can afford two sound fitted models right now!

 

Simon

Hi Simon,

 

As the sound decoders were from Legomanbiffo he will be selling the sound decoders direct. 
 

Cheers!

 

Fran

[adb968008]

My DCC ready trio have Accurathrash speakers already in them.

 

my guess is you just need the chip.

Though ive seen the speaker on the website.

https://www.accurascale.com/products/accurathrash-dcc-sound-speaker-pack-of-1?_pos=1&_sid=68c17e274&_ss=r
 

 

Edited December 18, 2022 by adb968008

[Jeremy Davison]

For anyone interested in the neutral section function, (asked about a couple of pages ago) I think from memory that you need to have the loco going at least at 50% speed (eg step 14 out of 28) before you will get the sound of the fans cutting out and the breakers working.

I did try to link this function to a hall sensor so that it would operate on our Euxton Junction layout from a small magnet in the track (just like the real things), but never got it quite right (maybe one for the future for Accurascale?).  Hopefully I will get my two Cl92s working on the layout tomorrow evening, they look great just sat here and I can wait to see them hauling some good long trains.

Cheers

Jeremy

 

 

[SRman]

2 hours ago, Torbay Express said:

... snipped

 

Class 92....Just seen a very good review via Dean Park.  Certainly looked exceptionally lifelike and prototypical.  Reminded me very much of how the beasts tend to go into the top bays at Crewe Station, when going onto and off the IETD. Just a shame to see Drone footage  on another YouTube channel of the depot and so many powerful locomotives stored unserviceable, the missed opportunity for rail freight and not operating the Channel Tunnel freights that were once planned. Beyond that, the model is a lovely tribute to the soon to be closed Brush Traction, and possibly one of the most technical and challenging engineering feats they ever undertook.   Looking forward to the next run, even if in a couple of years time - perhaps an Exclusive of 92046 - the last, with a replica works plate and a box dedicated to Falcon Works (the impressive Stainless Steel Falcon that used to be at the gatehouse is a fond memory, along with the illuminated 'Brush' that still greets anyone arriving at Loughborough Station today) - I am sure the highly talented gentleman who designs your boxes, would be able to do it an amazing justice - Perhaps an opportunity for the future......

 

 

 

While I await my own class 92s (one from Accurascale direct, one from Kernow), knowing that they won't get down under before Christmas (possibly not until after New Year), I did enjoy the Dean Park review.

I missed out on ordering 92 032 from Accurascale, so ordered 92043 (with sound), then discovered Kernow still had 032 available from their allocation, so have ordered that as plain DCC-ready. I'll probably swap the sound decoder into 032 (maybe even just swap bodies if all else is equal), and fit a Zimo or ESU decoder into the non-sound example.

That then releases my older Hornby 92 which actually has a slightly modified Hornby class 60 chassis and an 8-pin LokSound v3.5 with Howes' sound - I may reblow the sound and stick that in something else, because I think the Hornby 92 will very likely get relegated to the storage drawers. While it doesn't look too bad, with the exception of the pantographs, and runs beautifully with the better chassis, it won't be able to hold a candle against the Accurascale models.

 

Edited December 19, 2022 by SRman
Added a couple of lines and a photo.

[TomScrut]

10 hours ago, PeteB said:

Trying to get back on subject, does anyone have a reply to my earlier question, about whether there are any rules or conventions about which pantograph should be raised (leading or trailing)?

 

Tends to be the rear panto that is up (not sure why) but there are plenty of pics with either up.

[PeteB]

8 hours ago, Jeremy Davison said:

For anyone interested in the neutral section function, (asked about a couple of pages ago) I think from memory that you need to have the loco going at least at 50% speed (eg step 14 out of 28) before you will get the sound of the fans cutting out and the breakers working.

I did try to link this function to a hall sensor so that it would operate on our Euxton Junction layout from a small magnet in the track (just like the real things), but never got it quite right (maybe one for the future for Accurascale?).  Hopefully I will get my two Cl92s working on the layout tomorrow evening, they look great just sat here and I can wait to see them hauling some good long trains.

Cheers

Jeremy

 

 

 

Ah, that explains why I couldn't make it do anything, I am testing on a short end to end layout so no opportunity to get up to 50% speed.  I'll give it a go on the tailchaser when I get a chance, and see if I can make it happen. Further online research turned up the fact that "shift mode 3", which is all that F14 does, is a flag that can affect the behaviour of other sound slots, so that fits in with what you are saying, so other sound slots can behave differently if it is on.

[Torbay Express]

54 minutes ago, TomScrut said:

 

Tends to be the rear panto that is up (not sure why) but there are plenty of pics with either up.

I would assume its due to aerodynamics, less risk of pulling overheads down and when pulling a load the loco sits back slightly, so pan is not pushing on the contact wire of OHLE so much. 

[Torbay Express]

10 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Dont worry, Navidiums got you covered.

😜

Sounds a little like a nasty virus......allegedly it was being caught frequently by modellers, but rates of transmission currently low! 

 

 

Edited December 19, 2022 by Torbay Express
Addition

[Steadfast]

15 minutes ago, Torbay Express said:

I would assume its due to aerodynamics, less risk of pulling overheads down and when pulling a load the loco sits back slightly, so pan is not pushing on the contact wire of OHLE so much. 

If the rear pan pulls the wires down, less chance of damaging the front one. If the front pan pulls the wires down, the wires and broken pan could damage the roof equipment, including the second pan, losing your ability to carry on post demolition run

 

Jo

[adb968008]

3 hours ago, Torbay Express said:

Sounds a little like a nasty virus......allegedly it was being caught frequently by modellers, but rates of transmission currently low! 

 

 

last night I had some Brush therapy looking at pictures from a few years ago, and assuming the evil courier doesnt sell my parcel on the market, Ive decided the third number of my CS 92010…

 

its the one that went to Blackpool…

 

 

i miss gbrf tours, great trips.

by all accounts 2023 might be a quieter year for tours with most mk1’s coming off the network.

 

Edited December 19, 2022 by adb968008

[Damo666]

13 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Just noticed a little back door price rise on the 92’s by this little thing…

 

Thats rather just changed my plans.

 

https://navidiumapp.com
 

 

whats this all about, it wasnt there when I last bought something 10 days ago.

I know that at the time I'm writing this, that this option has been switch off by the guys at Accurascale and there will be an internal review on the wording, but when I first read this it became clear (to me at least) that the wording is the key.

 

If you don't accept (ie: you deselect) Navidium Shipping Protection then "we" ie: Navidium) will not be liable. Make sense. It doesn't therefore infer that the customer will be liable, which is where I feel some members have got this wrong.

 

You don't want to pay Navidium for a service so therefore they will not be liable, in the same way DHL be not be liable if you choose Royal Mail. Your normal consumer rights still exist.

[Accurascale Fran]

7 minutes ago, Damo666 said:

I know that at the time I'm writing this, that this option has been switch off by the guys at Accurascale and there will be an internal review on the wording, but when I first read this it became clear (to me at least) that the wording is the key.

 

If you don't accept (ie: you deselect) Navidium Shipping Protection then "we" ie: Navidium) will not be liable. Make sense. It doesn't therefore infer that the customer will be liable, which is where I feel some members have got this wrong.

 

You don't want to pay Navidium for a service so therefore they will not be liable, in the same way DHL be not be liable if you choose Royal Mail. Your normal consumer rights still exist.

 

Hi everyone,

 

Just brought this up in our Monday morning meeting (after hurriedly trying to get details to answer questions last night while at a family Christmas event) This was being tested only with the idea to offer additional protection for some international markets where statutory rights arent as protective as UK. It was put live accidentally over the weekend. We apologise for the confusion and anger generated, but needless to say you wont see it on our website again, ever.

 

So, as you were!

 

I hope this draws a line under it, and we can go back to focusing on the Class 92. If anyone ever has any further queries on anything to do our website, the best course of action is to email us direct. 

 

Cheers!

 

Fran  

[vanbasher]

10 minutes ago, Accurascale Fran said:

 

Hi everyone,

 

Just brought this up in our Monday morning meeting (after hurriedly trying to get details to answer questions last night while at a family Christmas event) This was being tested only with the idea to offer additional protection for some international markets where statutory rights arent as protective as UK. It was put live accidentally over the weekend. We apologise for the confusion and anger generated, but needless to say you wont see it on our website again, ever.

 

So, as you were!

 

I hope this draws a line under it, and we can go back to focusing on the Class 92. If anyone ever has any further queries on anything to do our website, the best course of action is to email us direct. 

 

Cheers!

 

Fran  

Thanks for the clarification & clear up job so promptly Fran, although I expect nothing less.

 

Focusing back on the 92... is it going to be a Merry Xmas for those waiting for 010 & 020? Or more likely to be a Happy New Year? 

[Graham108]

At least it appears the issue surrounding choice of courier didn't put people off buying - there were 12 x Charles Dickens last night, now showing as all gone (I put my order in this morning)

[adb968008]

Confirmed its gone.

 

i cannot ask for a faster reaction than that.

 

In good faith I just put in another order (no it wasnt a dozen 92022’s) :-)

 

 

[Accurascale Fran]

1 hour ago, vanbasher said:

Thanks for the clarification & clear up job so promptly Fran, although I expect nothing less.

 

Focusing back on the 92... is it going to be a Merry Xmas for those waiting for 010 & 020? Or more likely to be a Happy New Year? 

 

Hi @vanbasher,

 

I will have an update on these this afternoon. Check in then.

 

Cheers!

 

Fran 

[SimulationNetwork]

Hi all,

 

I received my Sound-Fitted example of GBRf 92 032 this morning. My first impressions with the Accurascale Class 92 were far from perfect.

 

Now, I don't know if it's just me but I have came across some issues with my model. Please review attachments.

 

1. On initial inspection, first issue I noticed were that one of the horns seemed to have been bent. Now, I would try and bend it back but I worry that If I do, I could completely snap it off.

 

2.  At some point in the production line, it looks as though the model has been bashed on the lowest portion of the locomotive body. This has left a noticeable chip on the body.

 

3. The model suffers with light bleed. This occurs within the headlight lens' themselves and the middle yellow portion between the 2 headlight clusters.

 

4. I switched on the cab light to see that there is some sort of residue on one of the cab desks.

 

5. The model has a couple paint blemishes.

 

To some, you could think I'm being harsh or nitpicking but the thing is, when paying a premium price, you expect things to be perfect. To conclude, I'm not saying I dislike the model. I very much do like the Accurascale Class 92, I have just been unlucky with my specific example. The detail on this model is second to none and the performance and sound is flawless.

 

Edited December 19, 2022 by SimulationNetwork

[Accurascale Fran]

14 minutes ago, SimulationNetwork said:

Hi all,

 

I recieved my Sound-Fitted example of GBRf 92 032 this morning. My first impressions with the Accurascale Class 92 were far from perfect.

 

Now, I don't know if it's just me but I have came across some issues with my model. Please review attachments.

 

1. On initial inspection, first issue I noticed were that one of the horns seemed to have been bent. Now, I would try and bend it back but I worry that If I do, I could completely snap it off.

 

2.  At some point in the production line, it looks as though the model has been bashed on the loweest portion of the locomotive body. This has left a noticable chip on the body.

 

3. The model suffers with light bleed. This occurs within the headlight lens' themselves and the middle yellow portion between the 2 headlight clusters.

 

4. I switched on the cab light to see that there is some sort of residue on one of the cab desks.

 

5. The model has a couple paint blemishes.

 

To some, you think I'm being harsh or nitpicking but the thing is, when paying a premium price, you expect things to be perfect. To conclude, I'm not saying I dislike the model. I very much do like the Accurascale Class 92, I have just been unlucky with my specific example. The detail on this model is second to none and the performance and sound is flawless.

 

Hi @SimulationNetwork,

 

Im very sorry to see this, please accept our apologies. This has not been in keeping what we have seen so far, so it’s likely that this example slipped through the QC net.

 

Can you please email us support@accurascale.co.uk and we will help you with these issues?

 

Cheers!

 

Fran

[Peter749]

19 hours ago, PeteB said:

So now I fully understand what the real thing does, which is useful knowledge, but I still don't know what F14 is supposed to do on the model.  It is not linked to any sound slot, and from your description there is no visible change looking at a real loco as it passes through a neutral section. Pressing F14 seems to do nothing.  I wondered if perhaps it would stop accelerating, but no, I just tried that, and it continued accelerating as normal with F14 active.

In theory if you have the 92 with Sound the fans should stop when you used the F14 button - and then restart on pressing it again.

My version of 92003 does not have sound so I cannot test it.

 

Peter

[Peter749]

16 hours ago, PeteB said:

Trying to get back on subject, does anyone have a reply to my earlier question, about whether there are any rules or conventions about which pantograph should be raised (leading or trailing)?

When I have been taking pictures on the UK network the rear pantograph is normally used.

But there are always exceptions https://peter749.piwigo.com/picture?/39229/category/462-class_89_90_and_92

 

[Torbay Express]

14 hours ago, SRman said:

 

While I await my own class 92s (one from Accurascale direct, one from Kernow), knowing that they won't get down under before Christmas (possibly not until after New Year), I did enjoy the Dean Park review.

I missed out on ordering 92 032 from Accurascale, so ordered 92043 (with sound), then discovered Kernow still had 032 available from their allocation, so have ordered that as plain DCC-ready. I'll probably swap the sound decoder into 032 (maybe even just swap bodies if all else is equal), and fit a Zimo or ESU decoder into the non-sound example.

That then releases my older Hornby 92 which actually has a slightly modified Hornby class 60 chassis and an 8-pin LokSound v3.5 with Howes' sound - I may reblow the sound and stick that in something else, because I think the Hornby 92 will very likely get relegated to the storage drawers. While it doesn't look too bad, with the exception of the pantographs, and runs beautifully with the better chassis, it won't be able to hold a candle against the Accurascale models.

 

Or have a stored row or transit move to/from Brush.... Certainly thinking of that with my Lima versions. 

[HExpressD]

2 hours ago, Peter749 said:

When I have been taking pictures on the UK network the rear pantograph is normally used.

But there are always exceptions https://peter749.piwigo.com/picture?/39229/category/462-class_89_90_and_92

 

As I am led to understand, however may be wrong, the trailing pantograph tended to be used due to the ways the arms folded. Should there be some sort of issue and the pantograph were to strike something the trailing one would just fall to the loco roof, whereas the leading one, again due to the way the arm folds, could get caught up on something such as catenary and cause damage to it or the loco. 

 

From the genius of Wikipedia:

 

Quote

The rear pantograph in relation to the direction of travel is often used as to avoid damaging both pantographs in case of entanglements: if the front pantograph was used, debris from an entanglement could cause damage to the rear pantograph, rendering both pantographs and the vehicle inoperable.

 

Edited December 19, 2022 by HExpressD
Added quote part

[CoBoLoco]

Any update on batch 3 before people finish ish for the day? 

[David12]

3 minutes ago, CoBoLoco said:

Any update on batch 3 before people finish ish for the day? 

… and an update on the Mk5s that were also supposedly being delivered on Friday last, please. Some of us are beginning to wonder if we are going to see anything before Christmas…