45568 Posted July 2, 2016 Share Posted July 2, 2016 So the modus operandi is: Drive the freight train off the main into the reception siding under the wires. Take loco off track. Turn upside down. Switch to overhead. Put loco back on track under the wires. Raise pantograph. Shunt train. Repeat in reverse when departing yard? So much for hands off operation. At least with the old 25Kv TriAng / Hornby overhead electric locos the changeover switch was on the roof. Alternatively have a spare to do the shunting? But then again, does anyone do 750v overhead masts and contact wire? Looks like 3rd rail in the sidings and ignore health & safety? I think your forum 'handle' says it all!! No more comments. From Oz, Peter C. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dibber25 Posted July 2, 2016 Share Posted July 2, 2016 I think that arguments over the relative merits of duplicated models tend to apply a zero sum game approach. So if one model is better then the other is bad, I don't accept this. One model may be better however that does not preclude the alternative from being a good model and in a sense I'd argue that it is a moot argument if both models satisfy the demands of potential customers. There may be all sorts of factors that influence the decision of which to buy, such as price, availability, livery application etc. So to me the fact that the DJM offering promises to be excellent in no way diminishes the Hornby model, any more than the Hornby model should be seen as diminishing the DJM model. When we can compare both models we can make our decision but I'm confident that whichever version people buy, they will be happy and have a first class model. Many will I am sure buy both. You're right, of course, but commercially such duplication is usually a disaster. If everyone bought one of each, it would be OK but the demand for a locomotive such as this is not like that for, say, an 'A4' or Flying Scotsman. Splitting the market across two models might work if one was very simple and cheap and effectively catered for a different market segment. However, we're about to have two potentially great models, with high tooling and assembly costs and the real likelihood that they'll split exactly the same market. I really hope I'm wrong but I see the BR Standard 4MT disaster coming again and being followed by a similar situation with the Adams Radial. In a business where development times are long and access to reliable manufacturing slots is difficult, duplication is a thoroughly bad idea. (CJL) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jjb1970 Posted July 2, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 2, 2016 (edited) You're right, of course, but commercially such duplication is usually a disaster. If everyone bought one of each, it would be OK but the demand for a locomotive such as this is not like that for, say, an 'A4' or Flying Scotsman. Splitting the market across two models might work if one was very simple and cheap and effectively catered for a different market segment. However, we're about to have two potentially great models, with high tooling and assembly costs and the real likelihood that they'll split exactly the same market. I really hope I'm wrong but I see the BR Standard 4MT disaster coming again and being followed by a similar situation with the Adams Radial. In a business where development times are long and access to reliable manufacturing slots is difficult, duplication is a thoroughly bad idea. (CJL) I certainly agree on the commercial points. Some items can support duplication and there are opportunities to duplicate items in a way which genuinely enhances choice without necessarily damaging the suppliers (eg. the Railroad and Bachmann full fat Tornado models) but I'm not sure a niche item like the 71 will support almost simultaneous directly competing releases and make a good return for both. My point was more about the quality and realism of the models. Edited July 2, 2016 by jjb1970 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Hawkins Posted July 2, 2016 Share Posted July 2, 2016 Well, I went for it today and purchased 71012 in BR blue, I just wanted a class 71, I've also got my local model shop to put by E5001 and E5022, I'm really impressed with the Hornby version but, I will also make one or two purchases of the DJM 71's when they become available. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dibber25 Posted July 2, 2016 Share Posted July 2, 2016 I certainly agree on the commercial points. Some items can support duplication and there are opportunities to duplicate items in a way which genuinely enhances choice without necessarily damaging the suppliers (eg. the Railroad and Bachmann full fat Tornado models) but I'm not sure a niche item like the 71 will support almost simultaneous directly competing releases and make a good return for both. My point was more about the quality and realism of the models. They look like they'll both be great. I have a 16-year-old Golden Arrow resin-bodied Class 71 which I really like but things have moved a long way in 16 years. I have a Hornby one on order and, no doubt, when DJM's is ready I'll get one of those, too, but I'm one who likes Class 71s and I'm happy to have several. I like AC Cars railbuses and actually have more than BR ever had! (CJL) 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Removed a/c Posted July 2, 2016 Share Posted July 2, 2016 At least with the old 25Kv TriAng / Hornby overhead electric locos the changeover switch was on the roof. You then rely on the body shell being attached to the chassis. Looks like limited room inside so I would think the wires would have to be short. Looks to be a great model and photos can be deceptive, but is the body shell painted or is it cast in the colour? The first set of photos gie the impression of coloured plastic ala Esso Sentinel. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevelewis Posted July 2, 2016 Share Posted July 2, 2016 (edited) Digitizing the Hornby class 71 I have fitted a decoder to one of my 71s tonight..... so I thought that others may like to have a look at my findings: This is not intended to be a definitive method, other may do it differently. Body removal is quite easy after disconnecting the dummy earthing strips at the cab ends the body is unclipped using the tried and tested small thin blade credit car and finger nail method, A WORD OF WARNING WHEN REMOVING THE BODY KEEP FINGERS AWAY FROM THE PANTOGRAPH IT IS VERY FRAGILE AND EASILY DISMANTLES!!!!!!!! But it is easy to put back together!! say no more! The interior decoder space is very limited, I only had some Hattons 8 pin mini decoders to hand so it was that or nothing ( No doubt others will be able to suggest smaller ones the GMaster DCC22 perhaps or a six pin on an 8 pin adaptor lead)) I tried a couple of unsuccseful attempts to locate the decoder, but each rendered it impossible to re fit the body, There is space inside the body for a decoder but this is taken up with the interior power detail section which is visible thro the window, this is a plastic moulding which simply clips out. So for the time being a removed it and this provided ample decoder space, it may be poss to reduce the detail piece in size as it is much longer than the window, or the window could perhaps be obscured so the interior is less visible. Anyway loco runs very well under digital control just got my other 71 to do now! Note how the power is transferred from the body to chassis for route indicator lights and pantograph power. Edited July 2, 2016 by Stevelewis 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
metropolitan cammell Posted July 2, 2016 Share Posted July 2, 2016 I fitted a lenz silver direct to mine,I think there is just enough clearance between the roof and the pcb for it to fit. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevelewis Posted July 2, 2016 Share Posted July 2, 2016 That is good info, I fitted the decoders I had spare, but may consider buying some Lenz direct 8 pins so the interior detail can be reinstated, matter of interest were you able to digitally turn off the rear red lights? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
metropolitan cammell Posted July 2, 2016 Share Posted July 2, 2016 (edited) That is good info, I fitted the decoders I had spare, but may consider buying some Lenz direct 8 pins so the interior detail can be reinstated, matter of interest were you able to digitally turn off the rear red lights?Sadly not, only using the switch underneath. Edited July 2, 2016 by metropolitan cammell Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevelewis Posted July 3, 2016 Share Posted July 3, 2016 (edited) Just returning to my post re decoder fitting/space, I believe that more space would probably be available within the body if the spring contact for pantograph power were removed ( see pic attached) I did not actually measure the depth of the spring but guess around 5mm. I cannot see that a high proportion of Hornby 71 purchasers will actually wish to use the loco under overhead power collection anyway, and those that do may not be using digital anyway It would be advisable to insulate the contact point on the PCB if this was carried out to prevent any interference with unwanted contact from the proposed decoder!. The contact point being the square bit in the centre of the PCB in the Pic, the blue wire is not part of the PCB its on the decoder. Edited July 3, 2016 by Stevelewis Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
knitpick Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 You then rely on the body shell being attached to the chassis. Looks like limited room inside so I would think the wires would have to be short. Looks to be a great model and photos can be deceptive, but is the body shell painted or is it cast in the colour? The first set of photos gie the impression of coloured plastic ala Esso Sentinel. Der. . . According to other posters in this thread, you can run the loco from the pantograph (haven't tried with mine - no overhead wire as yet!). So there must be a wire from the body shell / pantograph to the chassis anyway? Actually you probably could have metal sprung contacts instead of wire - but you still need the electrical conection. And from what I can tell - it's a paint job. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Removed a/c Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 Looks like springs for the contacts, but haven't we had issues with spring contacts in the past with other locos? 56 and 43 (HST) that is why they are now wired? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barison82 Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 Hattons have justed posted out the BR blue one I pre-ordered a few weeks ago...cannot wait Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevelewis Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 Looks like springs for the contacts, but haven't we had issues with spring contacts in the past with other locos? 56 and 43 (HST) that is why they are now wired? It is a spring contact see my photos 2 or 3 post previous, I wonder really why Hornby opted to enable the Pantograph for actual POWER CONNECTION given that the real thing only used OH in yards where 3rd rail was unsafe for staff ( shunters) and the likelihood of modellers actually constructing/installing OH is probably very slim. The contact spring in the roof if removed will provide increased space for decoder fitting. Very nice models though the retailer I bought my 2 from last week (Arcadia Rail) says he has done very well with them ( And his price is right as well) It will be interesting to see how Hornby's version compares with the other manfrs model when it eventually arrives Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted July 6, 2016 Share Posted July 6, 2016 The prototype conjunction of overhead and shunting yard is a modelling challenge alright, so much fun arranging the knitting over the point network for a start, and then the occasion of joy that is dealing with a reluctant autocoupler underneath the complete overhead between adjacent lines of vehicles Looks like springs for the contacts, but haven't we had issues with spring contacts in the past with other locos? 56 and 43 (HST) that is why they are now wired? It's more a matter of detail execution, and this looks decently done, sizeable springs and contact patches in a clean location. Alternatives like little pieces of bent sheet expected to contact other little pieces of bent sheet, not so clever. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Pedro32 Posted July 6, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 6, 2016 Hi, I've taken delivery of the new BR Blue (71012) version and have to say that I'm very impressed with it! The detail pack comes with two buffer beams with pipe work which I imagine slot into the recess where the NEM coupler is and there is a pack of headcodes to be added as required. Performance wise I've only got a 4 mtr part built layout, but its very quiet and runs very smoothly- no hesitation over points, and is a good weight too. The loco is dcc decoder fitted and Rails who I bought it from didn't appear to have problems leading to removal the compartment detailing. It is positive that Hornby have adopted the switches on the underside of the loco for lights and the phantograph. But they should have been doing this for many of their modern image locos for years really, just my opinion though! I am sure the other 71 manufacturer will produce a fantastic product too, and I have ordered a 74 to compliment my current Hornby 71. Cheers Peter 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Derails Models Posted July 7, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 7, 2016 (edited) Must say this has to be one of the best from the Diesel & Electric category from Hornby in a long time! Had one out on test just now and found it wonderful, the running is sublime, I also love the pantograph and the fact that it can be used for power pickup! Our customers must agree too, from this first delivery we're down to just one of each of E5022 (R3373) and 71012 (R3374) and just two left of E5001 (R3376)! Edited July 7, 2016 by Derails Models 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dibber25 Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 E5022 running the 'Golden Arrow' on my home layout. Can't add headboard or decorations yet in case it is photographed for review in a future Model Rail. (CJL) 15 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BruceV Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 "Body Removal" "Before attempting to remove the body you must pull out the earth strap from the holes in the front and back of the loco, as shown in Fig. 4 & 5." Both earth straps on my E5022 were glued in. I needed to extract them to fit a DCC decoder. They appeared to have pulled out easily enough but on closer inspection both had broken off flush with the body. After fitting a DCC decoder and replacing the body, I didn't bother gluing the earth straps back as they went back to their approximate position and I will be able to remove the body again. Why glue them if they are designed to be removed and replaced? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevelewis Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 "Body Removal" "Before attempting to remove the body you must pull out the earth strap from the holes in the front and back of the loco, as shown in Fig. 4 & 5." Both earth straps on my E5022 were glued in. I needed to extract them to fit a DCC decoder. They appeared to have pulled out easily enough but on closer inspection both had broken off flush with the body. After fitting a DCC decoder and replacing the body, I didn't bother gluing the earth straps back as they went back to their approximate position and I will be able to remove the body again. Why glue them if they are designed to be removed and replaced? On My 2 locos the Earth Straps were not glued they simply pulled out of the fixing holes with the aid of a thin blade Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pandora Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 I believe its origins lay in rhe design of the BLS ( Swiss) Ae 4/4 Bo Bo.My first sighting of one was E5005 on 22/7/1959 at Victoria whilst boarding a boat train for Dover which was of course then still hauled...via Tonbridge at least.....by a Bulled Pacific. EMU's operated via the Kent Coast,some on boat trains using that route. i read that initial design proposal use the LMS 10000 / 1 bogie so the class would be CoCo wheel arrangement. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
metadyneman Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 (edited) On the subject of useable decoders, I have successfully fitted my 71 with a Hatton's 8-pin direct plug 4 function decoder without the need to remove any internal "bits". I do agree with all the positive comments about this loco though, it's quite possibly the best loco Hornby have produced in quite a while. It runs beautifully and is incredibly quiet. You also don't end up with a myriad of bits to glue on which fall off when you take the body off the chassis. Well done Hornby! Edited July 19, 2016 by metadyneman 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BR(S) Posted July 27, 2016 Share Posted July 27, 2016 Picture of a blue Class 71 with pantograph in use in today's mremag: http://www.mremag.com/index.php Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MGR Hooper! Posted July 27, 2016 Share Posted July 27, 2016 Picture of a blue Class 71 with pantograph in use in today's mremag: http://www.mremag.com/index.php A link directly to the image... http://www.mremag.com/images/HYS2016/July/xClass71onwire.jpg.pagespeed.ic.KkNV_gYNKK.webp 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now