N Gauge Forum

Sorry, I imagine there will be an official announcement (is this the new Revolution model from Model Rail Scotland?), but this is exciting stuff: RMWeb link (https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/142170-mark-5-by-accurascale/).

Interesting as well that they're offering the 92 for the OO gauge lot, given 'the other 92 project' that's bubbling along!

The title should really be the other way round (in terms of the two companies ;-)).

The announcement was indeed due for MR Scotland but one of the mags printed it before the embargo.

The announcement is on our website here: http://www.revolutiontrains.com/sleeping-to-scotland-and-across-the-pennines-with-revolution/ (http://www.revolutiontrains.com/sleeping-to-scotland-and-across-the-pennines-with-revolution/)

Cheers, Mike

Hi all,

Yes, publisher's c/up meant that this news emerged before intended but these things happen, and it's only model trains!

As Mike said, in 2mm it's Revolution with Accurascale, in 4mm it's the other way round.  Each company is focussing on its preferred scale, but we are sharing a lot of the work in research, design, CAD etc to make us both that but more efficient and effective!

Cheers

Ben A.

Dunno what you're talking about Mike ;)

Apologies to both - didn't mean to misrepresent you!

This is great news, it seems highly likely that some CS ones will find their way to me!

Just got my March Model Rail and page 6 tells me to go to Revolution Trains website for more details, but..........

On a rather annoying note, I am probably scrapping several months of research work now.........

It is the way of the world though. It happens all the time. I will now move onto another project instead.

Fantastic news, I travel on them regularly  :D

Great choice - assuming they'll be sold in Kato style box sets, can there be a slot left free in the case for a Dapol class 68, or Revolution Class 92?

Quote from: Steven B on February 11, 2019, 01:59:50 PM
Great choice - assuming they'll be sold in Kato style box sets, can there be a slot left free in the case for a Dapol class 68, or Revolution Class 92?

That's a very good idea.

Sorry Bob - it happens to us all! TBH our feeling was that it was inevitable that someone would offer them RTR - we've been planning it for some time (assuming no one else announced them).

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why is it that Revolution always seem to find a route into my wallet?  Beans on toast for the foreseeable future I think!

Seriously, these were on my wishlist in my frothing thread. Trouble is I'll need a full Sleeper set and at least 2 TPE ones, which means another 2 CL68's.

Great news.

Thanks Mike and Ben

John P

BTW Regarding CL92's will those of use who have paid deposits get to change our selected liveries?

Thanks again.

I'm sure they'll be superb as usual, alas, of little use to me.

Maybe next time.

Still looking forward to the Sturgeon.

Love the idea of the box sets. Have always thought 16-car was a bit too long, but hoping there's a 10-12 car representation available.

For those wanting further inspiration/excuses, ROG did the deliveries for the TPE (and some CS) ones:

(https://railm.blob.core.windows.net/website/1/root/mk527s-115022c-127042c-120752c-120762c-128022c-63442c-63402c-9758752c-977087-abbotswood-jn-5q43-0900-portbury-longsight-250518-s-widdowson_w555_h555.jpg)

And I've read elsewhere that Freightliner did some of the deliveries of CS ones, here with some HHAs, which is intriguing:



Not my content.

The TPE sets make sense to do as 5 car sets ie full sets, unless there is much call for split sets ie 2+3 or 3+2 with DVT and end car in one set (either with or without one of the intermediates)?

For the CS the Lowlander is relatively easy as it splits into 2 x 8.  The Highlander is slightly trickier as extra coaches get added when it splits - it starts of with 16 coaches from Euston (8 for Inverness, 6 for Aberdeen and 2 for Ft William). The extra seated coach and lounge coach get added to the Fort William section.

Cheers, Mike

Hi,
..I' m just preparing my wallet....and just made the question on this forum some days ago about ..who will produce them?
I love that coaches and modern generally...more addiction for my Scottish 68's
and oncoming Rev Trains Class 92..

Marco

I'd better get the Dapol TPE 68 I said I won't get on order then!

Since the 5a's are technically 125mph vehicles they will fit with my high speed collection rather nicely!

Quote from: njee20 on February 11, 2019, 03:17:02 PM
Accurascale are producing them.

Only in 4mm.

For a class 92 in N gauge you need to look at Revolution Trains or DJM.

Eh? We're talking about the mk5 coaches, which are being produced as a joint venture between Accurascale and Revolution, with the former producing the OO gauge ones and the latter the N gauge ones.

Just to be clear Accurascale are only producing the OO Mk5s.  We're sharing research and development, but we're producing the N gauge Mk5s.

Cheers, Mike

Hello all,

Thanks for the great response!

We had intended to make this public at Model Rail Scotland, but apparently Model Rail in Peterborough had other ideas!

Anyway, feedback so far has been great.  We are really excited about these models as they're our first coaches and we have some clear ideas about what we - and we hope you - want!  Plus the scope is amazing from north to south and east to west!

One thing to clarify:  these are Revolution models. We are collaborating with our friends at Accurascale on the research, marketing, design, licencing etc as it makes sense to split those jobs and they are very much of the same mind as us in terms of quality, accuracy and how these products should be.

When it comes to the production it may be sensible to make them in the same factory as Accurascale, or it may not if we feel one of our other partner factories has a better handle on the specific needs and kinematics of N Gauge.

There are plenty of details on our website but here are some additional notes...

There are four Caledonian Sleeper vehicles.  We have illustrated two on our website - the Seated Car (SC) with the windows positioned lower and the Accessible Sleeper (ACC) - but we will also be offering the Club Car (CC):

(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/74/94-110219163455-74045311.jpeg)

And the standard Sleeper (SLC):

(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/74/94-110219163844-74050486.jpeg)

In terms of packaging, we haven't finalised exactly how it'll work but we are thinking along the lines of book sets of four vehicles each, to allow people to model just, say, the Fort William Sleeper (1 x SLC, 1 x ACC, 1 x CC and 1 X SC) or put them together to make the complete 16 coach Lowlander or Highlander trains.  The sets rotate around the two services, so the same coaches can be found in either.

For the TPE, I can't see any sense in offering anything other than maybe two or three complete 5-car book sets with different numbers, to model the complete train.  It's only 6 vehicles, including the locomotive, which will fit on most layouts.  I never really understood why Hornby split their Brighton Belle!

(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/74/94-110219163606-74049293.jpeg)

However, if there is strong demand for reduced sets then that's something we can look at.  Final decisions have not yet been made.

In terms of other parts of the specification... the coaches will have power pick up, factory fitted switchable lighting, functioning head and tail lamps where appropriate, detailed interiors and kinematic NEM couplers.  We may include  Scharfenberg type couplers for the inner cars.

We haven't opened the order book yet (and probably won't for a few weeks) so there is plenty of time to prepare.  The next step will be showing the CAD models, which should be in a month or so.

As ever, once we do open up the book the sooner people order the sooner we can get CAD models into tooling and onto your layouts!

Cheers

Ben A.

 :claphappy: Hurrah! I don't need or want any! My bank manager can call off the hit. :whiteflag:

Though I do of course wish Ben, Mike, and Accurascale every success with this model. :beers:

I don't need them or want them but so pleased the revolution are producing them as I am sure it will first class job on them.

Also another great example of development of the hobby by working with another supplier to have the licence for these across multiple scales.

Graham

Apologies, in my giddy over excitement I read the press release as Accurascale producing them (ie manufacturing), sorry for confusing things!

I agree that for TPE the 5-car set makes most sense, and 4-car booksets for the CS ones seems a versatile choice.

Wonderful annoncement! :thankyousign:
I was hoping for someone to produce the Caledonian Sleeper coaches to accompany my 92. Even better that it's Revolution themselves.

Cheers
Michael

Not sure if I "need" these but will get some...

Now just need a conversion or detail kit created for a class 73, some one with etched facilities maybe

I read this news sitting in a Chiltern push-pull Mk 3. I have a soft spot for push-pull trains so a five set of the TPE ones will be on my list. When the class 92 arrives I will have two Caledonian sleeper liveried locos looking for some CS stock to haul.

RevolutioN Trains have ways of commandeering my spending money.   :)

I think I'll be buying a TPE set, after all they will be running through Northallerton as soon as the TPE services start.

And since Revolution and associated companies have decided to do this, wouldn't it just be lovely if they brought out a 185 to compliment the loco hauled TPE service?  @red_death (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=246) @Ben A (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=94)  .....  please.

Cheers
Kirky

Mk5s an excellent choice

Look forward to the Caledonia Sleepers

  :thumbsup:

Quote from: Only Me on February 11, 2019, 09:50:40 PMquote author=Only Me link=topic=44414.msg553576#msg553576 date=1549921840]
I think a certain large company already has bought the rights for the 185...

Really?
Who?

Class 185, bucket of bolts :poop: quite the worst train I have been on since my unfortunate experience on a class 142.  :smackedface:

Quote from: Only Me on February 11, 2019, 09:50:40 PM

Quote from: kirky on February 11, 2019, 09:09:44 PM
I think I'll be buying a TPE set, after all they will be running through Northallerton as soon as the TPE services start.

And since Revolution and associated companies have decided to do this, wouldn't it just be lovely if they brought out a 185 to compliment the loco hauled TPE service?  @red_death (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=246) @Ben A (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=94)  .....  please.

Cheers
Kirky

I think a certain large company already has bought the rights for the 185...

He is referring to the existing 4 car DMU's that TPE use. Not the IEP based Nova2, or Nova1 for which Hornby have rights, I forget which is which.

Regards,

John P

I'm a big fan of 185s - 23m Desiros 😀

ah well, looks like the wallet is about to take another hit. What with these, the next release of the Pendo's and TEA's it is going to be an expensive year.

Yep, wallet is quivering as I type.

I'll have a TPE set (which means I'll need to get a TPE 68 to go with it) and as I am building a loosely West Highland based layout, I'll have a 'Fort William' set of the sleepers if you get my drift.

Better start saving...... :NGaugersRule:

I am a bit of a Mike and Ben fan but limited to 2000's around Newark so am struggling with this release. That said I have 2 pendo's and 2 LM 350's which are even more wrong. Maybe I need to build Watford Junction as well.

Yes please! 
TPE Set of 5 for me. Cant afford two sets, depending on price!

Im another vote for a 185! With sound of course. Very distinctive sound, very interesting.

Thank you boys!  Looking forward to another class model.

Did you say that the couplings are likely to be conductive like on the Pendolino?

Quote from: Snowwolflair on February 11, 2019, 10:02:59 PM
Class 185, bucket of bolts :poop: quite the worst train I have been on since my unfortunate experience on a class 142.  :smackedface:

If you live in these Northern parts like what I do, a 185 is absolute luxury compared to the usual offerings of the 142.  I think Middlesbrough station only has 142 and 185 units (occasionally Northern run 156s) so I'd advise you not to travel to or from there.

However, since Mike has declared he is a fan .... I'm hopeful. @red_death (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=246)

Cheers
Kirky

I'm amused by the thought that these model TPE Mk 5 sets could arrive before the forever delayed real things get started. An interesting reverse to the Dapol Pacer which is arriving just as the actual things are about to disappear.

The TPE Mk5 sets are being tested right now, so I think they'll be in service pretty soon.

John P

Yup, seen them at York a handful of times. The TPE staff I've spoken to about them aren't holding their breath though!

And one of the 68s is marooned at York with wheel flats apparently, and the person I spoke to said they weren't sure how it had happened. Or how it would get fixed as it's now banned from mainline use - there isn't a wheel lathe on platform 2 (I think it is) as far as I remember either. Oh dear.

Can't wait for these!

Full rake of sleepers and a Nova set!

Best not tell the misses!

I think I'll cry when I find out the price 😬

Quote from: GroupC on February 12, 2019, 05:24:46 PM


And one of the 68s is marooned at York with wheel flats apparently, and the person I spoke to said they weren't sure how it had happened. Or how it would get fixed as it's now banned from mainline use - there isn't a wheel lathe on platform 2 (I think it is) as far as I remember either. Oh dear.

Moving it on skates could be a long job, and changing the wheels on an 80 tonne loco around overhead wires might be a challenge technically and safety wise.

Quote from: kirky on February 12, 2019, 04:41:21 PM
If you live in these Northern parts like what I do, a 185 is absolute luxury compared to the usual offerings of the 142.  I think Middlesbrough station only has 142 and 185 units (occasionally Northern run 156s) so I'd advise you not to travel to or from there.

The only real problem with 185s is that on the main section of their route they are normally carrying 4, 5 or 6 carriages' worth of passengers in 3 carriages! Apart from the constant overcrowding, they are actually fine.

Good to hear that the Mk5s are being done, anyway - as a very regular traveller on TPE I'm sure I will be ordering a set as I'm sure to spend a lot of time on the real ones!

p.s. that Class 68 in the diagrams on the website looks remarkably like an HTA coal wagon!

Defo be up for some CS ones.

Makes sense the class 92 order book didn't close just before Christmas as announced.
Now I'll have to add the CS one to my orders.

Wonder what the Dapol TPE 68 sales wil increase by with this announcement.

Ron

 :hellosign:  A HUGE  :thankyousign: Mike & Ben, that`s this years birthday wish sorted
    regards Derek.

Does anyone know if any of the manufacturers will be offering a class 73 in the Caledonian Sleeper colours?

The service between Edinburgh and Aberdeen is hauled by a class 73 and with only a short rake of coaches, it would provide a cost effective way of running a sleeper service on your layout.

Not at the moment. Dapol do a 73, but not the 73/9 suitable for the Caledonian Sleeper, which is heavily modified.

There's a 3D printed body available on Shapeways, if you're so inclined.

Quote from: red_death on February 12, 2019, 12:33:11 AM
I'm a big fan of 185s - 23m Desiros 😀

Not wishing to detract, but another vote for a 185 unit!! Well done on the Mk5s - way out of my timescale, but one will have to be acquired as im a bit of a <wispers>68 fan</wispers>!!!!

As for seeing the Mk5a sets in traffic - don't anyone go holding their breath, from everything I am hearing even May timetable introduction is looking dodgy.  Its a shame, because a prompt, on time introduction to traffic, without any major technical problem would have done wonders to convince the industry that multiple units are not the be-all and end-all.  But if what im told is right, I gather CAF are not making themselves any friends at the moment, whether its TPE, CS or Northern. :(

Rich

Quote from: njee20 on February 20, 2019, 01:22:03 PM
Not at the moment. Dapol do a 73, but not the 73/9 suitable for the Caledonian Sleeper, which is heavily modified.

There's a 3D printed body available on Shapeways, if you're so inclined.

Hi,

Thanks for that.  I'll check it out. I'm eagerly awaiting more details of the Caledonian Sleeper sets.

just thinking I will need a Class 92 in Caledonian livery to pull the sleeper set. must be a cunning plan by the team to boost the 92 sales.

Electra do the vinyls for the 73 in the teal Caledonian livery.

Me to for a class 185.

Ron

Quote from: Merrylee on March 02, 2019, 07:25:33 PM
Electra do the vinyls for the 73 in the teal Caledonian livery.

The issue is that the 73/9s are quite noticeably different to 73s in original form (have a look at photos), so there's a limit to what can be done with vinyls.

Is this something Revolution might consider? I appreciate that Dapol already do a 73 in original form, but the 73/9s are sufficiently different that it would probably mean new tooling anyway.

Mega niche though; one livery, on one operational service, in a very limited geographical and time period. I wouldn't want to tool an entire new model for that myself.

Quote from: njee20 on March 22, 2019, 09:47:17 AM
Mega niche though; one livery, on one operational service, in a very limited geographical and time period. I wouldn't want to tool an entire new model for that myself.

Two liveries so far - GBRF and Caledonian Sleeper. The GBRF ones travel widely in the SE on various infrastructure trains, and the sleeper ones cover large distances in Scotland (and there will be coaching stock to go with them).

So while it's niche to an extent, it's much less so than a number of models which have been produced or are being planned (e.g. the Farish prototype Deltic, or the planned DJ Models Class 23).

Mmm, I was forgetting GBRF had some refurbished ones I admit, but even so... I wouldn't hold my breath!

Quote from: njee20 on March 22, 2019, 11:21:15 AM
Mmm, I was forgetting GBRF had some refurbished ones I admit, but even so... I wouldn't hold my breath!

All of the Brush-converted 73s belong to GBRF - they have a contract to supply the traction for the sleeper.

You know what I mean - I forgot about the non-teal coloured ones roaming the SE.

That's the second time I've seen that photo without mention of who it is that can actually do them. Any reason for the secret squirrel stuff? Ignoring the fact the photo isn't actually even uploaded properly!

Looks like Sutton St Anne's, do I assume they're the work of Antony Ainsley-Sutton?

The body is available from shapeways.


https://www.shapeways.com/product/B2BGT3E26/cs-gbrf-class-73-9-1-148?optionId=64297458&li=marketplace (https://www.shapeways.com/product/B2BGT3E26/cs-gbrf-class-73-9-1-148?optionId=64297458&li=marketplace)


(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/75/3761-220319144403.png) (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=75238)

Quote from: Arrachogaidh on March 22, 2019, 02:35:03 PM
There are also the Network Rail Yellow 73/9 as well. I believe they all may have slight variations other than colour scheme.

The Network Rail ones (of which there are only two) are completely different and were converted by RVEL / LORAM in Derby. They each have a pair of Cummins QSK19 engines (as used in Voyagers, etc), and no ETS capability.

The Brush conversions for GBRF are more conventional and have an MTU R43 8-cylinder engine - basically an updated model of a half-sized version of the MTU engine in HST power cars. There are a few differences in the way the two batches are set up (the sleeper ones have a higher ETS rating), but so far as I've noticed the only obvious external difference is that the sleeper ones are now fitted with drophead Dellner couplers whereas the ones for infrastructure work aren't.

I didn't realise someone had done a 3D print for the CS/GBRf 73/9s - I'll have to decide whether to go ahead with my plan to butcher some cheap Dapol bodies!

Back on to the Mark 5s - we've done a survey of the TPE coaches (Mk 5A) and got quotes from various factories.  We've decided on which factory to go with and we're awaiting a revised date to visit Polmadie (our original date got cancelled - turns out measuring and photographing for model trains isn't as important as the real job of the depots!).  Order book should open in the next couple of weeks.

Cheers Mike

Hello all,

A little inspiration - I am looking forward to picking up one of the Farish 57s in Northern Belle livery and it turns out it'll go rather nicely with the Mk5s in TPE, as it appears to have been used for delivering the sets:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBYFLvaqkZA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBYFLvaqkZA)

cheers

Ben A.

Have just found the TransPennine Express Mk5 variants in the Revolution website shop.  Two sets of five vehicles at £225.00 (same price as the OO versions from Accurascale).  Nothing new in the News or Projects sections as yet.

Details somewhat limited with nothing regarding lighting arrangements.

Will wait for further information before placing an order.

John D

Be interesting to see how the pricing on the Caledonian ones is. £45 a vehicle is certainly at the top end (even allowing for the fact one is a DT) of what we've seen previously, and works out more expensive per-unit than the last batch of sound-fitted Pendolinos if that's not a grossly unfair comparison.

I definitely want a set of the sleepers, but may have to temper plans for a full rake!

Yes, £45 per vehicle does seem quite a bit.
However, if internal lighting is(?) included throughout along with directional lighting(?) for the DVT (as per the OO spec) then I would be more than happy to pay the price and not to have to retrofit light bars.
Perhaps Ben or Mike can enlighten us further?
John D.

Why do people use the term 'DVT'? it's not a van at all. DT or DTS is a more accurate description.

Because DVT just rolls off the tongue (or fingers) and it's what we're naturally conditioned to call a non-powered vehicle with a cab. But yes, in this context it's not a "V".

The DT will have directional lighting as will any coaches (e.g. the sleepers) with tail lights.

The spec is pretty similar to the OO version as we want the same level of quality. The coaches are coming out of the same factory as the OO models as well so that we get some consistency of design and features (as well as a small saving in costs).

We're waiting to see what the designers can fit in the coaches before we say there will definitely be interior lighting though that is certainly our hope.

Prices are a reflection of the amount of tooling and detail I'm afraid (and not out of line particularly with Farish's recent Birdcage stock which have an RRP of £50/coach). Comparisons with the Pendolino don't really help as that was tooled nearly 4(?) years ago and if we were producing it now it would be considerably more expensive.

Cheers Mike

PS the pricing on the Caledonian Sleepers will be the same for the same reasons.

Cheers Mike

Thanks Mike, and apologies for drawing grossly unfair comparisons!

I'm sure a rake will still find their way onto the layout!

For those that think the prices are too high, and thereby implying that either Revolution's business model is flawed or that Andy and Mike are excessively lining their pockets at our expense, there is a very, very simple answer.

Set up your own model company and bring products to us at cheaper prices. No excuses - Andy and Mike have shown the way, now you show us it can be done cheaper!

Time and time again people, including even the much maligned Mr Jones, have tried to inform forumites of the perils and costs of production, yet no-one seems to pay a bind bit of notice.

So enough with the mithering, get out there and show us how it's done :P

1) I think you mean Ben and Mike

2) I don't think anyone's complaining (I'm not), merely observing

3) your extrapolation of people's implications seems way off and pretty unfair

Well I have now yellowed my 3D print 73/9 and it is a lovely print , teal to follow!

All the real Mk5s seem to be a bit plagued with TMS issues with reports of sleepers failing /running very late an almost daily  froth generator on other forums ! Hopefully we will escape that in the models! - DCC brake facility??  The Mk3s will stay on longer now on the Highlander, get them while you can. 

Quote from: robert shrives on June 27, 2019, 10:03:20 PM
All the real Mk5s seem to be a bit plagued with TMS issues with reports of sleepers failing /running very late an almost daily  froth generator on other forums ! Hopefully we will escape that in the models! - DCC brake facility??  The Mk3s will stay on longer now on the Highlander, get them while you can.

It seems that Transpennine are prioritising their other new fleets ahead of the Mk5a sets now, ue to all the problems (the Mk5a sets were supposed to be the first of the new fleets in service).

Quote from: davidinyork on June 27, 2019, 10:29:10 PM

It seems that Transpennine are prioritising their other new fleets ahead of the Mk5a sets now, ue to all the problems (the Mk5a sets were supposed to be the first of the new fleets in service).

At risk to pulling things off topic onto the real ones, in the case of transpennine and well the MK5s in general, the issues been had regarding the TMS is due to inter operation with the locos and the TMS systems fitted on them, the Mk5s use the CAF system where as the 68s and 92s use the ones fitted by their respective manufacturers.

Added into that specifically for the 92s and MK5As there has been some reported issues with the Deliner Couplers which when working between say DMUs which are both powered haven't had an issue but when 16 coaches are been pulled the electrcial connections for the TMS have a momentary break and systems on modern trains are designed as such should there be ANY lose of connection then it automatically applies full breaking effort.

I only know this as well last week I came off an traction and rolling stock engineering course which well these issues were used as examples.

But back on topic I personally cannot wait for these to arrive and a really great addition to the market for years to come!

Four Caledonian Sleeper sets have now been listed alongside the two Trans Pennine Express sets mentioned previously.

http://www.revolutiontrains.com/product-category/ngauge/mark-5-coaches/ (http://www.revolutiontrains.com/product-category/ngauge/mark-5-coaches/)

The differences in the lengths of some cars is apparent in the artwork, just to add to the tooling complexity and cost.

Quote from: woodbury22uk on June 29, 2019, 02:35:32 PM
Four Caledonian Sleeper sets have now been listed alongside the two Trans Pennine Exprees sets mentioned previously.

http://www.revolutiontrains.com/product-category/ngauge/mark-5-coaches/ (http://www.revolutiontrains.com/product-category/ngauge/mark-5-coaches/)

@red_death (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=246)  ok what combinations make what trains please.

Can these same coaches be used to form a Lowlander consist?

Thanks,

John P

Quote from: Snowwolflair on June 29, 2019, 02:39:17 PM

Quote from: woodbury22uk on June 29, 2019, 02:35:32 PM
Four Caledonian Sleeper sets have now been listed alongside the two Trans Pennine Exprees sets mentioned previously.

http://www.revolutiontrains.com/product-category/ngauge/mark-5-coaches/ (http://www.revolutiontrains.com/product-category/ngauge/mark-5-coaches/)

@red_death (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=246)  ok what combinations make what trains please.

It says that all 4 sets are needed for the complete Highlander.

I'm wondering about the Lowlander as well though.

Regards,

John P

Order in for both the TPE sets - can't wait - i'm sure they are going to be amazing  :bounce:

The lowlander sets are not up yet as I ran out of time yesterday afternoon.

I'll get them up tomorrow.

There are formation diagrams on each item page. Basically all 4 packs will give you the full highlander.

Cheers Mike

16 coaches? Wow.
According to Wikipedia the MK5 car is 22.2 meter long, times 16 is 355.2 meters, divided by 148 is 2.4 meter platform length w/o locomotive. 

For the locomotive I give 20 cm and additional 30 cm for clearance (15 cm front and rear) which gives a rough estimation for loop length / fiddle yard track / staging track of 2.9 meters.

That is .... just .... amazing, nice.
Why is the class 92 order book already closed? Now I'd like a Highlander set, just for the heck of it.

Quote from: MacRat on June 30, 2019, 07:52:34 AM
That is .... just .... amazing, nice.

Why is the class 92 order book already closed? Now I'd like a Highlander set, just for the heck of it.

Hi MacRat,

Our Class 92 locomotives can still be obtained from selected retailers after production, and I don't think the Claledonian Sleeper 92s are sold out at all of them.

For those seeking more information about consists there is a dedicated Mk5/5a page here: https://wp.me/P5BA2j-4nT which includes a downloadable PDF showing the various Sleeper formations.

In short, the coaches for the Lowlander and Highlander trains are the same leaving Euston; the difference is how they are split when they reach Scotland, and in model terms the destination shown on the side-board.

Each 16-vehicle train comprises two distinct 8-vehicle parts:  one is known as single PRM (Passenger - Restricted Mobility) as it comprises Seated Car + Club Car + Accessible Sleeper + 5 Sleepers.  The other is double PRM as it is the same, but with 4 sleepers and two Accessible Sleepers.

The Lowlander divides at Carstairs; the single PRM set goes to Edinburgh, the double PRM set to Glasgow.

The Highlander divides at Edinburgh.  The single PRM set goes to Inverness.  The double PRM set is further split into portions for Fort William and Aberdeen.  The precise make up of these varies; in Summer most sleepers go to Fort William, in winter most go to Aberdeen, but each always has an Accessible Sleeper.

Also, an additional Sleeper and Club car are added to the Fort William set at Edinburgh.

Cheers

Ben A.

thanks for that

hope it is a successful project. i did notice a class 90 in green freightliner livery hauling a late running mk3 set with mk2 lounge the other morning !! may have been standing in for a mk 5 set !!

The Mk3s are still in use on the highlander at the moment.

Given the reliability problems with the Mk5s, there might be a delay before the Mk3s are al replaced.

thanks for the explanations Ben & Mike, looks like I am definitely going back to work at this rate. looks like it is going to be every bit as spectacular as the Pendolino's.

cheers
Graham

thanks to ben / mike, david in york, graham

I've been looking for variation of locos pulling these and found this notice: https://www.railnews.co.uk/news/2019/06/26-caledonian-sleeper-highlander-services-delayed.html (https://www.railnews.co.uk/news/2019/06/26-caledonian-sleeper-highlander-services-delayed.html)

So we will see only later in the year what motive power / livery variants may appear outside of the current test runs. So far class 92 in GBRF and Caledonian livery. For delivery moves I've found class 66 with hoppers for brake force and class 37 with Rail Adventure cargowaggon and flats have been used.

Quote from: MacRat on June 30, 2019, 01:13:53 PM
I've been looking for variation of locos pulling these and found this notice: https://www.railnews.co.uk/news/2019/06/26-caledonian-sleeper-highlander-services-delayed.html (https://www.railnews.co.uk/news/2019/06/26-caledonian-sleeper-highlander-services-delayed.html)

Other than stock moves, it's only going to be 92s and 73/9s as no other locos are fitted with the required equipment to interface with the train management system on the stock.

The coaches don't have standard drawgear and are fitted with Dellner couplings. Therefore even stock moves will need barriers / adapters with most other locos, apart from the few which are fitted with Dellners specifically for stock moves (some of the 57/3s, some of ROG's 37s).

So to do the Highlander from Euston to Edinburgh you need all 4 sets, but this includes the 2 coaches added at Edinburgh to the Fort William portion.

I'm assuming that the Lowlander will be offered as 2 x 8 coach book sets?

Regards,

John P

I saw the consist pages and see the different sets, but will each coach be lettered in any way (underneath or included in the livery printing) so we can easily and correctly Marshall the consists?

Two good questions re stock formations and lettering / numbering. . .


please stand me correct


Each of the Highland & Lowland departures from Euston is formed of two of these sets with the seated & lounge cars at the London end. The Lowland sleeper is split into two at Carstairs. The Highland splits at Edinburgh, with a whole set going to Inverness (this was because the maintenance was done there- a ninth complete 8-car set would be getting worked on there). The other set would be split, with the seated+lounge and 3-4 sleepers going to Aberdeen. 3-2 sleepers go to Fort William with a seated & lounge car added on.


The typical formation of the new trains in service will be the same to the current formation:

Highlander Formation
4-6 coaches - Edinburgh to Fort William
4-6 coaches - Edinburgh to Aberdeen
7-8 coaches - Edinburgh to Inverness

16 coaches - London Euston to Edinburgh (Full Portion)

Lowlander Formation
8 coaches - Carstairs to Edinburgh
8 coaches - Carstairs to Glasgow Central

16 coaches - London Euston to Carstairs (Full Portion)

unsure WHAT THE INDIVIDUAL coach number letters will be

at present :

http://www.scot-rail.co.uk/page/Caledonian+Sleepers (http://www.scot-rail.co.uk/page/Caledonian+Sleepers)]

Each coach will be appropriately lettered and with the correct destination for the pack.

Cheers Mike

Hello all,

No news doesn't mean nothing has been happening.

Accurascale have pretty much completed the CAD for the TPE Mk5 versions - here is the Driving Trailer:

(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/80/94-080819203313-802771207.jpeg)

This will form the basis for both their 4mm and our N models.  Interiors are still to be added, and once we have those and the CADs for the remaining cars we can check them and proceed to tooling.

The Caledonian Sleeper CADs are not too far away either.  Their Mk5s are slightly wider, and therefore shorter, to fit the same kinematic envelope. 

Cheers

Ben A.

Hello all,

It's taken a little longer than anticipated but Accurascale say the CADs for the Caledonian Sleeper Mk5s are complete and the models are about to start, or have just started, tooling.

(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/86/94-240120231017-865451971.jpeg)

CADs for the TPE versions were approved some time ago, but all are going into tooling at the same time.

It's now Chinese New Year but we are hoping to have another progress report soon.

For more information, including images of both sides of each individual car, see the news page of the Revolution website here: www.revolutiontrains.com/news (http://www.revolutiontrains.com/news)

Cheers

Ben A.

Thanks for the update, Ben.
I'm very much looking forward to them.

Best,
Michael

Hello all,

We've received EP1 samples of the Caledonian Sleeper Mk5 and TPE Mk5a vehicles for checking and assessment.

Left to right:  Caledonian Sleeper Seated, Club and Accessible Sleeper cars.
(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/111/94-220621130610-111007468.jpeg)

TPE Mk5a DT and T-200 trailer car.
(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/111/94-220621130611-1110071254.jpeg)

There are a few niggles to feedback, but broadly speaking I am very happy with them.  I am pleased with how free running the inside-bearing bogies are; this is because each axle has two small steel bearing rings to enable the wheels to pick up power while minimising drag.

The models have full interiors and saloon lighting as standard; the saloon lighting is controlled by reed switches so a simple magnet will turn them on and off.

For more pictures and information see our news page here: http://www.revolutiontrains.com/news/ (http://www.revolutiontrains.com/news/)

The next stage will be to received decorated samples, which should be in around 8 weeks or so, with the pre-order book closing some time soon after that.

cheers

Ben A.

 :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

Really looking forward to these.

John P

the 92 in Caledonian is waiting on shed for its full rake.
the 68 in TPE is waiting for its coaches.

bring them on.

These look incredible, really looking forward to them!

Quote from: Ben A on June 22, 2021, 01:14:20 PM

Hello all,

We've received EP1 samples of the Caledonian Sleeper Mk5 and TPE Mk5a vehicles for checking and assessment.

Left to right:  Caledonian Sleeper Seated, Club and Accessible Sleeper cars.
(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/111/94-220621130610-111007468.jpeg)

TPE Mk5a DT and T-200 trailer car.
(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/111/94-220621130611-1110071254.jpeg)

There are a few niggles to feedback, but broadly speaking I am very happy with them.  I am pleased with how free running the inside-bearing bogies are; this is because each axle has two small steel bearing rings to enable the wheels to pick up power while minimising drag.

The models have full interiors and saloon lighting as standard; the saloon lighting is controlled by reed switches so a simple magnet will turn them on and off.

For more pictures and information see our news page here: http://www.revolutiontrains.com/news/ (http://www.revolutiontrains.com/news/)

The next stage will be to received decorated samples, which should be in around 8 weeks or so, with the pre-order book closing some time soon after that.

cheers

Ben A.

Hello,
I see from the pictures that the Caledonian Sleeper coaches feature Scharfenberg Couplers.

If these are working Scharfenberg, Has any thought been given to if spare Scharfenberg Couplers be available?
I ask thinking about 1 or 2 extra so we could fit them to our Class 92's if we wish.
(No doubt someone will have a use for packs of them for projects)

Many thanks,
CaleyDave

I have a question @Ben A (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=94) , @red_death (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=246).

Having seen the pictures of the decorated sleeper samples (look brilliant by the way  :thumbsup:), I notice they have the destination windows populated with text, which also looks great, but what is the intended text for the 6-car set which is Aberdeen(winter)/Fort William(summer), and the 4-car set the other way round? I would imagine it's Aberdeen on the 6-car and Fort William on the other, but just what to be sure before I place an order.

Many thanks
Adrian

Hello all,

We are examining the options for supplying the Scharfenberg couplers as spare parts.

The destination blinds on the Caledonian Sleeper Highlander packs are:

Pack 1:  Aberdeen on the grille side, London Euston on the other.

Pack 2:  London Euston on the grille side, Fort William on the other.

Pack 3:  London Euston on the grille side, Inverness on the other.

Pack 4:  Inverness on the grille side, London Euston on the other.

cheers

Ben A.

Quote from: Ben A on November 11, 2021, 08:00:22 PM

Hello all,

We are examining the options for supplying the Scharfenberg couplers as spare parts.

The destination blinds on the Caledonian Sleeper Highlander packs are:

Pack 1:  Aberdeen on the grille side, London Euston on the other.

Pack 2:  London Euston on the grille side, Fort William on the other.

Pack 3:  London Euston on the grille side, Inverness on the other.

Pack 4:  Inverness on the grille side, London Euston on the other.

cheers

Ben A.

@Ben A (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=94) , many thanks, appreciate the response  :thumbsup:

Quote from: Ben A on November 11, 2021, 08:00:22 PM

Hello all,

We are examining the options for supplying the Scharfenberg couplers as spare parts.

The destination blinds on the Caledonian Sleeper Highlander packs are:

Pack 1:  Aberdeen on the grille side, London Euston on the other.

Pack 2:  London Euston on the grille side, Fort William on the other.

Pack 3:  London Euston on the grille side, Inverness on the other.

Pack 4:  Inverness on the grille side, London Euston on the other.

cheers

Ben A.

So they don't know if they are coming or going  :D

John P

Quote from: jpendle on November 11, 2021, 09:12:43 PM

Quote from: Ben A on November 11, 2021, 08:00:22 PM

Hello all,

We are examining the options for supplying the Scharfenberg couplers as spare parts.

The destination blinds on the Caledonian Sleeper Highlander packs are:

Pack 1:  Aberdeen on the grille side, London Euston on the other.

Pack 2:  London Euston on the grille side, Fort William on the other.

Pack 3:  London Euston on the grille side, Inverness on the other.

Pack 4:  Inverness on the grille side, London Euston on the other.

cheers

Ben A.

So they don't know if they are coming or going  :D

John P

I know the feeling  :D

just looking at the pictures, all the coaches have the Scharfenberg couplers, are these in NEM sockets?
Just thinking about how can I couple up the 92 or 68 to the rakes on order.
Of course if there is a spare NEM Scharfenberg coupling in the box we can replace the coupling on the 92 or 68 with this.

cheers
Graham

I noted Ben's reply that that the scharfenburg couplers may be supplied as spares. Will there be a coupling included in the boxes of the coaches for replacing the ones on the 68 or 92 in the first place ?

Quote from: PWayman on November 12, 2021, 12:30:45 PM
I noted Ben's reply that that the scharfenburg couplers may be supplied as spares. Will there be a coupling included in the boxes of the coaches for replacing the ones on the 68 or 92 in the first place ?

Hi there,

Standard Rapido couplers will be included with the Mk5s so they are compatible with your chosen locomotive.

cheers

Ben A.

Thanks Ben

Apologies, but I am contemplating getting a complete Highlander set... :o
...but I am struggling to fully understand why there are 6 coaches in the Highlander pack 1 (Aberdeen)...  :goggleeyes:

(https://www.revolutiontrains.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Highlander1_Aberdeen.png)

Whilst I understand that (both) the Sleepers leave Euston with a maximum of 16 coaches, are the extra two added later (as Mike outlines below)?

Quote from: red_death on February 11, 2019, 02:39:18 PM
For the CS the Lowlander is relatively easy as it splits into 2 x 8.  The Highlander is slightly trickier as extra coaches get added when it splits - it starts of with 16 coaches from Euston (8 for Inverness, 6 for Aberdeen and 2 for Ft William). The extra seated coach and lounge coach get added to the Fort William section.

Or, are the extra two to reflect how the later 'split' (at Edinburgh?) is then, well, 'split' differently (for Summer and Winter)...?

(https://www.revolutiontrains.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/CS-formation-Highlander-split-1-768x296.jpg)

Finally, are the £270/£180 prices still the EarlyBird prices...? :D

A Happy Christmas to one and all... :)
...while I carry on singing: "All I want for Christmas is..." :worried:
...and before I get carried Cartic-4'd away... :(

Charles.

The mk5s never had an early bird price. £45/coach from launch.

Pass on the formations though, I can't stretch to 16 coaches so I've not concerned myself too much  ;D

Surely though you just buy one of each of the highlander packs?

The extra two coaches are the lounge and brake coach attached to the Fort William portion.

16 coaches is maximum length but as the Highlander splits into 3 parts at Edinburgh it needs 3 brakes (and 3 lounge cars for breakfast). The Mk5 continue on from the MK3+MK2 sets where they are formed up of two Half sets with 1 brake, 1 lounge and 6 Sleepers.
on the Highlander 1 half the set goes to Inverness with the remaining half set split between Fort William and Aberdeen.
The brake+lounge goes to Aberdeen leaving 6 sleepers to split between Aberdeen and Fort William.
The Fort William Brake and Lounge come down to Edinburgh on the London bound portion. They are uncoupled at Edinburgh and Wait on the Up train from London which is the split up into the 3 portions and take Fort William Brake and Lounge are attached to the Sleepers from London and travel back North.

In theory this keeps the sets grouped as half sets of 8 coaches (Brake, Lounge, 6 Sleepers) which helps simplify maintenance.

By supplying the extra two brake and Lounge coaches as part of the portions Revolution are catering for modellers in who want to run individual portions as they would be seen North of Edinburgh.

On the real Railway the number of Sleepers in the Fort William and Aberdeen portion vary depending on demand but they always add up to 6 shared between the two portions. (Fort William benefits from Tourist traffic and Aberdeen suffers from fluctuations in Off shore work).
When introduced the 2 Fort William, 4 Aberdeen split was the most common. My experience was this reversed in more recent years but I do not know to what extent this is seasonal or the impact the pandemic has had in the last two years.

Thank you for that answer njee20. :)
I thought I'd somehow missed out on something... :worried:

Quote from: njee20 on December 24, 2021, 12:41:47 AM
The mk5s never had an early bird price. £45/coach from launch.

Pass on the formations though, I can't stretch to 16 coaches so I've not concerned myself too much  ;D

I do hope to (eventually) have something to run all 16 coaches on (or even, all 18... as it would be fun to see how my CS 92 will cope with that :worried:)

Thank you for that very comprehensive answer CaleyDave. :)
It all now makes sense to me...! :thumbsup:

In the distant past, I have done both (what are now known as) the Highlander (c1989) and the Lowlander (1990). The former was to Inverness (and on 'Priv' tickets ;)) and the latter to 'Auld Reekie' (paying full price :() to see the Festival.

Obviously, both of the above were on Mk3 SLE(P).
I'm in no rush to recreate that, not least because Dapol seem intent to only sell their Mk3 SLE(P) as single coaches... :no:
...whereas those lovely boys at Revolution will happily sell me the relevant (and indeed correctly formed!) box sets...! :heart2:

All the best, to one and all. :wave:

Charles.

The bigger issue with the older stock is that there are no mk2 BUOs or RLOs. The sleepers are easy. Just buy lots. 12 mk3s and 4 mk2s I think. With a similar bit of musical coaches when the Highlander splits. 

Hello all,

Just for the avoidance of any doubt, the maximum length of all Caledonian Sleeper trains leaving London is 16 cars.

Each 16 car set has two seated and two club cars.

The Lowlander splits at Carstairs, with 8 going to Glasgow and 8 to Edinburgh, each portion taking a single seated and club car, while the Highlander splits at Edinburgh.  Here, because there are three onward portions (Aberdeen, Fort William and Inverness) an additional seated and club car are added in the platform before departure to (I think) the sleepers destined for Fort William.

The same process happens in reverse, so all trains arriving in London are 16 cars too.

The 6 strong package was offered so those who wished to model a train longer than 4 coaches but shorter than 8 could do so with an authentic consist comprising every type of coach.

Cheers

Ben A.

Hi all,

I see these are now available to pre order from Rails. Glad I've already got my order in for a couple of sets of the Caledonian Sleepers and can't wait to get them.

I'd seen mentioned earlier on this thread and now confirmed on the Rails email that the internal lights will be controlled by a magnetic wand. Does anyone know if this arrangement tends to be activated by uncoupling magnets in the track? Bit worried the lights will end up flashing on and off as the train goes in and out of my station.

I'd expected the switch to be in roof - so you can wave the wand from above.

I have ordered the Deerstalker section.

I succumbed to a full 16-car set. Decided it was better to have buyer's remorse and sell some than have to pay more for additional coaches! Should be formidable. If I have a layout.

Just had the invoice for the final payments for my Mk5's. Very excited! :D

Quote from: Hightower on September 19, 2023, 06:27:53 PMJust had the invoice for the final payments for my Mk5's. Very excited! :D

TPE or Caledonian Sleeper?

John P

Caledonian.

 :claphappy: Confirm Caledonian Sleeper Coaches MK5 on their way!  :claphappy:

Turns out I'd not paid as much as I thought I had on these, damn  :doh:

Looking forward to the delivery, one of the OO club members was running the Accurascale TPE set the other night and they looked great.

My Lowland Set is on the way!

Big ask for anyone getting the Highland Set - can I have the coach numbers for each of the packs please so I can update my website.

Highlander pack 1 (Aberdeen)
Highlander pack 2 (Fort William)
Highlander pack 3 (Inverness)
Highlander pack 4 (Inverness)

Many Thanks

Tony

https://www.ngauge.org/ (https://www.ngauge.org/)

I've received a "we have your parcel" email from Royal Mail, I'm hopeful...

Will a 92 haul sixteen, that's the question!  :hmmm: 

Quote from: njee20 on September 22, 2023, 06:39:33 PMWill a 92 haul sixteen, that's the question!  :hmmm: 

Well if it don't then my GBRF one will be running "dead in tow" with the CS one!

Regards,

John P

I have a 92 and I'm quite sure it will do so easily. My Farish Coronation handles 11 without a problem and the 92 has more mass and twice as many driving wheels.

Are the TPE MK5s in this country now?

Quote from: Brian-1c on September 22, 2023, 07:57:18 PMI have a 92 and I'm quite sure it will do so easily. My Farish Coronation handles 11 without a problem and the 92 has more mass and twice as many driving wheels.

Not mk5s though? I think a lot will depend on the inside bearing bogies. The design Revolution have opted for looks good, and I hope will run well, but there will always be more drag than with pinpoints. Plus Revolution stock is often pretty heavy, and I think haulage on the 92 is a bit underwhelming. Still, I've got eleven 92s, so plenty of testing opportunity!  ;D

Quote from: jpendle on September 22, 2023, 07:30:19 PM

Quote from: njee20 on September 22, 2023, 06:39:33 PMWill a 92 haul sixteen, that's the question!  :hmmm: 

Well if it don't then my GBRF one will be running "dead in tow" with the CS one!

Plenty of precendent for that:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49485234766_78d81d5cd3_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2ioQLfS)Double or Quits (https://flic.kr/p/2ioQLfS) by TimboM (https://www.flickr.com/photos/153305438@N06/), on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/2nRw3aX

https://flic.kr/p/2ktoGmC

As I have more locos than trains the CS/GBRF combo might become a permanent fixture.  :D

John P

Or buy more stock, tough choice... CS ones used to be a fairly common fixture on freights too, notably the IPA car carriers, GBRf spent a lot of time on silver bullets.

Quote from: jpendle on September 22, 2023, 07:30:19 PM

Quote from: njee20 on September 22, 2023, 06:39:33 PMWill a 92 haul sixteen, that's the question!  :hmmm: 

Well if it don't then my GBRF one will be running "dead in tow" with the CS one!

Regards,

John P

I like that idea, my CS is sound and the GBRF has added weight which gives it excellent traction effort. hopefully that will be enough to get the rake up the club helix.
Just got the notes mine are on their way, so hopefully in a couple of weeks I will try them out.

Pairing sound and non-sound fitted models has always seemed like a massive headache! I gave up on my 68s, there was too much variability in the start up sequence to reliably match the non-sound one. Just bought another sound fitted one! ;D

They're here! :laugh3:


(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/135/8705-230923101847.jpeg) (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=135811)

Mine have arrived too, just the Fort William set for me

Wow

Great, secure presentation, looks like really close coupling. Not had them out of the box yet but, detail-wise the best coaches I have seen in n by a mile.

Thank you and congratulations Revolution, now what about a 73/9 TO pull them

Rob

They look lovely.

You're gonna need more than two 92s to pull 16 though. Mine struggled with 7, and wouldn't budge with 8. Bit of a shame.

I got the Highland Sleeper packs so at eight cars hauled by a Class 66 and a Class 73/9 shouldn't be a problem.

GE

 :claphappy:  :claphappy:

Quote from: njee20 on September 23, 2023, 06:16:08 PMThey look lovely.

You're gonna need more than two 92s to pull 16 though. Mine struggled with 7, and wouldn't budge with 8. Bit of a shame.

A real shame, was hoping to emulate the real train. Maybe we can persuade @revolution to retool the 92 with the 59 mechanism if that turns out as good as it appears to be.

Yeah, I'm prepared to try and run mine in to get them going, but it'll have to be on rotation to get all 16 done! I suspect I don't have the patience, and they'll go on eBay in due course!

Had a bit of a play with mine last night. They do feel very draggy. My 92 will pull 7, which is all I will need it to, but annoyingly my 73's won't pull four of them. Hopefully I can get that sorted.

Has anyone tried the alternative couplings?

I have an Aberdeen set and I have to say that these coaches look great and I am very pleased that I purchased them.

I have run them on my DC Kato test track and my class 92 will just about pull 6 coaches. A Dapol class 73 loco struggles to pull 4 coaches. However, a double headed class 73 will pull all 6 coaches and this is how I will eventially run them. My oval test track has 12" radius curves. Fortunately my main layout does not have any inclines.

Am I doing something wrong with the lights? I have noticed that when running the coaches on DC that all lights switch on when the train is first moved. If you then switch off lights with the magnet they stay off until the train is next stopped. When the train is moved again all the lights switch back on. Is this is the correct function of the light operation with DC? To be practical in use the lights need to latch off until the end of your running session or if switched back on with the magnet. I suspect with DCC, with constant voltage on track, the lights will stay latched off.

I will be looking for a way to permanently switch off all the red lights except the rear of the last coach.

My 2 sets of 4 arrived yesterday. A quick look there amazing coaches, trying them on the track, the top and bottom coach in each box (so 4 of them) run beautifully and free, give them a good push and roll a good 30cm. The middle two in each box are all a bit draggy, give them a similar ouch they roll about 10cm. Not sure if it's coincidence that the middle two in each box are more draggy, will have to have a closet look when I have more time, I'm sure an eastpy fix otherwise they would all be draggy. May try swapping the what/axles from a good one or a bad one and vice versa see if the problem moves or stays...

Quote from: hsthero on September 24, 2023, 09:32:12 AMAm I doing something wrong with the lights? I have noticed that when running the coaches on DC that all lights switch on when the train is first moved. If you then switch off lights with the magnet they stay off until the train is next stopped. When the train is moved again all the lights switch back on. Is this is the correct function of the light operation with DC? To be practical in use the lights need to latch off until the end of your running session or if switched back on with the magnet. I suspect with DCC, with constant voltage on track, the lights will stay latched off.

I will be looking for a way to permanently switch off all the red lights except the rear of the last coach.

My set of 6 with two KMS Railtech Mk3s roll fine behind a Class 92. I have found a way of not resetting the lights at a station stop. Cunning use of the control knob on my Morley handheld allows me to bring the train to a stand with the 92s running lights still showing and the lights on in the Revolution Mk5s. Increasing power allows the train to depart with the unwanted tail lights still off.

Otherwise, if the controller voltage goes lower on DC, then the roof tapper needs to do his rounds.

The intensity of the lights seems fine to me and with a mix of berth side and corridor side lighting visible looks like a train starting its journey.

I am sure someone will devise a way of automatically turning off the unwanted lights after leaving the storage roads and keeping a constant low voltage on the track during station calls without precision knob twiddling. Not an issue on DCC.

Like others have reported, these coaches look wonderful but haulage is an issue. Straight from the box (but with the red lights turned off except for the tail coach), here's my Inverness 8-car rake hauled by a CJM Class 92:
https://youtu.be/wJN36TeCkDk
Individual coaches seem to run fine so I hope someone can come up with a solution to improve the freedom to roll when presented as a rake. Even just 8 coaches could not be hauled by my other CS CJM Class 92, and no hope at all with the Revolution one, all on level track where other trains have no such issues.

Thats exactly what I found - individually they're ok (but no better), but even with a few the rolling resistance seems to increase exponentially.

Some good news to report. Having run my rake of 8 coaches continuously for a couple of hours it seems the running quality has improved sufficiently for not only both my CJM locos to be able to haul the train but also my Revolution Class 92 too. It will be interesting to hear if extended running of other rakes will bring about similar improvements.

My 6 car set plus two Mk3s (I know they can't really run together) is running really easily now. I think that the Class 92 will benefit from the running-in too as I have hardly used it until now. Probably need to get my Dapol Transpennine Class 68 on the treadmill as well in preparation for its Mk5 set.

Do wonder how well the Dapol 68 will handle the 5 car TPE rake, the N gauge 68 isn't generally known for impressive haulage abilities.

My 4 car Fort William Sleeper portion has arrived.  Kooks great.  On Thursday I will try it out on the club layout with my Dapol Class 73, covered in Adam Warr's Caledonian sides.,

For those who enjoyed seeing the Class 92 hauling the Inverness rake of 8 sleepers, here's a short video showing the same rake being hauled by a CJM Class 73, slowing to a brief stop and recommencing its journey under DCC:  https://youtu.be/4zM1CAHfUEw

Quote from: carderrail on September 22, 2023, 06:06:08 PMMy Lowland Set is on the way!

Big ask for anyone getting the Highland Set - can I have the coach numbers for each of the packs please so I can update my website.

Highlander pack 1 (Aberdeen)
Highlander pack 2 (Fort William)
Highlander pack 3 (Inverness)
Highlander pack 4 (Inverness)

Many Thanks

Tony

https://www.ngauge.org/ (https://www.ngauge.org/)

I suspect the numbers are the same as the 00 Gauge Accurascale packs but would like some confirmation please.

Thanks
Tony

Links


https://www.facebook.com/groups/NGaugeForum/?ref=share


B. Chang


https://revolutiontrains.com/mk5-sleepers-a-bit-of-a-drag/?fbclid=IwAR28MvY4y_f50a-rK3GU49PmmY1bCoU_ao_UPGpxtsuPu6eICc0T2CmcB7I


Hope helps answer your questions

Quote from: crewearpley40 on September 26, 2023, 05:36:16 PMLinks


https://www.facebook.com/groups/NGaugeForum/?ref=share


B. Chang


https://revolutiontrains.com/mk5-sleepers-a-bit-of-a-drag/?fbclid=IwAR28MvY4y_f50a-rK3GU49PmmY1bCoU_ao_UPGpxtsuPu6eICc0T2CmcB7I


Hope helps answer your questions

Well spotted - thanks!

Tony

Quote from: carderrail on September 26, 2023, 05:41:46 PM

Quote from: crewearpley40 on September 26, 2023, 05:36:16 PMLinks


https://www.facebook.com/groups/NGaugeForum/?ref=share


B. Chang


https://revolutiontrains.com/mk5-sleepers-a-bit-of-a-drag/?fbclid=IwAR28MvY4y_f50a-rK3GU49PmmY1bCoU_ao_UPGpxtsuPu6eICc0T2CmcB7I


Hope helps answer your questions

Well spotted - thanks!

Tony

Tony scroll down revolution links. It shows both rakes highlander, lowlander, where exactly they split / join and rakes and coach numbers

Just realised I missed the invoice email!  Best get it paid in the morning, hopefully I'm not too late. Looking forward to my Aberdeen set  :)

Been messing with mine tonight to get them to run. Taking the pickups out of one bogie on each wheelset actually made a big difference, taking them out entirely didn't make it markedly better. Still only running 8, but the 92 was then totally happy pulling them, which is a big improvement. Only the other half a rake to go...!

I can see me potentially removing the lighting entirely, except perhaps from the rear coach to get the taillights.

Just checked the tracking number for mine, looks like they are still in Heathrow waiting for a space on a plane. I think Aus Post must have a mandated wait of 1 week in Heathrow before allowing parcels to leave, this has happened to the last 3 shipments.

Mine are finally on their way :bounce:

And for those who haven't looked,

https://revolutiontrains.com/news/

has some ideas on how to free up the wheelsets.

Regards,

John P

Biggest difference I've found is simply removing the pickups for the lighting. I've been talking to Mike B about modifying them, which does help, but removing them is even better (with obvious loss of functionality. I'd have far sooner paid less per coach and foregone lighting, but hey ho!

I have a couple where I've left the pickups on 1 bogie, and that seems markedly better, so may be the solution in the long term. There's obviously a decent capacitor in there, becuase they don't flicker much at all.

And Revolution have a handful of GBRf and Caledonian 92s as well if anyone's missed out. I definitely don't need another one...  :uneasy:

Quote from: njee20 on September 27, 2023, 03:34:43 PMAnd Revolution have a handful of GBRf and Caledonian 92s as well if anyone's missed out. I definitely don't need another one...  :uneasy:

Famous last words  :D

Anyhow I received my 16 coach Lowlander set and tried them out yesterday.
Unfortunately I am not one of the silent majority whose coaches run well!

With each coach placed on a re-railer, & on a 2% gradient, SLEP coach G won the trophy by managing a full 4 or 5 inches down the slope before stopping.

Seven or Eight of the others managed it off the re-railer but only got an inch down the slope.

The rest didn't even make it off the re-railer  :doh:

I swapped the bogies from coach G to F and then F ran better.

I also tried some bogies individually on a sloped 3 foot piece of track, Most of them wouldn't budge until one end of the track was 6 inches high or more.  :(

Unfortunately draggy wagons seems to be a recurring theme with Revolution at the moment, and I wonder if they are pushing the envelope too far?

First it was the IPA Cargowaggons where the brake shoes really worked, preventing free running as they would catch the wheelsets.
Second were the Timber Carriers and Hold-alls, where replacement wheelsets had to be provided.
And now it's the sleepers.

Ironically my gold standard wagons for free running are the Revolution TEA's, which freely run down the 2% grade to Wallgate and carry on well past the station.

I also tried running in 2, 4 coach sets, each behind a CL92. Neither got up the short 2% grade to the fiddle yard on their first attempt, but on subsequent circuits they ran slowly but steadily up and their speed picked up markedly after 5 or 6 circuits.

I then added 1 coach to each rake and neither would budge!
I also tried my TPE CL68 and that can't even manage 3 coaches, albeit ones that hadn't been run in.

Today's mission is to check each bogie on a 2% gradient and fiddle with the ones that don't move.

But I really need a decent benchtop magnifier because I'm not good locating black screws and bogies into a black wagon floor  :goggleeyes:

John P

I did resist! I have plenty of 92s, and they aren't the best runners ether! I have grudgingly got a pair of 92s to 'manage' 15 (Ie to move them, slowly). I've taken all the pickups out, they're still draggy, but markedly better. Undecided what to do with them in the long run.

I guess that my conclusion from the lighting issue is that we would not be having the same discussion/complaints if the default position at start up had been all lights off. I can't imagine anyone wanting to have to turn off a minimum of 31 tailights on a 16 car train everytime it stops on DC or the DCC power is turned off. Hopefully not an issue to be repeated on other hauled stock with integral tail lights.

I can cope with a six car set but isolating the tail lights would have been a big plus, and I would not be trying to bring the train to a stand for a short station stop without killing the voltage below about 2 volts. As it is, the train is a pain to operate and I suspect I shall be removing all the pickups and forego having tail lights on the rear car.

I am hoping that the reversible TPE sets will not have a similar quirk seeing as only the driving car needs reversible lights.

Fort William pack just made it all the way to Western Canada.  They look magnificent - same as everyone else the bogies will need some tuning.

Sadly the Caledonian Blue on the Dapol 67 stand-in for a 73 is completely off.  Will there a run of 73's in our future?  Hint hint ...  :) 

Presumably the TPE DTs will have a standard PCB and decoder socket. It does feel a bit daft that a full rake needs 31 tail lights to be turned off each time you start off. I can see these lingering hugely in the shops. £57.50 each stings somewhat.

according to Aus Post mine are due to arrive today, so yesterday I cleaned all the track and got some class 60's out.
Plan of attack is to start with a couple of coaches on each 60 and run them round for an hour or so, then build from there.
Someone mentioned letting them run for 24hrs which I assume was a joke but given the weather front we have coming it may be an option to put them on the track and just leave them to run.

Yes that does seem rather excessive. I did try lightly reaming the bushes on one bogie and it didnt seem to make a huge difference, but was a load of effort that I wasn't not prepared to replicate on all the others. If that becomes the official solution I'll get Revolution to do it!

The weight and drag also means they uncouple comparatively easily. A couple of times when I've left them running I've returned to the loco in the middle of the rake! I wouldn't want to leave them entirely unattended.

You should get a 60 moving 5-6 out of the box and 8 should be fairly doable.

I have a few class 60's sitting waiting their turn on duty for the running in.
I have also managed to add weight to the class 92's and found this improves the tractive effort.

Yeah I must look at the 92s. I'm going to take the sound out of a couple of mine I think, as it's awfully tinny, and add extra weight. Good to know it improves things! It seems highly unlikely you'll ever get one 92 hauling 16 coaches, but it'll look a formidable train regardless!

Hello all,

I just wanted to check in to say that we are still looking at this issue and looking at fixes for those Mk5s with high drag.

We've already put some interim hints and tips on our website - based in part on feedback from some of those contributing to this thread, so thanks for that - but more will follow as we continue to examine this issue.

It is frustrating because all the samples ran very smoothly; we are comparing the samples to the production coaches to see if there are any noticeable differences.

As to the lights; with hindsight maybe operational tail lights on just one coach in each pack would've been preferable.  However, on the prototype the coaches are often switched around and since any vehicle could find itself at the rear of the train, all have tail lights.  So this is how we configured the models.

I can see that having the 'default' setting as 'lights off' could've been preferable but, again, our experience is that a surprising number barely look at the instructions and I can image social media being flooded with complaints that the lights don't work.  Some may not even have realised that the coaches have lights or what their lighting rod is for!

As ever, if anyone is having problems Simon, our customer services manager, is on the end of an email and is best placed to assist.

cheers

Ben A.

thanks @Ben A will post my findings in a few days, once the coaches have had a good run round.
cheers
Graham

Quote from: Ben A on October 02, 2023, 12:50:30 AMHello all,

As to the lights; with hindsight maybe operational tail lights on just one coach in each pack would've been preferable.  However, on the prototype the coaches are often switched around and since any vehicle could find itself at the rear of the train, all have tail lights.  So this is how we configured the models.

I can see that having the 'default' setting as 'lights off' could've been preferable but, again, our experience is that a surprising number barely look at the instructions and I can image social media being flooded with complaints that the lights don't work.  Some may not even have realised that the coaches have lights or what their lighting rod is for!

As ever, if anyone is having problems Simon, our customer services manager, is on the end of an email and is best placed to assist.

cheers

Ben A.

I understand that people don't read the instructions, although there have also been complaints about "no instructions" with some models when people have not fully explored the packaging to find them "hidden" under the model. As it is now with the MkV sleepers, we will be disconnecting the lighting anyway or being adept at aiming the wand a few times at a moving train to turn the tail lights off every time it starts off on DC.

I wonder if a "lights off at start up" configuration was ever an option electronically for N. Seems not to have been an issue with the Accurascale 00 gauge sets.

I always think we should be thankful for lighting at all in N gauge, thanks to the miniaturisation of LEDs. I really don't care if it is prototypical or not. I just like seeing lights of any sort on N gauge models.

Quote from: Bealman on October 02, 2023, 08:10:25 AMI always think we should be thankful for lighting at all in N gauge, thanks to the miniaturisation of LEDs. I really don't care if it is prototypical or not. I just like seeing lights of any sort on N gauge models.

And conversely I absolutely hate it, oversize lamps that are too bright, light that bleeds through buildings. Nope, not for me...

Quote from: Bealman on October 02, 2023, 08:10:25 AMI always think we should be thankful for lighting at all in N gauge, thanks to the miniaturisation of LEDs. I really don't care if it is prototypical or not. I just like seeing lights of any sort on N gauge models.

Really? "Put up and shut up"? If people don't raise frustrations they don't get sorted. I don't want to have to individually turn off 47 sets of lights (31 red, and 16 interior lights which highlight the fact there are no passengers!) every single time I start the train. Given the performance degredation I, like others, will probably remove them. Then I've paid for a feature I neither wanted (and I'll confess I never read was included, but wouldn't likely have influenced my buying choice) or will ever use.

It is unfortunate that these coaches have running issues, Revolution have broken ground with models we wouldn't have otherwise seen, for that I am thankful and still support them with new models where I can, they do seem more proactive on trying to correct problems and learn off mistakes, all input from modelers whether it be good or bad is a positive if they account for it when making the next model.

The Mk5s are beautiful models, most of us may have static models unless we run a short rake, with the issue being a running problem is there a possibility of the bogie being redesigned and released as a replacement part? I know that is extreme and requires designing, but if that's a long term option some of us may choose to hold onto the model instead of selling for a potential loss.

If it comes to that then people will be entitled to return them as not fit for purpose. I hope we're a way off that, mind! I know Simon is looking at solutions, so fingers crossed there's something long term.

Where I think it's a bit iffy is that there's obviously no explicit guarantee that a model loco can pull a representative train. A Dapol
66 can't lift 40 container flats. People accept this. Perhaps it'll just come to pass that the accepted limit for a 92 will be (say) seven mk5s. I'm sure that would leave a lot of disappointed people, and I'm sure it's not what Revolution want. Particularly with how they've been marketed and sold, where there's a very definite formation with dedicated haulage.

Fingers crossed, given what Ben said previously they'll discover what changed between the samples, where I presume a full rake worked, and the production models, and this'll get sorted. 

Although I would like my 2 TPE rakes ASAP, I'd much rather they were held back at the factory until this issue is resolved.

My Dapol CL68 can pull 3 coaches at something like 20mph but no faster!

Regards,

John P

Inside bearing bogies are always going to be a nightmare to run smoothly, especially in N.

Ben showed me the Mk5 bogie at Warley last year and I was impressed at how well it ran.

Is there a solution to getting a virtually drag-free Mk5 bogie with working pick ups? Everything would need to be engineered to the nth degree, which is always going to be a challenge with humans putting it together.

Perhaps a solution would be to have USB-rechargeable battery lighting instead.

I would forego lighting all day long, particularly when it compromises performance. That said, it appears to be a contributory factor, but certainly not the only problem, but yes, inside bearing bogies will always be hard. My 3D printed LTF-25s have markedly more drag than anything with pinpoints. I don't doubt for one moment that Ben and Mike foresaw an entire rake being manageable, so sure we'll get there. Then you can watch for how to scale down the JHAs!

OK, so I have now had my lowlander rake running for over 4 hrs, in various consists, at scale speeds between 60 and 90mph. In distance these coaches have run something like a scale 300 miles.

I still have to progress past 8 coaches consistantly on any train. Some coaches are free running straight out of the box, others after a bit of fettling as per the instructions on the Revolution site, and others which regardless of all work are still proving to be very "draggy".

The B2B has been checked on every axel of the draggy coaches, and all found to be between 7.4mm and 7.6mm, I also removed the contact bars on the bogies, but this did not appear to make much difference.

My layout is approx 3 scale miles per circuit. with one small rise which is approx 3% for about 0.5m.

With 8 coaches I can now run any of my 92's, the only sound equipped one has not had any additional weight added and does struggle slightly, the modified 92's handle the 8 coach rakes fine. I have even tried the Dapol 67010, which will pull 8 no problem, however the Dapol 87401 was ok on the flat but failed on the incline.

Of particular note the sitting coaches and the bar coaches were very free running out of the box. the issues appear to be on some of the sleeping coaches.

I did get up to 12 coaches behind a 60, but had a few uncoupling issues which I could not appear to resolve, so did not try any other traction. Will spend some more time with them on Thursday and see how much better they can get.

I did set up a Pendolino set and try a push test on coaches side by side, surprisingly the "draggy" mk5 coaches performed about the same as a Pendolino coach.

As someone else has said these are definitely cutting edge with regard to the technology for n. But hey if someone doesn't try we will be stuck with no progress in the hobby.

Overall I love the look of them, like the lights, even though they are a pain to turn off every time you start up a rake. As for the running qualities, well, I am sure Revolution will resolve this.

Next step is to replace the couplings with the schaffenberg ones in the pack and see if I can resolve the uncoupling so I can reliably test longer rakes.

Quote from: njee20 on October 02, 2023, 03:13:34 PM

Quote from: Bealman on October 02, 2023, 08:10:25 AMI always think we should be thankful for lighting at all in N gauge, thanks to the miniaturisation of LEDs. I really don't care if it is prototypical or not. I just like seeing lights of any sort on N gauge models.

Really? "Put up and shut up"? If people don't raise frustrations they don't get sorted. I don't want to have to individually turn off 47 sets of lights (31 red, and 16 interior lights which highlight the fact there are no passengers!) every single time I start the train. Given the performance degredation I, like others, will probably remove them. Then I've paid for a feature I neither wanted (and I'll confess I never read was included, but wouldn't likely have influenced my buying choice) or will ever use.

I'm sorry, but if anyone is remotely worried about turning off lights on carriages in N scale which will be running around at speed anyway and so will hardly be noticed - then that falls into my category of rivet counting. Sorry.

Rant over.

Quote from: Bealman on October 03, 2023, 08:09:52 AMI'm sorry, but if anyone is remotely worried about turning off lights on carriages in N scale which will be running around at speed anyway and so will hardly be noticed - then that falls into my category of rivet counting. Sorry.

Rant over.

I think you are choosing to misunderstand what is needed here. EVERY time the train starts from a standstill, every light comes on. With the train moving two sets of tail lights on all but one coach need turning off as a minimum and one set of internal lights if those are unwanted for that journey/time of day. That is every time the train starts and can only be done with the moving train.

 Imagine instead that you were required to recouple every vehicle in every train every time you had to run it, or stop and reverse it. At least you could couple up with the train stationary. But I suspect it would turn us all into "rivet counters".

Quote from: Bealman on October 03, 2023, 08:09:52 AM

Quote from: njee20 on October 02, 2023, 03:13:34 PM

Quote from: Bealman on October 02, 2023, 08:10:25 AMI always think we should be thankful for lighting at all in N gauge, thanks to the miniaturisation of LEDs. I really don't care if it is prototypical or not. I just like seeing lights of any sort on N gauge models.

Really? "Put up and shut up"? If people don't raise frustrations they don't get sorted. I don't want to have to individually turn off 47 sets of lights (31 red, and 16 interior lights which highlight the fact there are no passengers!) every single time I start the train. Given the performance degredation I, like others, will probably remove them. Then I've paid for a feature I neither wanted (and I'll confess I never read was included, but wouldn't likely have influenced my buying choice) or will ever use.

I'm sorry, but if anyone is remotely worried about turning off lights on carriages in N scale which will be running around at speed anyway and so will hardly be noticed - then that falls into my category of rivet counting. Sorry.

Rant over.

I think that is a rather simplistic and short sighted view, and one that does you no favours. 

Certainly not everyone operates their railway running vehicles "at speed"; some of us have trains arriving and departing, stopping at signals, etc., and running through our scenic sections at sensible and appropriate speeds.  As an example on one of my FY to Terminus layouts, trains never exceed a scale 30 mph.

So, whilst I am with Nick (njee20) with regards to lighting, particularly on transition locomotives, I can fully appreciate why many N gauge modellers appreciate lighting and why the on/off arrangement for said lighting on these MK5s is problematic.

Your comment is unkind, unwarranted and shows your lack of understanding of the issue.

Thank you for that. Certainly, as a mod, I have no intention of starting a slanging match. However, I am entitled to an opinion.

I have said quite a few times over the years that we are just big boys and girls playing with trains. How seriously people want to take the hobby is up to them, but I'm sorry, I don't see anything unkind about what I said.

I bow out.

Yes, do. You appear to have no skin in this game, and are purely posting to antagonise.

Have an opinion, of course, but no need to foist it on others, nor denigrate people for theirs.

Quote from: Graham on October 03, 2023, 07:39:13 AMOf particular note the sitting coaches and the bar coaches were very free running out of the box. the issues appear to be on some of the sleeping coaches.

I did get up to 12 coaches behind a 60, but had a few uncoupling issues which I could not appear to resolve, so did not try any other traction. Will spend some more time with them on Thursday and see how much better they can get.

I did set up a Pendolino set and try a push test on coaches side by side, surprisingly the "draggy" mk5 coaches performed about the same as a Pendolino coach.

As someone else has said these are definitely cutting edge with regard to the technology for n. But hey if someone doesn't try we will be stuck with no progress in the hobby.

Overall I love the look of them, like the lights, even though they are a pain to turn off every time you start up a rake. As for the running qualities, well, I am sure Revolution will resolve this.

Next step is to replace the couplings with the schaffenberg ones in the pack and see if I can resolve the uncoupling so I can reliably test longer rakes.

Interested to see how you find the Dellners (aren't they, rather than Scharferbergs?). It looks to me like the only bit which actually keeps them coupled is the small bar below the actual interface, which appears extremely small, and is distorted on some of mine. Given how heavy a full rake is, even when pulled by hand I can't see them being stiff enough. They look good though.

Also interesting observation about the different type of cosches, I'd not got that far.

I've all but given up on mine for now, they've had far too much of my time. I'll wait for a proper fix.

For anyone with overhead wires installed for the Class 92 to run under, slipping the wand between wire and coach roof may become an important skill to learn. I can't believe that was a scenario tested before the "all lights on at start up" configuration was chosen.

From what has been said here and elsewhere, Revolution saw no issues with the free-running of the Mk5s on their test samples. It remains to be seen if the problem's due to a change at the factory (like the Rapido Conflats) or down to the bogies not being put together properly.

How much of the problems are down to the electrical pick-up and how much is due to the internal bearings remains to be seen. Internal bearings are hard to do. Neither Farish or Dapols class 220 were particularly free running.


What might be worth further discussion given the problems with the lighting limitations on DC is whether as modellers it's something we want. Personally I don't what interior lighting and would either remove it or permanently switch it off. Dapol's approach of light bars available as a separate item is probably the best solution for most.

I can see several different approaches, the question is are there any others and which would we as modellers prefer?

A. factory fitted lights with magnetic wands - current Revolution and Rapido approach but need turning off again every time power is reapplied on DC.

B. Push the boundary further - fit the magnet controlled lights but power from a battery so they don't turn off when track power is removed. Recharging from the track would be a bonus.

C. Factory fitted lights with switches to turn lights on and off, either needs roof removing or vehicle lifting from track to access switches that might compromise roof or underframe detail.

D. Don't fit lighting - add the pick-ups but sell us light bars as optional extras

E. Don't fit lighting, don't fit pick-ups.


SB

To pick up on earlier comments, I would happily do without lighting.  But that is me.  I have no issues with it being there for those who want it, provided I can turn it off.  For my deerstalker express I have removed the pick ups from the bogies when I fettled the burrs away.  But they are in a little bag in the box, so if I sold them I could replace them.

Quote from: Steven B on October 03, 2023, 09:29:43 AMI can see several different approaches, the question is are there any others and which would we as modellers prefer?

A. factory fitted lights with magnetic wands - current Revolution and Rapido approach but need turning off again every time power is reapplied on DC.

B. Push the boundary further - fit the magnet controlled lights but power from a battery so they don't turn off when track power is removed. Recharging from the track would be a bonus.

C. Factory fitted lights with switches to turn lights on and off, either needs roof removing or vehicle lifting from track to access switches that might compromise roof or underframe detail.

D. Don't fit lighting - add the pick-ups but sell us light bars as optional extras

E. Don't fit lighting, don't fit pick-ups.


SB

I think that's a pertinent question and probably extremely difficult to reach a consensus.  I'm not particularly interested in lighting and others clearly feel the same, but I can see where it enhances some modellers experiences.  I can't help thinking option D would allow for the best of both worlds.

 

Definitely D for me. I'd happily say E, but I appreciate some like it.

In fact I'd say I was DECBA in that order.

Quote from: Steven B on October 03, 2023, 09:29:43 AMFrom what has been said here and elsewhere, Revolution saw no issues with the free-running of the Mk5s on their test samples. It remains to be seen if the problem's due to a change at the factory (like the Rapido Conflats) or down to the bogies not being put together properly.

How much of the problems are down to the electrical pick-up and how much is due to the internal bearings remains to be seen. Internal bearings are hard to do. Neither Farish or Dapols class 220 were particularly free running.


What might be worth further discussion given the problems with the lighting limitations on DC is whether as modellers it's something we want. Personally I don't what interior lighting and would either remove it or permanently switch it off. Dapol's approach of light bars available as a separate item is probably the best solution for most.

I can see several different approaches, the question is are there any others and which would we as modellers prefer?

A. factory fitted lights with magnetic wands - current Revolution and Rapido approach but need turning off again every time power is reapplied on DC.

B. Push the boundary further - fit the magnet controlled lights but power from a battery so they don't turn off when track power is removed. Recharging from the track would be a bonus.

C. Factory fitted lights with switches to turn lights on and off, either needs roof removing or vehicle lifting from track to access switches that might compromise roof or underframe detail.

D. Don't fit lighting - add the pick-ups but sell us light bars as optional extras

E. Don't fit lighting, don't fit pick-ups.


SB

I will firstly admit to having no skin in the game as far as these particular coaches are concerned and on the plus side I do admire the level of detail and finish shown on the pictures I have seen.

In terms of the options above, as a preference I am firmly in the "E" category personally, as I see it most of us run our trains in conditions where we want to see them, and this involves the whole layout being lit in some way to represent daylight, so the need for lights in coaches will in most cases be limited. I do not want to pay extra for all the paraphernalia involved in lighting coaches for something I will not use. In this respect for me Farish have it right, producing quality models without such gimmicks.

The above is just my opinion and I accept there will nonetheless be those who do want them, and so I would regard option "D" as an acceptable compromise so long as in doing so the running quality of models were not negatively impacted. This appears easy enough to achieve with outside bearings using split insulated pinpoint axles, but I am far from convinced it can achieved with inside bearings, where the bearing surface has to be sufficiently large to afford reliable current transfer. Inevitably even the most perfect bearing surface if it is large will create more friction, and when the surface (and/or other factors) are less than perfect (as they will be in the world of mass production inevitably) people will get the results being witnessed with these Mk5 coaches, where remarkably some are reporting even the four coach Fort William set is a struggle for some otherwise quite competent locos.

On the not so positive side I have a couple of other observations with regard to this specific matter. Firstly, I am somewhat surprised from seeing posts on forums that people appear to be encouraged to try and fix the coaches with problems themselves rather than the default being to return them (as is of course their right under consumer law if an item isn't fit for purpose). Secondly, if the problem is as widespread as it appears would it not be sensible to at least have a pause on shipping further coaches out to customers/retailers until remaining models have been checked and confirmed to be OK (or in the worst case not)? I do appreciate people will have been looking forward to receiving their coaches but clearly from what we are seeing already, keen anticipation has in many cases turned into disappointment and surely knowing that the "pause" button needs to be hit?

I do appreciate that if there wasn't a perceived demand for these kind of features they wouldn't be attempted, and the challenges both technical and logistical, of producing such complex models to a certain price-point should not be underestimated. However against that I do think the inherent risk of pushing boundaries too far is what is being seen here, and I would reflect that without the lighting feature the coaches would still very likely have been extremely well received but minus the headaches and subsequent disappointment.

Roy

I would like to suggest an extra item above, which I will refer to as C2. As for C, but with DIP switches for DC, so they are either on or off, with the wand as optional. In addition, a Next18 decoder socket with blanking plate for DCC control of all lighting effects.

I suspect too, that bearing surfaces would need to be hard wearing and this may be conducive to electrical connections.

Decoder sockets in coaches is 100% a step too far IMO. If people really want that they can wire them in.

IMO, if people want that, they can ask for sockets to be included in the specification too, which is the whole point in not having to wire them in, for the same reason sockets have become standard in locos and multiple units.

To be fair to Kato their approach is probably quite elegant there. Drop in decoders for those who want them.

Also interesting insofar as they do it backward - lights are fitted but the circuitry isn't.

My Fort William set found its way to Germany.
The coaches look very good.
I also found that the drag is different on different types of coaches. My CLUB was free running, SEAT was not too bad. SLED and SLEP, however, would barely move. I removed the wheelsets and clipped them back in, which helped (although they are not as free-running as other coaches). My 92 is quite happy with that (admittedly rather short) train.

Concerning lights, I have to say that I rather like lit coaches. A passenger train with interior lighting trundling through the landscape at dusk is a sight I very much enjoy.
That being said, it is nothing I absolutely have to have in a coach.
Of the options given above, I would probably choose D, then C.

(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/136/2874-031023165113-136069708.jpeg)

Best,
Michael

Yes, Kato have an interesting design and they don't have to be custom wired, at least the more recent designs.

Quote from: Brian-1c on October 03, 2023, 05:09:42 PMYes, Kato have an interesting design and they don't have to be custom wired, at least the more recent designs.

I can fit lights to a full 2+8 double deck Kato TGV in less than half an hour. Insert two contacts to connect to the bogie and to these clip in the circuit board which includes the LED. The light diffuser is already on board. Small capacitor on the circuit board means operation is flicker free and Kato suggest that lights can remain on during a station stop by careful use of the trainset controller not turned down fully to 0 volts. I must confess that I use a Hong Kong look-alike circuit board at about one quarter of the Kato price but with the same functionality.

Quote from: woodbury22uk on October 03, 2023, 05:19:02 PM

Quote from: Brian-1c on October 03, 2023, 05:09:42 PMYes, Kato have an interesting design and they don't have to be custom wired, at least the more recent designs.

I can fit lights to a full 2+8 double deck Kato TGV in less than half an hour. Insert two contacts to connect to the bogie and to these clip in the circuit board which includes the LED. The light diffuser is already on board. Small capacitor on the circuit board means operation is flicker free and Kato suggest that lights can remain on during a station stop by careful use of the trainset controller not turned down fully to 0 volts. I must confess that I use a Hong Kong look-alike circuit board at about one quarter of the Kato price but with the same functionality.

Any chance of a link to these HK controllers?

Quote from: Railwaygun on October 03, 2023, 05:50:04 PM

Quote from: woodbury22uk on October 03, 2023, 05:19:02 PM

Quote from: Brian-1c on October 03, 2023, 05:09:42 PMYes, Kato have an interesting design and they don't have to be custom wired, at least the more recent designs.

I can fit lights to a full 2+8 double deck Kato TGV in less than half an hour. Insert two contacts to connect to the bogie and to these clip in the circuit board which includes the LED. The light diffuser is already on board. Small capacitor on the circuit board means operation is flicker free and Kato suggest that lights can remain on during a station stop by careful use of the trainset controller not turned down fully to 0 volts. I must confess that I use a Hong Kong look-alike circuit board at about one quarter of the Kato price but with the same functionality.

Any chance of a link to these HK controllers?

There is a choice of Kato compatible lighting systems here:-

https://www.hktilc.com/#!

This is the one I use in TGV Duplex and UK Class 800, at about £3 each. Choice of warmth of light. About half the price of Kato now.


https://www.hktilc.com/product/X-Type-%E6%81%92%E5%85%89%E6%8A%97%E9%96%83%E5%9E%8BLED%E5%AE%A4%E5%85%A7%E7%87%88-X-Type-Anti-flaching-LED-Light-for-kato-2pc-TRTixtBscvxjNtqK

To answer @njee20 's question about the Dellner couplings.
I found that with 5 coaches on they would uncouple on the tightest curve on my layout, approx 20" !
I swapped the Dellners in and the uncoupling stopped!

However fitting the Dellners required a bit of patience and some tweezers, and there is a click when they couple together.

Regards,

John P

Quote from: jpendle on October 03, 2023, 06:29:29 PMTo answer @njee20 's question about the Dellner couplings.
I found that with 5 coaches on they would uncouple on the tightest curve on my layout, approx 20" !
I swapped the Dellners in and the uncoupling stopped!

However fitting the Dellners required a bit of patience and some tweezers, and there is a click when they couple together.

Regards,

John P

thanks for that John, will have a go tomorrow, also have some spare Hunt couplings which I plan on trying.

Quote from: Roy L S on October 03, 2023, 11:44:31 AM

Quote from: Steven B on October 03, 2023, 09:29:43 AMFrom what has been said here and elsewhere, Revolution saw no issues with the free-running of the Mk5s on their test samples. It remains to be seen if the problem's due to a change at the factory (like the Rapido Conflats) or down to the bogies not being put together properly.

How much of the problems are down to the electrical pick-up and how much is due to the internal bearings remains to be seen. Internal bearings are hard to do. Neither Farish or Dapols class 220 were particularly free running.


What might be worth further discussion given the problems with the lighting limitations on DC is whether as modellers it's something we want. Personally I don't what interior lighting and would either remove it or permanently switch it off. Dapol's approach of light bars available as a separate item is probably the best solution for most.

I can see several different approaches, the question is are there any others and which would we as modellers prefer?

A. factory fitted lights with magnetic wands - current Revolution and Rapido approach but need turning off again every time power is reapplied on DC.

B. Push the boundary further - fit the magnet controlled lights but power from a battery so they don't turn off when track power is removed. Recharging from the track would be a bonus.

C. Factory fitted lights with switches to turn lights on and off, either needs roof removing or vehicle lifting from track to access switches that might compromise roof or underframe detail.

D. Don't fit lighting - add the pick-ups but sell us light bars as optional extras

E. Don't fit lighting, don't fit pick-ups.


SB

I will firstly admit to having no skin in the game as far as these particular coaches are concerned and on the plus side I do admire the level of detail and finish shown on the pictures I have seen.

In terms of the options above, as a preference I am firmly in the "E" category personally, as I see it most of us run our trains in conditions where we want to see them, and this involves the whole layout being lit in some way to represent daylight, so the need for lights in coaches will in most cases be limited. I do not want to pay extra for all the paraphernalia involved in lighting coaches for something I will not use. In this respect for me Farish have it right, producing quality models without such gimmicks.

The above is just my opinion and I accept there will nonetheless be those who do want them, and so I would regard option "D" as an acceptable compromise so long as in doing so the running quality of models were not negatively impacted. This appears easy enough to achieve with outside bearings using split insulated pinpoint axles, but I am far from convinced it can achieved with inside bearings, where the bearing surface has to be sufficiently large to afford reliable current transfer. Inevitably even the most perfect bearing surface if it is large will create more friction, and when the surface (and/or other factors) are less than perfect (as they will be in the world of mass production inevitably) people will get the results being witnessed with these Mk5 coaches, where remarkably some are reporting even the four coach Fort William set is a struggle for some otherwise quite competent locos.

On the not so positive side I have a couple of other observations with regard to this specific matter. Firstly, I am somewhat surprised from seeing posts on forums that people appear to be encouraged to try and fix the coaches with problems themselves rather than the default being to return them (as is of course their right under consumer law if an item isn't fit for purpose). Secondly, if the problem is as widespread as it appears would it not be sensible to at least have a pause on shipping further coaches out to customers/retailers until remaining models have been checked and confirmed to be OK (or in the worst case not)? I do appreciate people will have been looking forward to receiving their coaches but clearly from what we are seeing already, keen anticipation has in many cases turned into disappointment and surely knowing that the "pause" button needs to be hit?

I do appreciate that if there wasn't a perceived demand for these kind of features they wouldn't be attempted, and the challenges both technical and logistical, of producing such complex models to a certain price-point should not be underestimated. However against that I do think the inherent risk of pushing boundaries too far is what is being seen here, and I would reflect that without the lighting feature the coaches would still very likely have been extremely well received but minus the headaches and subsequent disappointment.

Roy

I agree with you entirely, Roy. This is my 3rd purchase from Revolution and the 3rd negative experience.  My first was with a DB Class 92 which suffered manufacturing defects on the electronics out of the box, the second was draggy biomass wagons that have since much improved (although no doubt added needless strain to the loco) and now this quite significant issue.
I purchased the two Inverness packs, paying the £160.83 deposit & shipping in Nov 2021, almost 2 years later the items arrive and of 8 carriages 1 ran well out of the box.  To say that I was not best pleased, after paying a further €107 for import dues, that a total spend of €417 results in this to then be told by Revolution 'refer to our MK5 page for solutions' adds considerable insult to financial injury.
It is not by any imaginable reason acceptable to ask modellers, many of whom no doubt will have purchased a 16 carriage rake, to 'have a go and put our mistake right for us'. It highlights a number of not insignificant shortcomings but especially in the proving out of design through manufacturability and the extent of quality controls throughout the entire process (I have spent enough time in China brining complex projects to launch to understand the challenges).

The response from Revolution that "our samples ran well" is an example of manufacturing naivety in the extreme - do they seriously think that the manufacturer would send them unacceptable final samples?  Did they pull sets at random from the delivery and inspect and check run-ability? When made aware (very early) by many customers that these carriages were "a bit of a drag" (seriously, this is funny?) other than pop up a webpage with things that 'might' help without having identified actual root cause(s) but continue to despatch orders is frankly not the hallmark of a Quality supplier.

No, this experience is the last straw for me as regards Revolution.  I had a Caledonian liveried 92 (the 92's I understand also suffer from motor burn-out) on the way to me but I stopped it at Customs and it has been returned to them, both packs of MK5's will be winging their way back to them when I return home from business.

I, like many others, will have welcomed a new manufacturer to the market, stunning reproductions at a reasonable price, but this experience is 3 from 3 too many so it's back to Kato, Dapol and Farish - the latter 2 not hassle-free but noticeably far more reliable and customer centric.

I have no interest in these models but have a suggestion to make which may/may not be viable as I could be talking out of my rear.
When Rapido first introduced their 'Easy Peasy' light bars with the 'magic wand' (presumably the same is used in their class 28 Co-Bo), the late Scotsoft (John) suggested maybe fixing the magnet above the entrances and exits from fiddle yards to turn lighting on/off.
Just chucking this out there, but it could be tosh

It is a valid suggestion @Newportnobby but such a set-up would turn off all the lights. There are three wand-activated switches along the length of the roof which control tail lights end 1, saloon lights, tail lights end 2. So the effect of an overhead magnet would be to turn them all off instead of leaving all saloon lights and the tail lights on the final car on. If you are turning off all the lights you may as well disconnect them anyway which is where I am going. With the layout having a main station with overall roof and overhead wires (eventually), I do not have the dexterity to turn off selected lights on a moving train in the narrow gap between the car roofs and the overhead wire every time power is applied to the track.

Just to further deepen the hole I may have dug, it's reported higher in the thread that as soon as the train is on the move all the lights come on. Would a magnet above the exit of the fiddle yard then turn them all off, leaving you to just use a wand to turn on the tail lamp of the last coach. It won't suit everyone, obviously, but might make life easier for some

Good solution @Newportnobby . Exactly the "all off" initial configuration which would have made the stock usable without extra kit. Still not ideal with overhead wires, of course, because the magnet needs to very close to roof level so would take out any passing pantograph.

I am still unclear as to whether RevolutioN was offered an "all lights off" start up option but rejected it. I guess we will never know.

Quote from: Highlander 66 on October 04, 2023, 10:37:06 AM

Quote from: Roy L S on October 03, 2023, 11:44:31 AM

Quote from: Steven B on October 03, 2023, 09:29:43 AMFrom what has been said here and elsewhere, Revolution saw no issues with the free-running of the Mk5s on their test samples. It remains to be seen if the problem's due to a change at the factory (like the Rapido Conflats) or down to the bogies not being put together properly.

How much of the problems are down to the electrical pick-up and how much is due to the internal bearings remains to be seen. Internal bearings are hard to do. Neither Farish or Dapols class 220 were particularly free running.


What might be worth further discussion given the problems with the lighting limitations on DC is whether as modellers it's something we want. Personally I don't what interior lighting and would either remove it or permanently switch it off. Dapol's approach of light bars available as a separate item is probably the best solution for most.

I can see several different approaches, the question is are there any others and which would we as modellers prefer?

A. factory fitted lights with magnetic wands - current Revolution and Rapido approach but need turning off again every time power is reapplied on DC.

B. Push the boundary further - fit the magnet controlled lights but power from a battery so they don't turn off when track power is removed. Recharging from the track would be a bonus.

C. Factory fitted lights with switches to turn lights on and off, either needs roof removing or vehicle lifting from track to access switches that might compromise roof or underframe detail.

D. Don't fit lighting - add the pick-ups but sell us light bars as optional extras

E. Don't fit lighting, don't fit pick-ups.


SB

I will firstly admit to having no skin in the game as far as these particular coaches are concerned and on the plus side I do admire the level of detail and finish shown on the pictures I have seen.

In terms of the options above, as a preference I am firmly in the "E" category personally, as I see it most of us run our trains in conditions where we want to see them, and this involves the whole layout being lit in some way to represent daylight, so the need for lights in coaches will in most cases be limited. I do not want to pay extra for all the paraphernalia involved in lighting coaches for something I will not use. In this respect for me Farish have it right, producing quality models without such gimmicks.

The above is just my opinion and I accept there will nonetheless be those who do want them, and so I would regard option "D" as an acceptable compromise so long as in doing so the running quality of models were not negatively impacted. This appears easy enough to achieve with outside bearings using split insulated pinpoint axles, but I am far from convinced it can achieved with inside bearings, where the bearing surface has to be sufficiently large to afford reliable current transfer. Inevitably even the most perfect bearing surface if it is large will create more friction, and when the surface (and/or other factors) are less than perfect (as they will be in the world of mass production inevitably) people will get the results being witnessed with these Mk5 coaches, where remarkably some are reporting even the four coach Fort William set is a struggle for some otherwise quite competent locos.

On the not so positive side I have a couple of other observations with regard to this specific matter. Firstly, I am somewhat surprised from seeing posts on forums that people appear to be encouraged to try and fix the coaches with problems themselves rather than the default being to return them (as is of course their right under consumer law if an item isn't fit for purpose). Secondly, if the problem is as widespread as it appears would it not be sensible to at least have a pause on shipping further coaches out to customers/retailers until remaining models have been checked and confirmed to be OK (or in the worst case not)? I do appreciate people will have been looking forward to receiving their coaches but clearly from what we are seeing already, keen anticipation has in many cases turned into disappointment and surely knowing that the "pause" button needs to be hit?

I do appreciate that if there wasn't a perceived demand for these kind of features they wouldn't be attempted, and the challenges both technical and logistical, of producing such complex models to a certain price-point should not be underestimated. However against that I do think the inherent risk of pushing boundaries too far is what is being seen here, and I would reflect that without the lighting feature the coaches would still very likely have been extremely well received but minus the headaches and subsequent disappointment.

Roy

I agree with you entirely, Roy. This is my 3rd purchase from Revolution and the 3rd negative experience.  My first was with a DB Class 92 which suffered manufacturing defects on the electronics out of the box, the second was draggy biomass wagons that have since much improved (although no doubt added needless strain to the loco) and now this quite significant issue.
I purchased the two Inverness packs, paying the £160.83 deposit & shipping in Nov 2021, almost 2 years later the items arrive and of 8 carriages 1 ran well out of the box.  To say that I was not best pleased, after paying a further €107 for import dues, that a total spend of €417 results in this to then be told by Revolution 'refer to our MK5 page for solutions' adds considerable insult to financial injury.
It is not by any imaginable reason acceptable to ask modellers, many of whom no doubt will have purchased a 16 carriage rake, to 'have a go and put our mistake right for us'. It highlights a number of not insignificant shortcomings but especially in the proving out of design through manufacturability and the extent of quality controls throughout the entire process (I have spent enough time in China brining complex projects to launch to understand the challenges).

The response from Revolution that "our samples ran well" is an example of manufacturing naivety in the extreme - do they seriously think that the manufacturer would send them unacceptable final samples?  Did they pull sets at random from the delivery and inspect and check run-ability? When made aware (very early) by many customers that these carriages were "a bit of a drag" (seriously, this is funny?) other than pop up a webpage with things that 'might' help without having identified actual root cause(s) but continue to despatch orders is frankly not the hallmark of a Quality supplier.

No, this experience is the last straw for me as regards Revolution.  I had a Caledonian liveried 92 (the 92's I understand also suffer from motor burn-out) on the way to me but I stopped it at Customs and it has been returned to them, both packs of MK5's will be winging their way back to them when I return home from business.

I, like many others, will have welcomed a new manufacturer to the market, stunning reproductions at a reasonable price, but this experience is 3 from 3 too many so it's back to Kato, Dapol and Farish - the latter 2 not hassle-free but noticeably far more reliable and customer centric.

Obviously we are all entitled to our own thoughts, conclusions and future actions but I feel this is a little unfair on Revolution

I have the Fort William set, one smooth runner (the club car-is there a pattern here?) Others with significant drag. Ordered and paid whenever orders were opened. Am I frustrated and disappointed, yes. It seems pretty clear they are too but what have they done?

Recognised there is an issue, communicated that-far from universal amongst manufacturers. Made it clear they are investigating the how why and how to resolve thoroughly and that those investigations are ongoing but, in the meantime they have shared potential fixes of their own and those from others whilst making it clear that customers can get in touch with their after sales department if not comfortable taking any or all of these steps themselves

From my own experience and from their communications here and elsewhere I see nothing to believe they are anything other than fully open and honest in their comms so, faced with a situation they hadn't expected, what haven't they done that they could have so far?  Nothing in my opinion but to go back to where I started, for each of us to form our own view and future actions.

I refer only to the running quality, luckily for me as a DCCuser I haven't experienced the lighting issue but do understand the frustrations of others on that one

Rob

As you say Rob, each person is entitled to their own thoughts and opinions, and I for one am not for a second questioning anybody's honesty.

However, I would firstly observe that if it were any other manufacturer they would be royally slaughtered (and rightly so) for suggesting buyers try to fix the problems themselves, witness for just one example the "sloping" Dapol M7 where a fix was suggested and precisely this happened. I am not sure why an exception should be made for any manufacturer and as RevolutioN is no longer a "philanthropic" undertaking but a business on a commercial footing with paid employees like any other, this applies, and indeed I am sure the RevolutioN team wouldn't expect it to be otherwise.

Of course the issue was unforeseen and unwelcome for everyone involved and if, on top of the production samples from the manufacturer being OK, by way of thoroughness sets from the shipment were also checked at random (we don't know this happened but let's assume) then agreed, there wouldn't be any more that could have been done until the problem started to become apparent when people started receiving their sets.

However, the problem having been identified and acknowledged, one thing that in my view not only could but should have been done would be to immediately pause sending further shipments out, until it had been rectified in all impacted models or if not possible the batch returned to China with an apology to purchasers. The "pause" may indeed have already happened in this case, but I appreciate that is an internal matter for RevolutioN and one I have no doubt they will communicate if or when they feel appropriate to do so.

I have no doubts lessons have been learned which will be applied to future releases, and hopefully the TPE sets which show as still in production will be rigorously checked before despatch.

Hopefully when the K Pullmans are designed consideration will be given to points raised in this thread, and for those like me, a DCC user who have no interest in lighting in coaches, a better compromise such as optional "light bars" can be factored in.

Roy

The mk5s are evidently a 'perfect storm' of inside bearings, lighting pickups and a lot of people wanting to run long (prototypical) trains.

I've seen comment from Revolution on FB that it's a 'small number' that are affected. I must admit I find that a bit insulting. I'm not aware of anyone who has gone 'wow these run well'. A loco (any loco) not being able to pull 4 is dismal. I'm a big fan of what Revolution are doing, but I do think facing into this would be better than denying it is endemic.

I've started removing the weights from mine. They're substantial! They're conductive, so it does mean that you only get lighting pickups from one bogie (if you want to retain them at all). It's not for the faint hearted either, the coupling 'wires' can spring off, and the unframe details are easily detached (albeit easily glued on). A Farish 37 will now manage 14 (I've taken weights out of 8 so far!), albeit working hard. I can't see that 16 with a single loco will ever be doable, but perhaps a pair of 92s is what it needs to be.

Interesting. These are notably heavy in hand, I didn't dare venture to consider looking inside for fear of damaging and giving Revolution excuse to refuse a refund. Given that I don't run trains in a darkened room I would care less if I lost lightning, save the last vehicle in the rake. Is it an onerous task?

Not especially. At least if the couplings don't ping off into the ether, the spring wire is minuscule.  I'll confess to having lost one, so one coupling no longer self centres, but I'll sort that. You have to remove the body, which is the usual clipped affair. Then you have to remove the interior, which is also clipped to the underframe, but does have two wires attaching the PCB to the contacts. Then there are two weights held in by 4 screws. The coaches still feel pretty heavy without them, and seem to run fine. I'll do all of mine and see what difference it makes. Happy to be the guinea pig  ;D

Quote from: njee20 on October 04, 2023, 11:38:06 PMThe mk5s are evidently a 'perfect storm' of inside bearings, lighting pickups and a lot of people wanting to run long (prototypical) trains.

I've seen comment from Revolution on FB that it's a 'small number' that are affected. I must admit I find that a bit insulting. I'm not aware of anyone who has gone 'wow these run well'. A loco (any loco) not being able to pull 4 is dismal. I'm a big fan of what Revolution are doing, but I do think facing into this would be better than denying it is endemic.

I've started removing the weights from mine. They're substantial! They're conductive, so it does mean that you only get lighting pickups from one bogie (if you want to retain them at all). It's not for the faint hearted either, the coupling 'wires' can spring off, and the unframe details are easily detached (albeit easily glued on). A Farish 37 will now manage 14 (I've taken weights out of 8 so far!), albeit working hard. I can't see that 16 with a single loco will ever be doable, but perhaps a pair of 92s is what it needs to be.

Interesting to note the use of substantial weights in these coaches, I am surprised that the lesson learned from the impact of heavy weights on haulage hasn't been learned from the first run of Class B tankers. To me it is just inevitable that substantial weight pushing down, especially on the large bearing surfaces in these coaches would always be likely to induce a lot more friction and therefore drag and @njee20  it really shouldn't have been necessary for you to substantially dismantle and modify your brand new coaches to be able to run close to a prototypical rake.

It does beg the question as to whether tests were undertaken using an entire train of 16 coaches being hauled by a cross section of locos rather than just individual coaches being tested alone for free-running? Could be all this was done and samples passed fine, but from what I am reading it seems pretty much universal that locos normally considered quite capable of decent haulage are struggling to move even eight of these coaches and then only with great effort and strain on motor/geartrain - Class B scenario all over again in some ways.

Sadly, none of this will pass without some negative reputational impact sticking, but much will depend on how RevolutioN respond and how quickly. To take a similar recent example, the 00 Gauge Rapido 15xx tank loco seems to have seen more than it's fair share of QC issuses, but what I find refreshing is that from the get go Rapido have held their hands up and admitted it wasn't acceptable - no playing it down or hiding from it. Then, rather than suggesting how people might try to fix the problem, they have actively discouraged it, instead saying that regardless of whether shop purchased or direct sale it should be returned to them for repair/replacement. I would reflect that they too are only a small company with limited resources/manpower but the steps they have taken will very likely mitigate any reputational damage significantly and give people confidence to continue buying their products.

Roy

Quote from: woodbury22uk on October 04, 2023, 11:51:30 AMI am still unclear as to whether RevolutioN was offered an "all lights off" start up option but rejected it. I guess we will never know.

Ben's metioned (here or RMWeb, I'm not sure) that having the magnets turn on the lights was considered but rejected because they'd get lots of support calls/emails claiming the "lights aren't working", when the reality is they wouldn't have been triggered correctly.

Accurascale have used the same magnetic switches on their OO Gauge versions - it'll be interesting to dig through the thread on RMWeb and see if they've have similar grumbles.

Hopefully Revolution will take on board the feedback they've had when they develop the lighting for the K-type Pullmans.

SB

Quote from: Steven B on October 05, 2023, 09:20:31 AM

Quote from: woodbury22uk on October 04, 2023, 11:51:30 AMI am still unclear as to whether RevolutioN was offered an "all lights off" start up option but rejected it. I guess we will never know.

Ben's metioned (here or RMWeb, I'm not sure) that having the magnets turn on the lights was considered but rejected because they'd get lots of support calls/emails claiming the "lights aren't working", when the reality is they wouldn't have been triggered correctly.

Accurascale have used the same magnetic switches on their OO Gauge versions - it'll be interesting to dig through the thread on RMWeb and see if they've have similar grumbles.

Hopefully Revolution will take on board the feedback they've had when they develop the lighting for the K-type Pullmans.

SB

I did trawl through the RMWeb thread and it appears that the Accurascale sleepers are configured with all lights off at start up. I accept the reason that Revolution opted for all lights on to save the work of pointing people towards the instructions, but in retrospect it seems to be a decision that inconveniences every user instead of Revolution. Even on DCC the train has to be set up at the beginning of operations so turning off any unwanted tail lights as a minimum which in my case with an overall station roof and eventually OHLE would still be an inconvenience. It really is the tail lights which are the deal breaker and hopefully that will not be an issue with other hauled stock as older stock carried externally hung tail lamps, with the exception of the Mk3 sleepers, or were integral push-pull sets.

If memory serves me correctly @Steven B  @woodbury22uk these units have been manufactured by, or in association with, Accurascale for Revolution which may go some way to explaining some decisions.

I made that comment on Facebook and Stephen McCarron (MD of Accurascale) was quick to say they didn't make them. I'm sure at the very least they had a (large) hand in design though - they're very similar to the OO gauge ones.

Quote from: Roy L S on October 05, 2023, 09:18:31 AMInteresting to note the use of substantial weights in these coaches, I am surprised that the lesson learned from the impact of heavy weights on haulage hasn't been learned from the first run of Class B tankers. To me it is just inevitable that substantial weight pushing down, especially on the large bearing surfaces in these coaches would always be likely to induce a lot more friction and therefore drag and @njee20  it really shouldn't have been necessary for you to substantially dismantle and modify your brand new coaches to be able to run close to a prototypical rake.

Not just the Class Bs - the TEAs, HOAs and IZAs were all compromised by weight and drag. I recall for the early ones it was weight being to NMRA standards, which our locos don't adopt, so it causes problems.

Know there's a lot of chat on these but my experience, I got 2x4 of these, as they were packed the top and bottom of each one roll lovely the two middles quite draggy, so 4 superb 4 draggy. Out the boxes lined all 8 together as is and the revolution sleeper class 92 again as is out the box on dcc pulls all 8 just fine. Remove the loco and try and pull all 8 by hand yeah they feel quite heavy load to pull round. So whilst they are a big heavy/draggy personally I wouldn't call my set a disaster as some seem to say they are. I'm sure there may be some worse and a lot better, law of averages. But I will give revolution 10/10 for sorting these issues if you give them the chance and be a little patient. I dread to think what I've spent with them, well into 5 figures, yes most fantastic yes a few problems but they have all been sorted, I would put give the same feedback to the Dapol and farish box shifting manufacturers.

Quote from: Spanners70 on October 05, 2023, 01:54:47 PMKnow there's a lot of chat on these but my experience, I got 2x4 of these, as they were packed the top and bottom of each one roll lovely the two middles quite draggy, so 4 superb 4 draggy. Out the boxes lined all 8 together as is and the revolution sleeper class 92 again as is out the box on dcc pulls all 8 just fine. Remove the loco and try and pull all 8 by hand yeah they feel quite heavy load to pull round. So whilst they are a big heavy/draggy personally I wouldn't call my set a disaster as some seem to say they are. I'm sure there may be some worse and a lot better, law of averages. But I will give revolution 10/10 for sorting these issues if you give them the chance and be a little patient. I dread to think what I've spent with them, well into 5 figures, yes most fantastic yes a few problems but they have all been sorted, I would put give the same feedback to the Dapol and farish box shifting manufacturers.

The point that is being made is that they shouldn't be that "draggy" and your locos shouldn't have to work that hard to pull them, but if you are happy with them, then quite honestly that is all that really matters.

From personal experience I can't give any manufacturer 10/10 and this does extend to RevolutioN as no non-intrusive solution was ever really provided for the Class B tanks and I could never run all of my original 12 in a single train as purchased due to the weight, oscillation between wagons and break-aways. The solution in the end (and risky due to their delicate nature) was to open them up myself and remove the weights. To be fair the second batch by comparison (and Class As too for that matter) are excellent so lessons were applied.

Then there is the Sturgeons (I have six) that in my experience struggle to stay coupled, I have lost count of the times I have set an 08 off slowly pulling them round the layout, look round a few minutes later to find half the train being pushed! They are exquisite models detail and finish wise but I now very rarely run them due to this issue.

So, I would say receptive and keen to resolve problems, absolutely yes, but 100% successful and therefore 10/10 no, sorry not from me :hmmm:

In terms of any manufacturers though, our views are very often prejudiced by our own personal experiences. Personally I have had very few problems with Farish products, I find their models by far the best in terms of quality and reliability, but I am aware that others have different experiences and therefore views.

Roy

Hello all,

Rest assured that we are working hard to assess and sort the problems some are having.

A week long national holiday in China has only just ended and this has necessarily impacted our discussions with the factory.

No one is seeking to diminish the issue.  It is clear some of the bogies on these coaches have wheelsets that drag.  We understand the frustration of those with such coaches and we are keen to help.


EDIT: When I first wrote this post I added that, for context, we had now sent out thousands of coaches to hundreds of customers and had received barely a dozen emails to our support line.  I deleted the remark when I read back and saw that such comments make those with difficulties think we are being complacent, when we aren't.

However I have reinstated it for the sake of jpendle's sanity.  He isn't losing it!!


cheers

Ben A.

Have some posts been deleted?

I could have sworn that I saw a post from @Ben A  saying that despite all the comments on here there have been relatively few emails to the Rev's support line about the issue.

I must confess that as a complainer I hadn't emailed Revs directly, but now I have.

Regards,

John P

The one immediately preceding yours is from Ben...? Doesn't mention complaints though.

Quote from: njee20 on October 05, 2023, 06:54:49 PMThe one immediately preceding yours is from Ben...? Doesn't mention complaints though.

Exactly!

Maybe I was hallucinating  :laugh3:

John P

Quote from: jpendle on October 05, 2023, 06:46:23 PMHave some posts been deleted?

I could have sworn that I saw a post from @Ben A  saying that despite all the comments on here there have been relatively few emails to the Rev's support line about the issue.

I must confess that as a complainer I hadn't emailed Revs directly, but now I have.

Regards,

John P

I don't recall seeing anything to that effect on this particular thread and I have been following it for some days  :hmmm:

Quote from: jpendle on October 05, 2023, 06:46:23 PMHave some posts been deleted?

I could have sworn that I saw a post from @Ben A  saying that despite all the comments on here there have been relatively few emails to the Rev's support line about the issue.

I must confess that as a complainer I hadn't emailed Revs directly, but now I have.

Regards,

John P

Hi John

You are right - I have subsequently edited my post back to its original form with an explanation.

cheers

Ben A.

Houston we have lift off, albeit behind a pair of class 60's I have run the full 16 coach lowlander for over an hour around my layout without uncoupling. A single class 60 will pull them on the flat but over the rise on my layout I needed the pair.
This morning whilst continuing the running in to see if they freed up an more I set the lap timer going on the phone, and found that progressively the rake was freeing up, starting at 2min for a lap which equates to a constant 90mph, I found the times were coming down by approx 0.5 sec per lap, until they flatlined at about 1min 50sec. after a couple of hours of running. During this time I was running 2 sets of 8 coaches each with a single loco, changing between different class 60's, class 92's and 66's. So no loco did more than 30mins.
This afternoon I put a pair of 60's on and gradually built the full rake up, I did find a few uncouplings, but a dab of "tacky wax" soon sorted those out.
On the class 92's I did not try them on the full rake, I will have to remove the front fairing and fit the coupler to enable double heading capability on one of my units.
I did change the position of the traction tyred axels from the middle of each bogie to the rear axel of each bogie and this definitely helped with the traction.
So whilst still draggy, they do get better with a lot of running, and they look magnificent.
I have sent some videos to Revolution and if they want to post them, I would be happy for them to go up. I have tried a couple of times to post videos without success.
They do look good in the full rake, especially with the lights in the layout room turned down to emulate evening time.

Quote from: Graham on October 06, 2023, 07:39:45 AMI have sent some videos to Revolution and if they want to post them, I would be happy for them to go up. I have tried a couple of times to post videos without success.

@Graham The forum has never supported uploading of videos so you have to use a host such as YouTube or, in my case, Flickr

thanks, I was aware of that and thought I will have to get the grandson round to work it out.

That's mine in the post, looking forward to giving them a run.

I've been following this thread closely and thought I'd contribute where I'm at with my 16 coach highlander rake.

Visually out of the superb packaging they look wonderful, however moving them on track was initially very disappointing. As others have found some ran a little better than others but none of them great. My Revolution 92 would only move 6 coaches and even my CJM 92 only 9.

So here's what I've worked on to improve things , nothing radical just basic stuff, mostly covered in others posts. I know we shouldn't have to do this but I rather like 'fettling' things. Nothing I've done should affect warranty or any solutions Revolution may come up with.

a) Unscrew bogies and release wheelsets, remove lighting pickup etches

b) Separate the wheels and ring bearings from the  plastic retaining muffs and thoroughly clean the axle shafts and internal surface of the bearings, a high percentage of these had stuck on residue present, maybe electric conductive oil or other lubricant?

c) Reassemble the wheelsets and reset the wheel back to back measurements, make sure the ring bearings have room to move between the muff and wheel rims.

d) Check for any loose flash and paint.

e) Give them a good run - things do seem to improve.

All a bit time consuming but I think worthwhile as one Revolution 92 can now pull 12 coaches and double headed easily handles the sixteen. the CJM 92 moves all sixteen comfortably and no doubt more but It's the wrong livery!

Also I had a few issues with unwanted uncoupling with the rapidos and alternative couplings so I took the plunge and fitted 'Hunt magnetic intermediate Elite' versions, problem solved.


Ian.

I've rather given up on mine for now. I fitted the Dellner couplings but still suffer uncoupling, particularly near the front of the rake due to the weight. I am running them on an inappropriately small test loop though, so I'll cut them some slack. They're definitely improving with use. Good to hear the Hunt couplings work and that you've managed to get them working satisfactorily.

I used the intermediate Hunt couplings but they do gap the coaches a little, not sure if the close coupling will work as I don't have any.

Ian.

I've had a try with some short Hunt couplings and they seem to work, though they've only had a push around some curves and points, not a proper test so far.

Quote from: Farmer chap on October 12, 2023, 08:03:16 PMI've been following this thread closely and thought I'd contribute where I'm at with my 16 coach highlander rake.

Visually out of the superb packaging they look wonderful, however moving them on track was initially very disappointing. As others have found some ran a little better than others but none of them great. My Revolution 92 would only move 6 coaches and even my CJM 92 only 9.

So here's what I've worked on to improve things , nothing radical just basic stuff, mostly covered in others posts. I know we shouldn't have to do this but I rather like 'fettling' things. Nothing I've done should affect warranty or any solutions Revolution may come up with.

a) Unscrew bogies and release wheelsets, remove lighting pickup etches

b) Separate the wheels and ring bearings from the  plastic retaining muffs and thoroughly clean the axle shafts and internal surface of the bearings, a high percentage of these had stuck on residue present, maybe electric conductive oil or other lubricant?

c) Reassemble the wheelsets and reset the wheel back to back measurements, make sure the ring bearings have room to move between the muff and wheel rims.

d) Check for any loose flash and paint.

e) Give them a good run - things do seem to improve.

All a bit time consuming but I think worthwhile as one Revolution 92 can now pull 12 coaches and double headed easily handles the sixteen. the CJM 92 moves all sixteen comfortably and no doubt more but It's the wrong livery!

Also I had a few issues with unwanted uncoupling with the rapidos and alternative couplings so I took the plunge and fitted 'Hunt magnetic intermediate Elite' versions, problem solved.
Ian.

Thanks very much for your very detailed explanation of your steps.
I have this afternoon gradually worked through 6 coaches and the difference is brilliant.
The one thing I think I noticed was the plastic tube the wheels plug into each side needs to have a small clearance from the bearing.
I found on the first coach even after following your steps the bogie was still very "draggy", so I made sure there was a small gap on both sides of the tube and this did the trick.
I am still making sure all the wheels and bearings are cleaned and then checked before putting back on the track.
Only the other 10 coaches to go, hopefully tomorrow afternoon if SWMBO permits.
cheers
Graham

Just had my 4 car set back from Simon at Revolution (wasn't confident going beyond swapping of wheels etc without stuffing them up)

Boy what a difference. Still not the most free running coaches I own but they're never going to be in the context of the design of the real thing. Only tested on a straight yard length of track so far, pulling and propelling but I can report...
Dapol 67- moves them easily
Sound fitted 08-moves them easily
Newer style Dapol 73-Pulls surprisingly well, propelling a struggle

I suspect the 73 will struggle with curves but I do believe that's all about the loco, possibly the worst chassis design I've seen in N

Much less frustration for me than a few weeks ago, yes I'm only having to deal with a FW portion but pretty sure the 67 would have no problem with 8,possibly more

Really impressed with Revolution's after sales service, less impressed that R Mail left them in the rain but luckily no damage done.

A decently weighted, well designed 73/9 would be most welcome Revolution. Until then I'll be pretending that DB kept the haulage contract

Rob

Would be great to hear the steps Simon performed to get them running better.

The biggest difference seems to be the 'muffs' between the wheels. They're too long, so they foul on the bogie frames/pickups. Remove them, ease the wheels out and give a few sweeps of a file.

I've got a single 92 pulling ten, and a pair doing all 16 now. Still not totally sure what to do with them long term; whether to run a short rake as was prevalent in Covid, get rid entirely or double head. I do intend to try making an Uber 92 at some point with extra traction tyres and as much weight as I can fit. Possibly relocating a speaker to and utilising the pickups in the leading coach, but that's a bit more drastic.

Thanks, pretty much what I am doing. I have all 16 running behind a pair of 92's, both 92's have additional weight added, the other thing I found, was packs 1 & 2 ran well almost out of the box, where packs 3 & 4 are taking a lot of work to get running well.
Think I will wait for the new parts now before continuing. I will keep them regardless as they are one of the main pieces of rolling stock for a new layout.

Hi Gang,

I may be forced to get the Mk5s out again on the test track to see if the stiffer ones are from specific sets as previously noted by some. It will be an excuse to admire them and have a further fiddle with the wheelsets and pickups!!

Later;
Stu from EGVN

Quote from: StufromEGDL on November 05, 2023, 08:58:05 AMto see if the stiffer ones are from specific sets as previously noted by some.

I wouldn't bother. All 4 of my sets have stiff wheelsets, I can't see any correlation between set numbers or coach types and stiffness, other than they're all stiff  ;)

I do hope that the TPE sets come "pre-fixed" though.

Regards,

John P

Quote from: jpendle on November 05, 2023, 04:01:43 PM

Quote from: StufromEGDL on November 05, 2023, 08:58:05 AMto see if the stiffer ones are from specific sets as previously noted by some.

I wouldn't bother. All 4 of my sets have stiff wheelsets, I can't see any correlation between set numbers or coach types and stiffness, other than they're all stiff  ;)

I do hope that the TPE sets come "pre-fixed" though.

Regards,

John P

Is there any word on the TPE sets, anyone heard a whisper, there is nothing on the projects page.
I guess we may get a whisper or 2 from Warley.

I see we now have shipping to customers on the TPE sets as of today UK time.
Anyone heard anything on the fixes to the wheel sets. Strangely quiet from the Revolution team on an issue.

They did say they had carried rechecks on the TPE sets in their recent news item on 2023.

https://revolutiontrains.com/the-2023-revolution-round-up-a-year-of-consolidation-and-catch-up/

thanks, just wondering about the Caledonian sets.

I exchanged emails about the Caledonian ones about 6 months ago, but haven't heard anything since then.
I think I'll have to send another email to try to find out what the resolution is.

Regards,

John P

Just received my invoice for these.

Hello all,

The first few hundred Mk5 TPE sets have been shipped, and should be arriving with those who paid in full today or tomorrow, depending on the Royal Mail.

As ever, if you have any problems at all please email our customer support manager first - he has a step-by-step diagnostic process to aid in trouble shooting and of course we would much prefer you give us the opportunity to solve any issues before complaining online.

We haven't forgotten those having trouble with sleepers, but we have been waiting to study the performance of the TPE sets' 'improved' wheels.  If these are better (and the samples were, but of course that is just a couple of sets) then we will use this learning to help anyone still having problems with their sleepers.

If you have the sleepers and we haven't come back to you within a week or so please contact us again so we can help.

cheers

Ben A.

hi  all

  got  mine  today    look  bloody  great    wheels  run  freely  by  hand ...  will  try  and get it  running  sat / sunday 

  thanks  ben and  team

Quote from: paulbeckwith on January 19, 2024, 07:27:01 PMhi  all

  got  mine  today    look  bloody  great    wheels  run  freely  by  hand ...  will  try  and get it  running  sat / sunday 

  thanks  ben and  team

Don't forget, to be truly authentic, once you've got them running, you'll need to park them up in a siding somewhere until another operator picks them up  :doh:  :(  :D

Can't wait to get my hands on the two sets that I've ordered.

Which reminds me that I think I'll need to order decoders for the driving trailers

John P

Quote from: GroupC on February 12, 2019, 04:49:49 PMI'm amused by the thought that these model TPE Mk 5 sets could arrive before the forever delayed real things get started. An interesting reverse to the Dapol Pacer which is arriving just as the actual things are about to disappear.

Sorry to quote such an old post but it made me chuckle, things didn't go quite as planned on the real railway  :D

John P

Quote from: jpendle on January 19, 2024, 08:42:06 PMWhich reminds me that I think I'll need to order decoders for the driving trailers

John P

Plus suitable speakers and find a place to install them.   :)

Just got the despatch note for mine, had forgotten about the decoder, will have to get one.
Wonder how long Aussie Post will hang on to them before they reach me.

My trans pennine set arrived yesterday, what works of art in minuture well done Mike Ben and revolution, look amazing.
On the track, gentle nudge if the finger, the dcc runs amazing as free as any coach from Dapol farish etc, the other 4 are similar to my 8 sleepers. Gentle nudge the dvd will roll a good 20-30 cm, all the other ps (12 mm 5) maybe 10cm with a similar nudge.

In the sleepers, I've had every axle out pulled both wheels off each axle bearings off all cleaned up put back together. Slightly loosened eachbogie screw as a common fix, marginal improvement. I'm now baffled how the dvt rolls so beautifully yet the others don't. Did try the online form on revolution website but no reply with the sleepers.
Anyone any other thoughts or ideas ? I did notice on the tpe set looks like the plastic centre of the axles look a little shorter than the sleepers, but doesn't give a clue why the dvt runs so differently.
Great fan of what revolution team are doing, and totally appreciate they go all out to sort issues ( including 72 replacement axles for one of there wagon sets) but a bit stumped on these coaches, bit of a shame as the tpe set in particular look amazing

Quote from: Spanners70 on January 20, 2024, 09:10:08 AMGentle nudge the dvd will roll a good 20-30 cm, all the other ps (12 mm 5) maybe 10cm with a similar nudge.

Hi there,

Obvs it's the weekend now, but if you email our support line I am sure our customer services manager Simon will come back to you asap.

Also, even if the coaches aren't all that free running I suspect the Dapol 68 would have no problem with them. Mine have pretty good haulage.

cheers

Ben A.

Thanks Ben. Anyone got the email address for Simon in support? Searching the website it's just the online form and whenever I use this never get a reply. And I'm not at home due work so cannot see if it's on the paperwork with the mk5's. On the plus, seeing how well my dvt rolls is Great it means there's no reason the rest shouldn't just got to figure out the difference between that one and the other 12 mk5's.

Hi all,

For any Revolution products the email address in the instructions is the one to use first.

And like any business our emails tend to be monitored during working hours. 

Cheers

Ben A.

Quote from: Spanners70 on January 20, 2024, 05:23:11 PMThanks Ben. Anyone got the email address for Simon in support? Searching the website it's just the online form and whenever I use this never get a reply. And I'm not at home due work so cannot see if it's on the paperwork with the mk5's. On the plus, seeing how well my dvt rolls is Great it means there's no reason the rest shouldn't just got to figure out the difference between that one and the other 12 mk5's.

support@revolutiontrains.com

Thanks, I'm out the country for next 5 days so reading  instructions isn't an optio. Will send an email off to them

Quote from: Spanners70 on January 21, 2024, 06:28:09 PMThanks, I'm out the country for next 5 days so reading  instructions isn't an optio. Will send an email off to them

I bought the 4 coach "Deerstalker" rake of sleepers.  I found when I unclipped the wheels that some of the seatings had a burr.  A very careful pass with a round needle file dealt with that and improved free running.  I had also queried how the lighting behaved - it would not stay off.  I must say that I had an answer within a few hours, all credit to Simon.  My issue arises only with DC operation!  Anyway since I am not DCC or bothered by lighting I removed the brass pick ups from the bogies while I had the axles off.  I stress I have stored them safely so I can put them back if I ever sell the coaches.  But not having them has improved the rolling resistance.   My Dapol 73, with Adam Warr's vinyl sides in Caledonian Teal Blue now copes easily on sharp curves.   So if anyone does not want working lights this is a part solution.

My 2 TPE sets arrived this week plus some new wheelsets for my Caley Sleeper coaches.

At first I thought I was going to have major problems when my TPE liveried CL68 wouldn't pull or push the coaches over the slightest bump on my not so flat track work.

After some experimentation it turns out I have 2 duff CL68's  >:( one of which was the TPE liveried one.

Here's one of my sets running at speed with a good CL68.


Unfortunately a CL68 was harmed in the making of this video, on my first attempt the entire rake derailed and the propelling CL68 hit the floor, so I now have 3 duff CL68's  :veryangry:

All 3 have the same issue which is that the bogies have come loose from the worm gear assembly, I've posted seperately asking for help on how to fix this issue.

For my Caley sleepers I received new wheelsets which I have swapped for the old ones, now my CL92 can just about manage 8 coaches on the flat, so it looks like double heading with a 'failed' 92 in the rake will be the way to go.

UNLESS, and I'm just floating this as an idea, there would be any merit in having Revolution develop a motorised chassis for the MK5A's which could then added to one or more coaches giving one or two more "locos" in the consist to get a 16 coach rake moving??

Regards,

John P

have you added any weight to the 92's, I have just received the new wheelsets and have found a single 92 will pull them on the flat straight track, but all of my 92's have almost an extra 10g of weight added.
Also you may want to run them with the new wheelsets for a while I have found they definitely free up with a lot of running.

Well I'm pleased to report that I've been able to fix all 3 CL68's. They can all push or pull a TPE rake but one of them insists on derailing as it goes over straight points when propelling the train.

Now I need to get to work running in my sleepers.

Regards,

John P

Quote from: Graham on February 11, 2024, 06:19:07 AMhave you added any weight to the 92's, I have just received the new wheelsets and have found a single 92 will pull them on the flat straight track, but all of my 92's have almost an extra 10g of weight added.
Also you may want to run them with the new wheelsets for a while I have found they definitely free up with a lot of running.

I haven't added any weight to my CL92's. Looking with the bodyshell off I'm not even sure where you've managed to squeeze any additional weight in at all.

Regards,

John P

I will take some pics in the next couple of days and post so you can see.
cheers
Graham

Hi Gang;

Been away for a few days, so catching up....

Is there now a known issue with CS wheelsets, prompting a replacement batch? Comments above seem to indicate that some customers with problem coaches have now received new wheelsets..... I know that despite fettling , a lot of running and swapping of wheelsets around, some coaches remain stubbornly stiff. It is obvious from the TPE sets that the centre sleeve is considerably shorter that those on the CS Mk5s.
My next experiment will be to find the four most reticent Mk5s and swap the wheelsets in their entirety for the TPE wheelsets to see if there is a noticeable difference.

later;
STU from NRSW

just contact Simon at Revolution and he will send out new sets for you.
cheers
Graham

I keep meaning to try adding weight to a 92, definitely interested to see how/where you've done that Graham.

Plenty of examples of a 92 being moved DIT, so it's not entirely atypical, it's the conclusion I've reached too.

OK so here are this afternoon's results.
@jpendle and @njee20 as promised, here are some pics of how I added weight to the 92's. I probably should also add these to the 92 thread.

1. here is a 92 straight out of the box, this one is sound fitted, as can be seen 74g
(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/139/1058-170224061102.jpeg) (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=139673)

2. this is after I have added the weight. non sound. and as you can see 86g
(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/139/1058-170224061148.jpeg) (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=139674)

3. lastly this is all the weight added
(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/139/1058-170224061536.jpeg) (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=139676)

all the weight added is basically lead sheet cut and hammered down to the size required then covered in Kapton tape to eliminate any shorting issues, on the large piece which sits on the top I have 3 layers of Kapton tape.

basically I am just filling holes with lead to help with the traction. It does help.

I am wondering what the impact of all that extra weight will be on the longevity of the drivetrain as it will be under considerably more load. I do appreciate that the to some extent unavoidable drag caused by the internal bearings currently used on the Mk5 coaches requires a solution that will allow a full length "Caledonian Sleeper" to be hauled and this is one such, my concern is that the loco isn't designed to be that heavy so while obviously an individual choice, I would be pretty wary of adding that much weight personally.

On the subject of the Mk5 coaches, I haven't seen the bearings used but the cause seems to be the inevitable additional friction over that of a pinpoint bearing and presumably to some extent this will be impacted by the surface area involved. Appreciating that a secondary and complicating factor is providing adequate contact for the lighting pickups, nonetheless I am curious to know, have RevolutioN (or their designers in China) tried experimenting by using a much smaller internal bearing surface?

I have no "skin in the game" so to speak as I do not model the modern era, but they are lovely coaches so it would be great if a more effective solution could be found for the "drag" issue and I hope my thoughts/suggestions are take constructively as I intend them.

Roy

I added the weight pretty much within 3mths of receiving the 92's and they have run a lot since then with no problems.
When I mean a lot, to do a full circuit of the club layout takes approx 40mins at a scale 60mph, and these would have run for many hours on the layout. I would normally run 2 or 3 circuits on a club night so I think this speaks volumes for the reliability of the loco's and motors used.
cheers
Graham

Quote from: Graham on February 17, 2024, 08:15:04 AMI added the weight pretty much within 3mths of receiving the 92's and they have run a lot since then with no problems.
When I mean a lot, to do a full circuit of the club layout takes approx 40mins at a scale 60mph, and these would have run for many hours on the layout. I would normally run 2 or 3 circuits on a club night so I think this speaks volumes for the reliability of the loco's and motors used.
cheers
Graham

Here's hoping that continues and of course your choice to do so. All I am suggesting is that others should think very carefully before doing the same, and regardless of how "good" the motor may or may not be the model was not designed for that extra weight to be added and greater load will inevitably be put on it, very likely reducing motor life and potentially extra wear the entire drivetrain.

I have no interest in the Mk5 coaches, but with this talk of drag from internal bearings it's interesting to note that my Kato ICE 4 12-car set has internal bearings on some of the coach bogies (not all), and those coaches are perfectly acceptable free-running. Stub axles with live bearings ready to take light bars if desired.

(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/139/medium_5885-170224123718.jpeg) (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view;id=139684)

I think you're crediting them with overly fine engineering tolerances. Let's not pretend they're calibrated to 74g and any deviation from that will cause failure. You hang a couple of hundred grams of train behind them anyway. It is a disappointing failing of the 92 that the haulage is poor, so Graham's solution seems good!

Quote from: ntpntpntp on February 17, 2024, 12:40:09 PMI have no interest in the Mk5 coaches, but with this talk of drag from internal bearings it's interesting to note that my Kato ICE 4 12-car set has internal bearings on some of the coach bogies (not all), and those coaches are perfectly acceptable free-running. Stub axles with live bearings ready to take light bars if desired.

(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/139/medium_5885-170224123718.jpeg) (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view;id=139684)

Thanks for that, but for a mechanical numpty like me, what's a stub axle and what does it look like inside the box that the axle is in?

Thanks,

John P

Quote from: ntpntpntp on February 17, 2024, 12:40:09 PMI have no interest in the Mk5 coaches, but with this talk of drag from internal bearings it's interesting to note that my Kato ICE 4 12-car set has internal bearings on some of the coach bogies (not all), and those coaches are perfectly acceptable free-running. Stub axles with live bearings ready to take light bars if desired.

(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/139/medium_5885-170224123718.jpeg) (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view;id=139684)

@ntpntpntp

The Kato inside bearing bogie augurs well for the forthcoming 9 car Class 800 where some of the extra cars have them. I be interested in how the brass pick up strip is designed, and whether the axle passes through a hole in it. Stub axles would facilitate that.

@jpendle Kato typically uses two half-axles (stub axles) pushed into a plastic centre which keeps them isolated from each other.  This then allows each wheel to be live as a pickup, with power transmitted through the pinpoint axle ends to phosphor-bronze axleboxes and then up to the mechanism. It's a reliable method which has much less drag than wiper pickups, and all wheels can pick up (some older designs of bogie pickups  eg. older Fleischmann, Minitrix have only one wheel live to the metal axle, with a wiper contact to the axle. Thus only 2 wheels of a bogie pick up power)

Here's an example of the pinpoint axle version
(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/139/5885-170224195510.jpeg) (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=139705)

In the case of these ICE 4 inside bearing wheels there are obviously no pinpoint axles, but just behind the wheels you can just about see they're supported in thin metal strip bearings.    I would imagine the separating collar is different to that of the pinpoint axle version, given that there needs to be some bare metal axle for the bearing.  I expect it's still a plastic tube but with a definite plug in the middle to maintain separation and to keep the required back-to-back distance.

I've not actually had a bogie apart to see the full arrangement, and don't intend to fiddle unless something misbehaves in the future. For now they are running nicely - not as freely as pinpoint axles do but definitely much better than other brands of coach which still use wiper pickups.  Give one of these a gentle push and it glides for up to a metre without any obvious  immediate friction effect.


(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/139/5885-170224193510.jpeg) (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=139702)

It stands to reason you won't want to be lubricating these bearings as you'd risk the build-up of non-conductive crud as we see in locos with stub axles and chassis bearings.

Quote from: njee20 on February 17, 2024, 04:22:29 PMI think you're crediting them with overly fine engineering tolerances. Let's not pretend they're calibrated to 74g and any deviation from that will cause failure. You hang a couple of hundred grams of train behind them anyway. It is a disappointing failing of the 92 that the haulage is poor, so Graham's solution seems good!

Not sure if this response is directed at my comment but here's the thing. As matters stand with the weight of the loco as purchased, hooking it up to anything like a full Caledonian Sleeper train will, from all that I have read, even with traction tyres as fitted cause a break in traction - the wheels will slip, immediately relieving much of the load on the motor and drive-train. With extra weight and less or no propensity to lose grip the load of the train and all the friction in the bearings remains on the gears and more specifically on the motor and I would be very surprised if the motor didn't get hot which is from all I have learned especially undesirable for a coreless motor (which I understand to be fitted) as there is no iron core to dissipate heat.

I an simply expressing a view and concern, but with (as I have said already) no "skin in the game" as far as 92s or sleepers are concerned it does not affect me personally and people will of course make their own choices. That said, I doubt there would be much sympathy from RevolutioN if burnt out motors are the result.

Regards

Roy

Yes, it was aimed at your comment and mild prophecies of doom. I'm not really talking about the mk5s specifically, just in general - any loco will be at risk of motor failure if you attach a train to it. Sticking a few extra grams in the loco isn't going to change anything IMO.

As an aside to this I have added weight to the Dapol 66's and 68's, and they all run and operate so much better. I consider myself fortunate to have the fleet I have and service each loco every year, regardless of if it has run or not.
I also found on my Farish 319, as the pickups and decoder are in the adjoining coach to the motor coach, by adding a bit of weight in this it aided reliability.
I am sure we could argue the merits or not of my actions for a long time, but they work for me. Especially on the club layout which takes one hell of a pounding with most of the modellers running US outline with up to 4 locos on long trains, and some of it being over 20yrs old.

Quote from: njee20 on February 17, 2024, 08:45:11 PMYes, it was aimed at your comment and mild prophecies of doom. I'm not really talking about the mk5s specifically, just in general - any loco will be at risk of motor failure if you attach a train to it. Sticking a few extra grams in the loco isn't going to change anything IMO.

You are entitled to your opinion as I am mine, but bottom line is that once you have added weight in such a way any warranty is quite reasonably void.

Your ability to claim for a burnt out motor may be compromised, but it's not as clear cut as saying it voids any warranty. In the same way that weathering a loco modifies it but doesn't void a warranty. I think everyone understands that you think it's a bad idea. Again, pulling trains puts undue stress on models, but we all do it. I have eleven 92s, I'll happily add weight to some and compare longevity. Could even remove some, they'll last forever then!

IME models have a very extreme bathtub curve failure rate. If they work out of the box they'll likely be fine for ages. I don't believe you get many failures 9 months in, even if you add 10g of extra weight.

Quote from: njee20 on February 18, 2024, 12:11:41 AMYour ability to claim for a burnt out motor may be compromised, but it's not as clear cut as saying it voids any warranty. In the same way that weathering a loco modifies it but doesn't void a warranty. I think everyone understands that you think it's a bad idea. Again, pulling trains puts undue stress on models, but we all do it. I have eleven 92s, I'll happily add weight to some and compare longevity. Could even remove some, they'll last forever then!

IME models have a very extreme bathtub curve failure rate. If they work out of the box they'll likely be fine for ages. I don't believe you get many failures 9 months in, even if you add 10g of extra weight.

I was of course referring to warranty claims in respect of the motor and drivetrain which was the issue under discussion. Quite naturally if something unrelated to that failed like the lighting I would agree that a claim under warranty would hopefully not be impacted.

I am happy to agree to disagree on this and as I have already said a few posts back it is a matter of personal choice if people want to add weight by whatever means, all I was trying to do was make people aware of potential risks of doing so.

Right! It's time to drag this thread, kicking and screaming, back to the subject of the coaches themselves  :D

I have just fitted Zimo accessory decoders to my 2 DVT's. What a palaver!

Getting the bodyshells off is hard enough as there is no discernable gap to get a fingernail or "waffer thin mint" into.

Getting them back on again is even harder, I managed to dislodge the driver's console/light pipe assembly on one unit and then when I tried to get it in again one of the side windows got pushed out :doh:

It took forever to get the window back in, secured with a drop of poly cement at the edge, my fingers are too fat and pliers don't give the tactile feedback that you need. It then took another age to accidentally find out that the light pipe unit slides in sideways from back to front of the bodyshell rather than from bottom to top.

Once I got both units fitted I also found that the lights weren't as bright on one and further investigation revealed that the chassis was proud of the bodyshell at the front, I fixed that and now the head/tails light work nicely.

BUT, there's an issue with the cabin and coach lighting.
Even with a decoder fitted they still come on when power is applied and then have to be turned off again. But then the Z21 app shows them as being on when they are off and vice versa.

I'll do a bit more playing around today because it also seems that the function outputs need to act as momentary switches rather than push buttons when turning these lights on and off. I suspect this is due to the latching relay that is wired to the interior lights in these coaches.

There's nothing wrong with the head/tail lights as they don't have a relay in the way.

Regards,

John P

A question regarding the rolling resistance of the Mk5s, I noted that the TPE sets haven't had as many comments about the free rolling (or lack of) nature, is it a general opinion the TPE sets roll better?

I recall someone was going to try TPE bogie on sleeper coaches, did that happen and are they interchangeable?

Sorry if I already missed the answers previously

I suspect that no one wants to run more than 5 is the primary factor. Five sleepers is easy!

Quote from: Intercity on February 18, 2024, 04:47:38 PMis it a general opinion the TPE sets roll better?

It's not an opinion it's a fact.

The TPE sets have revised axle assemblies with narrower 'muffs' between the wheels and they do roll better than the original sleeper coaches, as a result I have had no trouble pulling or pushing a 5 car rake around my layout, with a Dapol CL68, at speed.

Along with my TPE rakes, I also received a full set of replacement wheelsets for my 16 coach Caley sleeper rake, these also run better than with the original wheelsets BUT pulling more than 7 or 8 coaches is still an issue for my CL92's

Regards,

John P

I agree with John, my TPE sets roll great. I have also received the replacement Caledonian wheel sets and have started to change them, but to date have not had the same success as John, and I don't know why. Will be working on them over the next week to see what I am doing wrong.
Given the amount of time spent on the Caledonian set so far another few hours getting these right is well worth the effort.
As a test I have a 30cm length of track raised at one end by 1cm and see if the coach rolls down, its ok, if not get to work.

I did some experiments with the lights in the DVT, with the DCC accessory decoders fitted.

When track power is applied the cabin and coach lights come on.

When Function Outputs 1 and 2 are then turned ON, the cabin and coach lights turn OFF.

Then when Function Outputs 1 & 2 are turned OFF, nothing happens.

Turning Function Outputs 1 & 2 back ON again, turns the cabin and coach lights ON.

Then turning the Function outputs OFF again, nothing happens.

Then turning the Function Outputs ON turns OFF the cabin and coach lights.

So turning ON the Function outputs either latches the lights ON or OFF depending on the state that they are already in, turning the Function Outputs OFF has no effect.

Regards,

John P

Quote from: Intercity on February 18, 2024, 04:47:38 PMI recall someone was going to try TPE bogie on sleeper coaches, did that happen and are they interchangeable?

Hi Gang,

Yes, not had a chance to transfer the TPE wheel sets into a sleeper rake yet. There is a difference in the length of the insulating axle sleeve which may or may not be a factor. Hopefully, I'll get an opportunity in the next few days to experiment.

Later,
Stu from NRSW

Hi (again) Gang,

Ok, so I went for a quick experiment with a 1 metre test track raised 2.5 in at one end. (I know I mixed metric and imperial there!)

Random sleeper coach....rolled slowly.
Random TPE coach...rolled better.
Swapped wheel sets...
Sleeper coach..rolled as per TPE.
TPE coach did not roll.
Swapped wheel sets back...
Sleeper coach...did not roll.
TPE coach ..rolled as originally.
Swapped one wheel set on sleeper coach with another sleeper wheel set and it rolled better but not as free as the TPE coach or wheel sets.

So I think that some of the Sleeper wheel sets need fettling but not all, and the TPE wheel sets seem to be of a higher overall consistency.

As I said, the experiment is quick and unscientific and I have not yet played with/swapped or removed pickups to try and improve things further.

The recommendations of the Revolution team should be applied first if anyone still has running issues.

Later,
Stu from NRSW

@StufromEGDL Revolution will send you replacement wheelsets if you ask.

Regards,

John P

Quote from: jpendle on February 19, 2024, 06:20:07 PM@StufromEGDL Revolution will send you replacement wheelsets if you ask.

Regards,

John P

Agree, I asked Simon and the replacement wheelsets were here (in Australia) under 2 weeks later.

Quote from: ntpntpntp on February 17, 2024, 12:40:09 PMI have no interest in the Mk5 coaches, but with this talk of drag from internal bearings it's interesting to note that my Kato ICE 4 12-car set has internal bearings on some of the coach bogies (not all), and those coaches are perfectly acceptable free-running. Stub axles with live bearings ready to take light bars if desired.

(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/139/medium_5885-170224123718.jpeg) (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view;id=139684)

We've come to expect nothing less from the technical team at Kato. I have been so impressed with the running quality of my Azuma sets, and fitting the interior lighting couldn't be simpler, a truly quality-centric manufacturer.

Hi Gang;
Just back from a great weekend and day at the Glasgow show....it certainly had a better selection of layouts than last year and most were operating fairly well. A few operating difficulties for some, but nothing is ever perfect!!

I have replaced all the wheelsets in the CS Mk5s now and most are now very free-running on the test incline. A couple were hesitant at first but a quick 'reseat' of the axles to ensure the bush sits smoothly outside of the 'pip' on the pickups and all seem to be fine. I have also found that repeated handling of these coaches and fiddling repetitively with the bogies has caused some fat finger damage to a few of the yaw dampers , so a little bit of superglue was needed in a couple of instances.

I'll dig the test track out later and do a bit of a haulage test, but I feel sure that the Revolution 92 will now happily pull the Glasgow set (8 coaches) and I will add gradually the remaining 6 Aberdeen coaches to see how it gets on, although I cannot see me ever having the space to run a full length sleeper!!!

Getting the test track out will also give me a chance to have a look at the 59005 collected on Friday too!!

Later;
Stu from NRSW

I just realised that you are using an ~7% slope!

My metric is a 2% slope they don't roll on that at all!

Regards,

John P

My TPE set runs reasonably freely, but will not run far after a bit of a push, on the level.

New, an individual coach would not run its own length. Now, after about 12 - 15 hours of running, the five car set, when pushed on the level, will run almost two coach lengths.

Clearly it is getting looser as it runs.

There is no problem for the Dapol 68, either pushing or pulling, at any speed I care to use. Except slow speeds, close to a crawl it stalls, presumably from the remaining drag.

Overall, I am delighted with the set.