Where to start?

DRC,

One piece I am surprised Hornby don’t make is the diamond cross over piece, but I see that Peco make it. 

Do you mean the whole assembly including points? I think that would be a bit too large to package as a single piece! Otherwise why cannot you use Hornby's R615 and/or R614?

R615 and R614 point either left or right, the diamond I showed allowed locos to cross tracks both left and right at the same point. I use this diamond in Railway Empire and I really like how it functions, especially close to a station or junction. If it was the length of two R8077/78 back to back, it wouldn't be that big. However, you wouldn't be able to stack them in the same way you can with R615 and R614, so it would have its drawbacks.

I'm curious about something to do with track radius. I'm pretty sure I know the answer to this one, but I'd like to confirm.

Will a radius 1 track piece always be a radius 1? As in, if I have a track configuration of:

Start point R8073 - R606 - R604 - R606 - R606 - R604 - R606 - R8072 End point

Will the R604 always make this a radius 1 curve, regardless of other larger radius pieces?

Well it will at the position where the R604 is laid and will be prone to any restrictions a full radius 1 curve would have at that point.

Mixing tracks of distinctly different radius will result in loss of smooth curvature transitions. The laid track will have kinks in it. It could also result in layouts where track that comes back round a loop become off-set to the starting track piece unless symmetry is maintained between each opposite side of the layout. Hornby track is very basic with limited geometry, making it difficult to construct custom designs without resorting to flex track to fill the gaps in the track product range.

Use your AnyRail program and build two curves, one as per your track parts list in your post. And another substituting your three R606s with R604s. It should then be obvious that the overall radius effect of the two curves are different.

Is there a reason why Hornby track is so basic? Using the AnyRail program I was surprised to find such a small selection of pieces. I’d have thought for such an old company, they’d have a huge selection of pieces to choose from.

Just my personal view, but as I understand it. Hornby track still offers the same basic geometry that was originally developed in the 1950's. Yes the products have been tinkered with in terms of materials (now Nickel Silver) and point operating mechanisms, but the basic geometry has been largely unchanged.

Historically, the track was designed as track for 'Train Sets' predominently for children. Where sophisticated layout designs have not been focused on. This, in my view, is also why Hornby track has so many derailment issues. The track was designed when locos and rolling stock were heavier and had deeper wheel flanges that made it easier to keep rolling stock on the track. However that said, the current NS track doesn't always work well with very early Triang stock that has very coarse wheel profiles.

If you look at Hornby accessories, for example signals, buildings (excluding Scaledale which is not a historical Hornby brand) etc, these are also based on original designs with little evidence of updating.

It seems to me, that except for locomotives, rolling stock and controllers, that Hornby seem unwilling to invest in updating track & accessories for modern times.

Take Hornby R406 signals and the Hornby range of electrical switches. These have not changed in 50 plus years, except the R406 signal now has LEDs rather than bulbs, but from a design point of view it still has absolutely no resemblance to a prototypical signal and looks like a toy.

Many times I have seen questions raised on the forum relating to the old design of track, asking why Hornby have not made the same strides forward in terms of design as other manufacturers, often quoting PECO as an example. But these often repeated comments seem to fall on Hornby's deaf ear.

One can only assume that the cost of a complete track revamp is not seen by Hornby as a significant profit making scenario. They will be aware that proper 'railway modellers' are unlikely to be using Hornby branded track anyway, thus relegating their track to the toy and train set market. I've probably said too much already (i.e. being Hornby critical), but this Hornby track question is something I feel passionate about and I (as I'm sure others would too) would really like to see Hornby address this part of the market with new products.

Hear hear thumbsup I suppose the nearest they've got to innovation is the production of Flexi and Semi-flexi track. Even then I think Peco have done a better job of it, where it doesn't spring back in your face when you're trying to lay it.

What i can not understand is why Hornby did not look at the track pieces made by the other companies they now own and adopt them to make a greater selection of track pieces, as both OO gauge and HO gauge track are the same size. Which would be usable across the whole range of HO and OO makes.

Going back into the history of Rovex it was normal practice to fit none flanged wheels on the middle pair of driving wheels of all coupled 6 wheeled steam locos so they could go round the tight curves like Radius1 laid on the dinning room table.

And, if I remember correctly, radius 1 then was just 12.5 or 12.75 inches radius! (Certainly it was with the likes of Jouef/Playcraft.) Times have moved on - to radius 4 - but only for plain track, unfortunately.

I seem to have stirred up a bit of a hornets nest. I just check the PECO website and the list of track pieces compared to Hornby is considerable.

Am I right in thinking Hornby track and PECO track is just plug and play? They have a few pieces that I’d be very interested in using.

I understand this is the Hornby forum, so if we are stepping into other manufacturer territory, no need to really discuss this in depth as not to ruffle any feathers.