fezza

I've read a bit about pooling but am not 100 per cent clear about the implications. Was this an entirely national process so a coal private owner wagon from Somerset could end up in Norfolk? Or would wagons still broadly stay in the same geographical region? For example, should a model of a Norfolk branch line mainly have former Eastern coal private owners or were they completely mixed up by 1950? I'm struggling to find detailed reference photos of rakes where the original PO identity can be discerned.

I've always assumed BR repainted private owner wagons very quickly as few photographs post 1948 seem to show large numbers in private owner liveries. Were some repainted plain grey when they were pooled and repaired during the war? There seems to be little data/photographs of wagons during the war - but that's not surprising I suppose!

No I didn't say that at all. Try reading carefully.

Maybe Hornby should have thought of that and got a properly thought out and logical range of good quality products ready before launch? If the answer is they don't have sufficient capacity for a viable TT range, why launch a TT range? The fact they have driven other potential TT suppliers out of the market without being able to offer products of their own is crazy and does nothing to encourage growth of the scale.

We are desperate for a J50 said noone ever. Yet we still have no DMUs (either first or second generation), no Standard 5s, Standard tanks or 4Fs - you know stuff that would actually be useful to a wide range of people who want to run a railway realistic and appropriate stock. There was an April Fools joke on the internet stating that Hornby had abandoned TT. Perhaps the bigger joke is that is continuing with an utterly random range of models. If I was a shareholder I would be very worried.

Yes, I was wondering about that. I guess my J72 is going to remain in service for the Summer timetable (well, it was good enough for Iain Rice...) I'm running a Gaugemaster Combi (non feedback) which should be ok for coreless?

Actually that does seem to have improved running. Thanks! It's not perfect, but certainly better. I suppose that's the problem with assessing running issues - there are sometimes several issues that you have to diagnose. It makes me a bit more comfortable with buying locos with coreless motors though.

Both mine were skirted BR versions. I sold one as I got frustrated with fiddling with it! The other runs better but after lots of running in it is a bit sticky at a crawl in one direction and occasionally stalls on gradients or with heavyish loads. Compared to my ancient but sweet running Mainline J72, the J70 doesn't seem to represent 40 years of progress. Of course, that's not to say the Buckjumper will be the same, bit it is a worry given some review comments on coreless issues.

Well it's Q2 so we can count down the days... greatly looking forward to what looks like being a GE masterpiece! My only slight worry is the coreless motor. My only other loco with a coreless motor is my Rapido J70 which was disappointing when slow running on conventional DC (and being coreless couldn't of course be helped by my usual tactic of a feedback controller). Coreless motors have also been noted as a problem in other loco reviews. What is the reason for using a coreless motor and if It isn't great are there easy ways of fitting an alternative? (Genuine technical question - not criticising that choice if it works!) I don't want to get obsessive about this but when you are running light railways you need something that can really crawl. Why 00 gauge shunting locos and light railway engines are sometimes geared for a scale 80mph is beyond me...

Around 1988/9 Barnstaple had Speedlink services, loco hauled substitute services (50s and 47s on two coach trains!) and just about any DMU the Western region could get hold of. And Barnstaple wasn't a seaside location... There is no reason why you can't invent a plausible modern image scenario around a major holiday resort. In 2024 cross country services to Padstow wouldn't be impossible. Minehead has seen through HSTs in the preserved era, so Castles or 67 excursions wouldn't be unreasonable either.

Iain's article in MRJ 9 shows a crossing gate across the 'main' line. It looks to be of a Great Eastern pattern, although the picture isn't very clear. There is also a gate contained in the plan of the same issue so it was definitely there. There was also a short fence or a gate at the end of the path that leads down from the old chapel to the track. That seems to have been removed too. I'd be interested to know what stock you use. Iain used a modified Mainline J72 and a 4F at one stage. That stuck in my mind as I had both as a youngster and loved them both. My ancient Mainline J72 is still running on my (under construction) GE light railway - like Iain, I found you could get a great crawl out of this loco on a good controller. They did get to East Anglia, but were mainly to be found in Ipswich I believe? Later a kitbuilt Buckjumper seemed to be the mainstay on Butley Mills. Today we are so lucky with high-quality RTR J15s, J70s and, soon, an RTR Buckjumper. Are there any new plans to attend exhibitions? I'd love to see this legendary layout in the flesh.

Yes, the hanging third link is not too noticeable really and is better I feel than having coupled stock too far apart. I've not had any buffer locking yet. I don't think I'm brave enough to go with anything finer scale - the frustration of coupling would probably ruin any pleasure I got from the improved appearance.

I hadn't appreciated just how overscale they were. My eyes are getting old! Yes, it seems in this case using the middle (seconds) three link to couple is the sensible compromise. You get scale distance but with one link "spare". It's not ideal but it means the coupling are easy (or easier) to use.

I've recently started a small Finescale 00 project and equipped my four wheel vans with Smiths 3 link couplings. However if I couple them together correctly using the third coupling loop the wagons are coupled far too far apart. I have to use the second link to get a scale distance between the vehicles. That leaves the third dangling. Am I doing something wrong or is this normal? It looks odd to me...

The big positive about this show was it was packed even though it might have lacked "superstar" layouts this year. There seemed to be more families there and newcomers/returners too. I think reports of the hobby's death are greatly exaggerated. In terms of retail there was stuff for every pocket. I picked up two Lima locos for less than £30 each. Back home and half an hour's service later and they are very sweet runners on my retro layout. Good to see an exhibition where retailers aren't just trying to shift "premium" stuff but are catering for all - very much the right ethos for an exhibition in "the people's palace."