srihaggis

Careful now, you are starting to sound like Bachmann with that reply

I reckon the tooling could be adapted to allow a 153 and 155 (blanked cab window inserts etc) to be produced. I refuse to buy the Hornby 153 because it just does not look right, particularly around the cab end. Also, aren't the bogies on a 153/155 the same as those used on a 156? One less item to tool up

What is the actual 'depth' of the unit incl the green connector type thing on the end? I saw Rails of Sheff listing the depth as 20mm, but I suspect that is just the cylindrical part?

Have you tried taking a decoder out of one of your locos that are not affected by this issue and put it into the Dapol 52, just to make sure it's not the decoder doing it?

That is some desperation for a model! Maybe postage stamps are cheaper over there - i'm sure if we did the same to a UK manufacturer let alone to Canada, i'm sure we could perhaps have covered the cost of tooling in postage stamps

Thanks for clarifying - I don't have any of the models you mention, so hopefully i'll be fine.

Interestingly I was planning to re-space the sleepers on the straight sections of the layout scenic parts anyway for the more realistic photo opportunity - I wouldn't ever look too closely on a tight bend. I'll be at Warley next week so i'll see if I can grab a piece of code 75 for testing purposes. @TRAILRAGE - which Hornby stock in particular have issues with the wheels rubbing?

All interesting comments. For pointwork, I only use large radius anyway so that won't be a problem, i'd sooner it look right than to be accurate, if that makes sense. The layout i'm doing is totally fictitious location wise, but utilising rolling stock of the Derby area from 1990-2005, so I can get away with modellers licence as to the type of rail used for that part - I'm struggling to think of anywhere locally with bullhead, i'll have to look on flickr - I seem to recall Derby station area having bullhead in the very early 90s.

Thanks for the info chaps. I'm only changing because I need to buy all my trackwork again anyway, so thought i'd give it a try and to my eye it looks marginally better, though it'll be a couple of months before buying physical rail because I am rebuilding the boards too, but i'll certainly buy a sample of track next time i'm in town. Fortunately I don't own any Lima stuff (at all), though I do have some ex Lima, now Hornby branded MK3s from 2015 (Midland Mainline Teal release).

Hi all I have decided to scrap my previous layout (actually gave it all away to a friend), which was all code 100. On the new project, i'm looking to go down the route of code 75. (00 Scale) Now trackwork isn't something I've ever really took a great deal of interest in, I understand 75 looks more prototypical, but I understand that it can cause running issues with certain types of stock, typically much older stock. How would I know if there were some items of stock I own that would be incompatible with code 75 rail? Is there a certain flange size I need to look at or is there more to it, eg the need to re-wheel everything? Most of my stock has been produced in the last 10-15 years. Sorry if this sounds an odd question but i'd sooner ask than go and buy a load of track and nothing work. Many thanks Kyle

Central Trains Green would be sweet.

Only just discovered this scheme, looks to be great value, though I do have to ask, are future magazines sent to us in paper or digital format? Should it be digital then that would be the only thing stopping me from signing up, unless theres an option to receive paper format? I'm just between jobs at the moment, so once i'm sorted out i'll get a subscription sorted subject to the above clarification.

I've been away from the whole DJM threads for a while, just skim reading the last few pages of this thread - are we now saying that you can claim for debit card refunds? I'm not going to worry if we can't.

£30 for a class 92.

I have attempted to refrain from commenting, however despite many of us [potentially] loosing money (my self included), I would still thank Dave for his efforts to try and get the market something that we all wanted, and that was detailed models. Looking to the future, I don't think I would invest in crowd funding again - DJM was a stab in the dark for me having never done anything like this historically, but I doubt I'd do it again for any product. I'd sooner see a product on the table, available for me to buy and take away, or at the very least in the same way the APT-E came via Locomtion: Deposit to secure and then balance pre-delivery. That worked very well and was delivered. Ok, not on time but it was worth the wait. I hope good things come out of this, and wish everyone affected the best for the future - I'm sure nobody would have wanted this.

Having just checked my invoice (I was never refunded any funds to pay back via the new method), there are x5 References to DJM, the DJM logo, website address and his name as "David" rather than Dave, on the Paypal Invoice. This was paid on the 5th October 2016. "You'll see "PAYPAL *DJMODELSLTD" on your card statement." was also stated. Fortunately for me I only paid £30 and I won't loose any sleep over it, therefore won't be chasing it up, but the above info may help clarify how he 'billed' people.

Dare I ask if anyone "Actually" knows what the latest is with this project?

As someone who has taken a first dabble into crowdfunding, I wish to see this product come to fruition. The announcement must be a disappointment for DJM however the way I am looking at it, is that DJM have produced powered models that run well (certainly the ones I've bought are anyway). We are yet to experience the opposition's running quality of a powered model.

Just come on here to say that - I ordered some yesterday morning when they showed as more than 10 in stock. Got email confirmation and I then checked stock level in the afternoon and it still said more than 10 in stock, so looks to have been a surge in orders - I think Hattons put a marketing thing out on Facebook in the afternoon so may have had something to do with it.

Yes that's correct. So basically you are able to control lighting as follows: - Saloon + 1 side of the luggage van end - guards comp - remaining side of the luggage end

I ordered an Arriva DVT from a local model shop whom I always generally pre-order from (This was during Hornby's supply farce), said DVT started appearing online at some retailers but quickly disappeared, my retailer kept saying still waiting for delivery, and as soon as the box shifters started to show no stock, I quicky looked on eBay and there was 1 shop on there (Chester model centre) selling them at retail, so I grabbed one. Eventually my original retailer rang me about a month later to say they won't be getting any, so based on this experience, if it's available somewhere else, buy it or risk loosing it.

This might have been covered already but I've just been looking at my collection of mk2 wiring schematics and the lighting in the bso/dbso is technically wrong. When the saloon lights come on, 50% of the van end lighting should also (as a means for passengers to walk past the cage and into the next coach). The other 50% is a manual switch to light the cage side. The guards comp is the only part to be completely independent of the rest, and shouldn't control both the guard comp and van end together.

Has anybody considered the visual difference between painting on plastic to a steel body of the real thing, thus requiring some tweaks to make it look correct on plastic? I'm going to buy some but they'll be weathered so hoping it'll be enough to hide the differences.

as someone who has put cash your way, with no responses to any emails, I'd say you are struggling to keep up to date with what you already have going on without having the added bonus of even more stuff to reply to. You have to ask your self the question, how have you survived without it? Do you need it to be able continue? Stick to what you know, make models. Let other facilities, eg RMW do the chatty chatty stuff.