knitpick

As a simplistic comment, when using live frog points, I would normally place an insulated rail joiner on both rails leading from the frog. BUT if the line from the point is leading to a dead end siding, then I'd cheat and not bother with an insulated rail joiner on that siding line. You then need to think about power beyond the insulated rail joiner - this can be direct from track just before the point or via a switch - the latter being safer from a crash prevention point of view.

I must admit that I use hardened steel cutters - and have on odd times used the Xuron track cutters. Also I place my spare hand over the top to catch any flying bit of the motor rod. So I don't bother with safety goggles - the cut off piece isn't going to go through my hand - but don't tell the Health & Safety Rep!

Sorry but I don't know off hand the relevant sales codes BUT . . . When I started with 009 and Peco track (late 60s / early 70s), it was only the "worn" random shape sleepers and 18" lengths. The points were 6" radius - or (if I recall correctly) 9" 'Y' points. Now the track is only available in either 3' lengths flexible or standard but much shorter lengths of rigid track. The left and right hand points are now 9" radius instead of 6". Also you can get flexible track with "normal" rather than randomised sleepers - much more accurate for a modern preserved line rather than a low maintenance industrial / early preservation line. Of course, all modern 009 ready to run locos seem to be limited to a minimum 9" - or worse 12" radius curves so won't run on my old layout. And the Roco HOe still comes with 6" fixed radius curves! So much for standards.

To add to my previous comment on Linda and Blanche, I was going to get Charles and possibly the original Blanche - but I daren't let my wife know these plans. Also you should note that my father-in-law had significant involvement with the Ffestiniog - hence my wife's interest (many holidays at Porthmadog). So the Harbour station buildings are also on the list (OK a bit off topic for these Hunslets but relevant in context).

My wife told me about these new models as they were announced. She also gave me permission to get Linda and Blanche BUT they MUST be 2-4-0s with tenders and green as running on the Ffestiniog Railway. So Bachmann, how soon will the preserved versions of these two engines be available? (I do note that others have stated interest in these variants already)

Sorry but you MUST have a spare operator with you / available. All day operating is exhausting and the more tired you get the more likely you are to make a mistake. There are also the issues of eating / drinking and "personal needs" breaks. And it's always good to visit other layouts and the trade stands at the show. When at an exhibition, we try to operate on the one hour on one hour off basis - though if short of operators it may be two hours on then one off. Also you may get an unexpected medical emergency; I had a very unexpected medical emergency once during an exhibition and had to stop operating and was unable to attend the following day (two day event).

Ah, awkward question. On gangwayed stock, the gangways should touch at all times. Even when going round a bend. At bends, the outer part should extend slightly and the inner contract. On a reverse curve, then they gangways stay connected but skew slightly. The result is that the internal gangway path remains a constant width even when skewed. In reality, coach gangways are very flexible but model ones are too stiff and do not connect like the real ones. Also on real coaches with buckeye couplings (Pullman types etc.) the buffers do NOT touch - verified by visual inspection at Kings Cross in the late 60s. The buffers will only touch on older coaches where screw couplings are used. So to run a model train with gangwayed coaches round a bend, then the gap must be too large. Of course you could change the gangways to cloth based ones and find a method of attaching them between coaches - but to me I'll accept the inaccurate distance and stay with molded gangways.

Just a quick thought but . . . One method of using dice is to throw a die to determine how many of each type of goods / freight wagon to send each day. So a 3 might mean 3 coal hoppers then a 2 could be 2 VDA vans, etc. One issue is when wagon load freight ceased and block trains became the norm. In this context, Scotland seemed to run wagon load trains much later than the South East. And Clay Hoods went in wagon load freight from the West Country to ceramics producers in the North. Though I do recall the odd "wagon load" / variable length fuel train to parts of the Sussex Coast until the receiving terminal closed (around the 1990s?)

Just a thought as you refer to the 4 wheel Wisbech & Upwell coaches. Thomas the Tank Engine had Toby - a W&U tram loco. There was also Henrietta a 4 wheel coach. Bachmann now do the TTTE models including Henrietta within the UK. This is a "plain" coach - i.e. no name printed nor face. OK - I believe that it is technically an HO model and I cannot vouch for its accuracy to the original W&U coaches - as opposed to the Britt Allcroft interpretation of Henrietta. But if you are happy with the compromise - try your nearest Bachmann stockist. You can always look at one and decide if you are happy with the TTTE version. I have accepted this - but then it is my railway. Notwithstanding the above, would like a Titfield Thunderbolt bogie coach as well.

Why am I now getting lots of irrelevant video clips on RMWeb? Views of busy Motorways; fairground carosels; a cruise chip; cooks at work; animals including bugs and insects; etc. Every time I click on something and open a new view I get a new irrelevant movie about 75cm x 40cm blocking the right hand part of the page. I could understand it if the clips were relevant to railways or modelling albeit they would still annoy. As it is, I visit RMWeb far less frequently due to these unwelcome irrelevant intrusions. SORT IT OUT

I have updated a few of my older TRi-Ang / Tri-Ang Hornby models with finer wheels. Specifically, the 0-6-0 chassis used on the Jinty, the 0-6-0 tender loco and 57xx; the 4-4-0 chassis on an SR L1 (also used for the LMS 2P and the 0-4-0 chassis under my Nellie. As suggested above, I have used Romford / Markits 1/8th" bushes in the frames and generally used Romford / Markits wheel and axle sets for quartering. Unfortunately, I was unable to get Markit wheels for Nellie at the time I was looking; so I think I used Alan Sharman wheels - quartering by eye. Also as noted, the gear wheel also needs to be bused. I found out that using the Romfords / Markits 1/8th" bushes then the gear wheel could be force fitted onto the bush resulting in a good "friction fit" to the Ronmford (and Sharman) axles. No need for glue nor solder; the locos run fine through modern point work - unlike the original wheel sets. One further comment; the old Tri-Ang screws to hold the coupling rods in place fit the Romford and Sharman wheels perfectly and have been reused along with the original coupling rods.

Lilliput still make the 0-6-2 Zillertal U class. I do wonder if a the current chassis would fit and if so, how easy is it to get a spare? Incidentally, I did get mine to go round 6" radius including the original Peco crazy track points. With modern 009 / HOe I guess that's a few old points to bin and a major layout rebuild?

As noted before, Hornby have previously done a Titfield Thunderbolt set with assorted errors. The set consisted a 14xx numbered as the film version; a Lowmac with the body from a 4 wheel coach and a Toad. The correct Loriot is makedly different from a Lowmac as is the "converted" coach body compared with the standard 4 wheel coach body. Also, this rush hybrid train was not pulled by the 14xx; rather it was "pulled" by Lion under the name Thunderbolt and removed from the "local museum". So following their recent issues of updates to historical Hornby and Tri-Ang models, Hornby seem to be issuing an updated and more accurate Titfield Thunderbolt set. We do not know what licensing agreement Hornby had when they issued their cruder model and how long that may have lasted for. But there does seem to be another point from the Copyright viewpoint. From memory, copyright has a limited lifetime. I thought is was extended to 50 years as pop stars lived longer; but it may be even longer than that. But if it is 50 years and the film is 70 years old - then there is no copyright issue. Also, it would have been nice if the Wisbech & Upwell tramway coach were issued possibly with the 14xx? But it would seem that even Rapido do not plan to issue that coach from the initial Titfield railway preservation train consist other than as part of a very pricey set.

The scale doesn't really matter. I've used Kadees for various DMUs and EMUs as I find the small tension lock can cause derailments when pushing - especially when you have 2 powered units coupled together (e.g. a 153 and 142). It's a lot easier to fit into NEM standard coupling pockets using 20s, 19s, 18s or rarely 17s. For couplings fitted at the end of DMUs, you may find that some cutting of the guards under the buffer beam height is required for the Kadee to poke through. I do have a Kadee coupling height gauge which I use on non-NEM fittings - well worth the spend.

Picking up on PhatBob's comment and going slightly off topic, Bachmann make both the 2EPB and the 2H. When the 3R "Tadpole" units were replaced and disbanded (OK, one 3R was kept working!), 3 of the 2EPB driving cabs were inserted into the middle 2H units to make the 3T units. I did suggest that as they had the mouldings, it should not be too difficult for Bachmann to produce a 3T. But apparently the intermediate couplings on the 2H are at a non-standard height and so the cab end coupling would not line up with the intermediate 2H coupling. And that's ignoring any electrical connection issues within the (now 3 car) set. Also some 2Hs were extended using redundant TSOs from withdrawn 4CEPs - and given the width discrepancies were (if I recall correctly) nick-named "slugs". These were given a separate subclass (205/1) from the as built 3Hs (205/0). Corridor connections were also created on the previously non-gangwayed 2H coaches. I've produced a model of 205 205 by adding gangways to a 2H. OK I've cheated by not altering the seating. But don't tell anyone. The gangways were bought as spares.