Chamby

Blimey, that’s a lot of snow disappeared since I was last there in mid-summer!

Tread carefully... the voluntary sector can be even more political than the work environment. There are great volunteering opportunities out there, but you’ll find plenty of lemons too. Congrats on your retirement, with a hobby like ours, you won’t look back!

I doubt if anyone reading this thread has bought the RTR GT3 in BR ‘double arrow’ blue livery... or the APT in a livery it never carried. Unrebuilt ‘Hush Hush’ in Apple green, anyone? Several RTR manufacturers don’t seem to be restricted by prototypical liveries any more.

The WTT I have for the former GC line to London would support the use of Class H as a default, it was used almost universally for the famed Windcutters/Runners. Perhaps because it was impossible to predict the formation of each train until the day!

That’s a rare utterance of the ‘S’ word. I’ll take the bait... go on, I dare you to open the box!

Re: close coupling of commuter stock, to me the answer would seem to be fairly straightforward. Yes it is to do with reducing the ‘lost’ space between coaches, but ask yourself what is that converted into? Each extra compartment squeezed into a rake of non-corridor stock would accommodate 8-10 (?) additional fare paying passengers... over the lifetime of these coaches I would expect that could add up to a tidy additional revenue. Of course you could just build longer coaches, or add on an extra one, but if platform or train length is an issue then it’s the only available option, apart from perhaps adopting double-deck stock as trialled on the SR and used more widely overseas, where the arguments would presumably be similar.

Try the Bachmann spares website… LMS Crimson Lake version would seem to be available for £20 the tender top and £10 for the chassis/wheels.

And the British Grand Prix qualifying, and England v Spain under 21’s are all live on free-to-view today... doesn’t happen often these days :(

Backscenes don’t have to be vertical. You could perhaps preserve much of the view by angling the backscene over Polperran?

Sorry! It’s a combination of my sense of humour and because you call your fiddle yard “Paddington”. If a short freight is being diagrammed from London Paddington to deepest Cornwall, why not send it via an equally unlikely route for good measure...?

Via Birmingham Snow Hill, I presume?

Thanks for all the replies, some very helpful and informative suggestions. In particular, separating the running lines from their respective fiddleyards is something we hadn’t considered but it makes sense. I should have mentioned that the accessories will have completely separate control. Using MERG circuit breakers is something we are already considering for creating sub-districts, thanks for the endorsement. The comments about current are interesting. We haven’t built the fiddle yard yet, but we’re anticipating all the loco’s awaiting their turn to be ‘live’ to the power supply but not driving. Their current draw under these circumstances, and the number of loco’s that each handset can handle, we are still assessing options. Thanks again.

Our club is making its first foray into DCC control with its new exhibition layout. Some of our members are already DCC users, but club layouts have all been analogue control before. This layout is intended to provide an exhibition outlet for our DCC users, and to help other interested members to perhaps make the transition. We are having a debate about which is best... to have a separate 5A power supply feeding each power district, or to use a single 8A power booster but with each district protected by circuit breakers. We envisage 3x power districts: Up and Down lines, each with their associated fiddle yards, and one for the goods yard, so three districts in total. Anticipating around 30 trains/loco's in use when at an exhibition. There seem to be pro's and con's to both approaches, but are there any clubs already out there with a large DCC exhibition layout who can help shorten our learning curve - and hopefully save us making some painful mistakes? With thanks in anticipation!

A bit of basic modelling undertaken this week. Take one little-used LMS Fairburn tank, gently remove the lettering, add BR mixed traffic lining (fiddly!) and re-number it to a Neasden and (later) Woodford Halse allocated example manufactured in the same batch as the donor model. Now with re-touched weathering and a sound chip fitted, it will hopefully become a really useful tank engine. Whilst researching the numbers and allocation of the class, I was surprised to find that no less than 277 Fairburn's were constructed, 41 of which were unusually built at Brighton works in 1950 for service on the Southern Railway, but still allocated numbers 42066-42106 in the London Midland Region series. The design evolved to become the BR Standard 4MT tank, seeing another 155 being built, most of them at Brighton. Unsurprisingly given the total number built, they were widely distributed including a few on the former GC even before it was transferred over tho the LMR.

With regard to the cost of RTR products and their level of detail: Three observations: Firstly, more established companies have often accumulated more ‘baggage’ over time that adds to their overheads... in-house functions such as finance, marketing and HR, stuff like premises, utilities and consumables all create a fixed cost burden to the company and whilst these are not a cost directly associated with the tooling of an individual product, they still need to be recovered from sales. Newer companies will be ‘leaner and meaner’ in comparison, carrying a much lower overhead, so are able to turn a profit with lower costs. They can spend more on tooling the details, because they spend less on other costs. The likes of Accurascale will no doubt encounter this challenge as they continue to grow and their corporate waistline expands into middle age. Secondly, If you are looking from a normal viewing distance watching a model train run by, you tend not to notice the detail, your appreciation is of the broader picture and higher levels of detail are simply overlooked. In this scenario, the concept of ‘layout’ loco’s and stock is sound. However when stood side by side in a siding, or on a slow moving shunting layout, ones eye will linger on the detail and the difference becomes immediately obvious. So your point of view regarding the worth of added detail will depend very much on the nature of your model railway. Thirdly, there is an optimum level of detail, and a note of caution to those manufacturers lauding the highest levels of detail, and that relates to robustness. Bits falling off have become more commonplace as the bag of separately applied parts has got bigger, even factory applied detail parts can fall off easily, for example the bogie guard irons of the otherwise superb Accurascale Deltic (which is still my favourite RTR model of all time). A higher level of detail is pointless if it ends up not being there at all. Delicate details are great in a display cabinet of course, but not so clever when the product is being regularly handled on a layout. So a vote from me for having the maximum level of detail that can be achieved without compromising the robustness of the product under reasonable everyday handling!

@St Enodoc A quick question, if I may? I understand that the emphasis of Mid-Cornwall lines is on operation, and you regularly have running sessions with several people working together. But in between these, how much of the layout and operating sequence can be run by just yourself from a single command station... or do you walk all round the layout to work the various control panels in turn?

As a relative ignoramus on the subject, I find Volume 1 of Banks and Carter a most useful reference source. I am aware of the criticism out there re: inaccuracy of some detail, but still remain in awe of the information that it contains and how well it has otherwise been presented. The bulk of its content still seems to be correct? And it is an absorbing read for those of us with limited access to source information. Much better to have this tome even in its current form, than not to have it at all... even with its flaws it has improved my knowledge, understanding and modelling efforts considerably. I am sure that, as is often the case, these initial errors can be corrected in any subsequent reprints as the collective knowledge of more minds is shared constructively for the common good. I look forward to volume 2 with great interest!

That must make it a tie...

A tale of two 9F’s: This week, Bachmann have distributed the latest versions of their excellent 9F model. Single chimney, BR1F tenders, including class members used on the 'Runners' and 'Windcutters' up and down the former GC between Woodford Halse and Annesley. Normally I would be delighted, but actually I am not amused! Typically, the new models have been introduced just after I modified two other earlier 9F releases: Zod's law in operation, as usual. So herewith, I share a tale of two 9F's that were modified to get exactly what I needed, only for Bachmann to release the exact same locomotives the following week. First off, I had an earlier model of Bachmann's 9F, 92116. This had the required single chimney, but hauled a BR1C tender more appropriate for the London Midland region. So a relatively simple matter of renumbering and a tender swop. A quick search on the Bachmann spares website and a suitable BR1F tender body was sourced, it just needed the late motif changing to the earlier 'cycling lion' to be right for what I wanted. A Bachmann crew, some real coal in the tender, a touch of weathering and class H lamps added to complete: The second 9F was converted from Hornby's R3987, No. 92194. This was released with a BR1F tender, but carried the later double chimney. So a turned brass replacement single chimney was sourced (Precision), the double chimney removed with a Dremel and the replacement installed and painted using Precision matt black. Again, the 'cycling lion' emblem replaced the later logo, crew was added (ModelU this time), real coal in the tender and class H lamps. So pictured here for a direct comparison between modified Bachmann (above) and Hornby (below) 9F's: The differences are subtle, and make for an interesting comparison. Of course, you can now just go online and order either 92010 or 92069 from your preferred retailer and save yourself the effort! I have found the following websites useful for researching the details and differences between different BR locomotives, and other classes: https://www.brdatabase.info/ is useful for searching by locomotive number, it gives details of overhaul dates, modifications and shed allocations. http://shedbashuk.blogspot.com is really a database of loco-spotters logs. The search function is a little convoluted but it contains by date, the locomotives that were actually logged by loco-spotters at any given loco shed. It gives you a good idea of what was around, where and when. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BR_Standard_Class_9F Wikipedia, of course, can be a veritable minefield of information. Useful information here about the variations between class members, tender types, regional allocations, etc etc. Not all locomotive classes are as well documented as the 9F, but it's a good point of call. Of course there are a number of books that are also available with even more information. I have browsed through the GCLE texts in my library and observed which individual locomotives featured more frequently in the photographs taken, this also helps to identify the condition and tender logo's carried at a specific date, for example. Fine if you have access to them, but the above websites are instantly available and free. My thanks go to those responsible for collating and maintaining these invaluable resources.

To my eye, it’s more about the expanse of frame sides being exposed, suggesting something is missing or unfinished - undressed even. The Great Bear has steps strategically placed, cleverly covering the bare frames.

Surely the world has developed somewhat since the probably tongue-in-cheek comment made by Fanny at a time only five years after the opening of the Stockton and Darlington railway! In the years since then, I suggest that locomotives with masculine names have far outnumbered females. Most of the female named locomotives are probably titled - Princesses, Duchesses, Ladies and Queens especially come to mind, but the masculine names are far more varied. The nicknaming of more modern locomotive traction is hardly complimentary to the female gender either: There have been some female associations, such as the German first generation diesels nicknamed ‘Lolo’s’ owing to their bulbous front being reminiscent of a certain actress of the time. But oh dear: Skips, Sheds, Tractors and Gronks... hardly feminine associations, I suggest!

We've had fantastic weather this last week, at last! It rather signals the end of the 'modelling season'. The local beach and our garden beckon, and regular family visitors to our Cornish cove will inevitably drag me away from the modelling bench for much of the summer. So, a quick update and summary of the winter season's progress with the layout: My focus ended up being mainly on the scenic requirements of unfinished corners of the layout. At the north end of the station, a factory unit was installed (J&S Models Canal Warehouse) and a Bachmann Scenecraft GCR signal box was modified to better resemble the timber clad version at Leicester Central. Chain Link fencing (Scale Model Scenery) and mill workers unloading sacks (ModelU) complete the scene. Note the 'bus on a bridge', Leicester style. This corner was originally going to be hidden, so Peco Code 100 track work was laid owing to the number of curved points required here, but the plan has since been opened up and it now jars somewhat - a remodelling of this station approach will be a future project. November saw my annual pilgrimage to Warley, where just along from the JS Models stand I discovered some fabulous trees by Primo Models. A new forest-edge of firs on the countryside side of the layout was the outcome: Turning my attention to the other unfinished corner of the layout, Leicester Passenger South signal box was a second conversion from the Bachmann product, this was a more substantial conversion involving much hacksawing, raising the height to better reflect the original at modelled location. For now, it is sited on the wrong side of the station approach but it will eventually be moved to its proper location in front of the operating position. LED's have been installed in both signal boxes and the mill, work is still in progress under the boards to wire in DCC accessory decoders to control this lighting. I hope to eventually install working lighting on the station too, for night-time operation. The now-installed turntable is the main feature in the 'southern approach' corner. A Heljan unit, the operators cabin has been removed but it still needs vacuum tanks and the associated brackets and piping to be modelled, all in good time. The surrounding wall is true to prototype, though the track layout has been simplified owing to space restrictions. The V2 is also a recent addition to the locomotive fleet. Last but by no means least, I have changed the control system from a Gaugemaster Prodigy wireless unit, to an ECoS base station. Despite the seemingly daunting requirements to link it up with my Mac, it proved surprisingly easy to upload appropriate UK locomotive pictures from the ESU user database to facilitate the display. I shall have a go at generating my own images based on the layout's roster in due course. One nice feature of the ECoS unit is that my old gauge master system will simply plug into the back of it, so I can still use the Prodigy handsets (and through the wi-fi adapter, any mobile smart phone) for additional locomotive control. The final part of the layout requiring scenification can be seen on the right hand side of the above photo. It is on the inside of the end curve, between the turntable and engine shed, and currently littered with 'stuff'. A row of about 20 terraced houses would fit nicely into this location so that, and completing the lighting installation, will probably top the list of next autumn's projects. So that's sort of it for now, apart from the general running of trains and working on operational refinements, as and when the opportunity arises. However, discussions are ongoing with the management re: a possible relocation of the layout to allow a longer run, though that will likely involve a loft conversion to our home and the project is currently being scoped up for feasibility. Fingers crossed!

I am one of the many: what seems like a reasonable monthly rate of spend on my hobby has built up over the years into a collection that is much greater than my layout needs, and represents what seems like an inordinate spend. There are many reasons for this. My interests are broad, but my layout represents just one carefully selected time/location that I focus on. I have sufficient stock to run it in either the early fifties, or BR blue diesel era. I also have a few pre-grouping trains as another personal interest, plus some western region hydraulics and even four modern image rakes that run on club layouts. Then there is the legacy of my earlier interest in Swiss metre gauge.... Is this excessive? It’s certainly way more than I need, but it still gives me much enjoyment. Yet this indulgent collection has also cost me well under half the price that my next door neighbour has just spent on his new camper van, and my annual hobby spend is way less than other friends spend on their holidays, golf club fees, sports cars... and especially those with boating interests! So you see, it’s all relative.

My ECoS has arrived, though I’m still getting my head around setting it up... and installing somewhere to site it! Ethernet crossover cables are now ordered, etc. And tomorrow I hope to see what user-designed UK loco images are already out there. It certainly seems to be a very capable unit. Re: using a phone handset control for driving loco’s, I hope to use my ‘old’ GM Prodigy unit with its WiFi attachment, plugged into the sniffer port. One reason for upgrading now, was the knobs failing on the Prodigy handsets, but it still works fine through the phone and WiThrottle app.

Very many thanks to all above for the informative replies. 50210 it is, then. I’ll have to hunt further for that UK retailer selling at under £600, assuming they have stock!