Jump to content
 

DK123GWR

Members
  • Posts

    581
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by DK123GWR

  1. 3 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

    I feel that the 10-cars run more easily than 9. Why an extra car should make any real difference I have no idea. The 06.55 Ply - Padd on which I am riding is a classic case of feeling sprightly as we approach Tiverton Parkway, just as the 13.03 Padd - Ply did Tuesday last week. I have little experience of 5-cars but suspect they have a similar advantage. 

    5 car units have three engines (so 0.6 engines per car, 6 on a 10 car unit).

    9 car units have 5 engines, which works out at 0.555... engines per car.

    • Like 2
    • Agree 1
    • Thanks 1
    • Informative/Useful 4
  2. Benediction, about the life of Siegfried Sassoon, is on iPlayer at the moment. It has a few bits of black and white footage of railways, as well as a small number of scenes where Sassoon is travelling during WWI. They do seem to have made an effort, and probably couldn't have done much better given the era it's set in - he and his brother leave separately for war on an SECR coach and a GWR Toplight (chocolate and cream, but an older style with lining around the windows). This scene also features a loco pulling the SECR train, but the shot only shows it below the running plate, presumably concealing something innapropriate. Later, as Sassoon leaves Liverpool for Scotland, an LMS coach (Stanier?) is seen in the background. If it is it's too new, but still an awful lot better than the Mk1s that some productions would be happy with.

    • Like 2
  3. 9 minutes ago, ess1uk said:

    Which line is Battersea Park station on?

    I think it's an alternative terminus on the ELL/Windrush Line for trains that would normally run to Clapham Junction. It only has a few trains per day and if I recall correctly these are mostly early mornings and late evenings. Is this just to avoid formal closure of the line?

  4. And while Waterloo was named after a bridge, I don't think the bridge (which was only 3 decades old at the time) was named independently of political considerations.

     

    Edit:

    Victoria (the queen, via the very new Victoria Street, and during her lifetime) also has a clear political hue.

    Maybe also Liverpool Street (the Prime Minister, via the admitedly slightly older Liverpool Street road).

    • Like 2
    • Agree 2
  5. 2 hours ago, RobAllen said:

    One thing that I have noticed is that it knows that I have 22 unread notifications, so I guess the problem is related to the viewing of my notifications.

    Not sure if that additional information helps you find the issue, as I guess that this isn't happening for everyone.

    The same here, I now have 21 unread notifications. Clicking on the bell, and even trying to go through to the dedicated page, does not change this.

  6. At Nailsea last year, I overheard a conversation between two gentlemen walking past a Croatian layout called Osjusko Stari with thick West Country accents to the effect of:

    "That there's some foreign stuff."

    "Crikey."

     

    In telling this story before somebody remarked to me that they may well have said the same about the LMS.

     

     

    One place I think would make a good model, and which will be familiar to some British people, is Aguas Calientes in Peru. Look around on Street View and I'm sure you'll see its potential:

    https://www.google.com/maps/@-13.1551661,-72.5256983,2a,75y,58.25h,79.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAg8uy3S9EyNPekfl3JjMiw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu

     

    If you are looking up the stream towards the footbridges, the rails leading round the curve on your right hand side lead to this junction at the edge of town:

    https://www.google.com/maps/@-13.1578695,-72.5235395,2a,75y,341.11h,76.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snC37LWipxdiMI5ugINkZRw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu

     

    The other line comes from this terminus, on a higher level than the first picture.

    https://www.google.com/maps/@-13.1569789,-72.5236113,2a,70.7y,328.67h,85.4t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sx2AZ-MUSCWCoWkUmISafvA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu

     

     

    Another thought would be the railways in the Llobregat valley near Barcelona, with metre, standard, Iberian, and mixed gauge lines running all sorts of passenger and freight trains.

    • Like 2
    • Informative/Useful 1
    • Interesting/Thought-provoking 2
  7. Since the red banner appeared last night saying that the 'Classifieds' section was out of action, my notifications have not loaded. I have a bell in the top corner with a number next to it (gradually increasing, so that bit seems to be working). When I click on the bell, it brings down the box as usual, but the wheel just spins around and never displays the notifications. Clicking on 'View all notifications' takes me to a page with the usual url, but this page does not load and displays the error code 500. All other functionality appears to be working as usual. I am using Chrome on a Windows 11 laptop if this helps.

  8. I only have experience with code 100, but all Streamline points should be perfectly reliable if correctly wired. I have never had a derailment on Streamline points of any kind (when the correct route is set!) using modern rolling stock. The only reason for avoidng small radius points is aesthetic, which doesn't apply in the fiddle yard. Set-track points can cause issues, but they are an even smaller radius (and turn through a larger angle). I would focus on getting the best possible length and number of sidings (which usually means using small radius and curved  Streamline points).

    3 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

     

    Slips might cause the odd derailment, but I generally don't see much use for them in most fiddle yards.

    They could be useful for adding a headshunt, or allowing a dead-end extension to a through siding to store and otherwise over-length train. They might be useful if you have multiple lines feeding into the fiddle yard, depending on how easily you want to move stock between them.

  9. 13 minutes ago, Buckfire said:

    I think I know the post you’re talking about, but, as with many other older posts on this thread, the pictures are gone, and I do t know if anyone has salvaged them. God, please tell me there’s a way to retrieve them without going through too many hoops. 

    You will have to ask the poster. If they don't have them it's very unlikely that anyone else will.

    • Agree 3
  10. 1 hour ago, C126 said:

    I assume rail travel is declining in this demographic group.

    I can't (quickly) find any data to support or reject the assumption, but I'm sceptical (unless you're talking about children travelling with families - where the high marginal cost of rail travel on some journeys carries greater weight). Teenagers and those in their early 20s though are more climate concious, more left wing, and less able to afford car ownership than our immediate predecessors (a newly qualified cousin of mine can't get insurance for less than £10,000/year). That said, when on trains or at stations (even Didcot) most people (and this is true of all ages) are staring at screens.

    I think that rationalisation is a big issue - of both rolling stock and operating practices. My current understanding is that for a model based on the Devizes branch in 1938/9, I can have (at least) Manors, Moguls, Halls, Castles, 57xx, 54xx, 28xx, and quite a few other locos could be justified occaisionally. I have local, regional, and express passenger services with local and long-distance freight. There is plenty of opportunity for shunting - different at each station. And this is on a single track line where the largest station has three platforms.

     

    How big would your prototype need to be to get anything like that diversity on the modern railway? The best I can think of is a cut-down Oxford, with at most one through line between the platforms (or model the future layout with three through platforms and no freight lines), a single bay for Chiltern services, and simplified sidings. But that would still likely end up as big as a model inspired by steam-era Trowbridge, which would offer everything the Devizes branch does and more. I love the look of the modern GWR and much of the freight that runs alongside it (EWS livery is still a common sight near Oxford) but I would still need a lot more space to build a modern layout as interesting as Wiltshire in the 1930s.

     

    And to attack an important premise of the argument for producing more current stock, if I want to see the modern GWR, I can go for a walk. How often do you think a 43xx comes past my house with a long train of four-wheeled wagons? When do you think I last got to see a Bulldog running? Replicating things I've seen in real life is appealing, but no more so than creating things I never could.

    • Like 3
  11. On 24/11/2023 at 18:48, Siberian Snooper said:

    There was an article or two in the much missed GWJ on Devizes, with a good selection of photos and other information. I don't have ready access to my collection to give chapter and verse on what was in the article.

     

     

    I'm hoping to review these at the library this evening, and I'm trying to get access to a few books which might contain some useful information. Unfortunately, the coach formations book is one of the few they don't have a copy of. Incidentally, the only website I can find claiming to have this book in stock was last updated in 2006. Since it doesn't appear in National Library of Wales searches either, I would be willing to go out on a limb and say that the British Library is the only (non-specialist?) library in the country to have a copy (I'm assuming it does because it legally has to, but can't check because of the recent cyber attack).

  12. 24 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

    Red Engines (but not the Double Red 'Kings-) were definitely permitted via Devizes at September 1938.  The wording of the authority. almost suggests that it wasn't new but might have been amernded from an older authority for 'Heavy Engines' over the route.  

     

    Interestingly the 1927 Passenger Train Loads Book (the first the GWR issued) shows loads for both 'Stars/Castles ' and 'Saints' between Patney & Chirton and Holt Jcn.  This booklet does not contain any sort of note indicating that if a load was included that did not necessarily mean that the relevant class of engine might not be permitted over the route clearly implying that loads were only issued for authorised classes of engine

    The September 1931 Service Time Table, on the other hand, says:

     

    "HEAVY ENGINES BETWEEN PATNEY AND HOLT JUNCTION VIA DEVIZES.

    The following types of engine are prohibited from running over the section named:-"

     

    And then lists: Saints, Stars, Castles, Halls, Kings, 83xx, Cities, Counties, Badmintons (etc.), 47xx, County Tanks, 31xx, 2-8-0 tank engines, 56xx, 66xx, 1101 class, and absorbed Red engines of the 0-6-0T and 0-6-2T classes.

     

    The sole exception is for Halls, Castles, and 47xx locos, which can run onto the line with freight trains at Patney to allow other trains to pass.

     

    It lists loads for partly fitted and accelerated goods trains only for the category including the 43xx and 4001-4045 (all other routes have loads for engines up to 47xx and Castles).

     

     

    A September 1938 upgrade seems reasonable though, even if the Manors didn't leave as soon as Red engines were permitted. Between February and April 1939, four new Granges were allocated to OOC and Westbury, at around the same time the four Manors seem to have left. Could it have been a case of keeping the Manors on until there was something suitable to replace them?

    _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    It has been suggested that I revisit Priddle and Hyde by a modeller who does recall Manors being mentioned, giving a very similar list to the ones I had inferred might have worked on the line based on shed allocations.

    • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
  13. 12 hours ago, Siberian Snooper said:

    There was an article or two in the much missed GWJ on Devizes, with a good selection of photos and other information. I don't have ready access to my collection to give chapter and verse on what was in the article.

     

     

    According to the index, three articles by Bill Crosbie-Hill on his wartime experiences. Probably worth looking at anyway, but I'm not sure they'll answer my question about the larger 1930s passenger trains unless something's mentioned in passing.

  14. I have read the main book on this branch, Priddle and Hyde's 'GWR to Devizes', as well as a smaller volume by Nigel Bray. The line was upgraded to Red RA, as I understand it, in 1939 when a bridge was strengthened. There are many photos in the books on the line taken from this point onwards, showing Halls and Castles on the long-distance passenger services (London/Reading to Trowbridge/Bristol). What would these have been hauled by prior to the upgrade? There are no photos from this period.

     

    I have observed in J.W.P. Rowledge (and this website, which duplicates much of the relevant information) that when built in January 1938 - January 1939 (before the upgrade), 7802 and 7808 were allocated to OOC, and 7809 and 7814 to Westbury. By nationalisation (the next data point for both sources) all had moved away, to Aberystwyth, Oswestry, and Bristol Bath Road (joining two Manors already in Bristol). The OOC locos both moved away in April-May 1939. This site suggests that it's not clear what OOC would need a Manor for, and I am inclined to agree - except that maybe, as the largest locos permitted, they would have been useful on the Devizes trains worked by Castles from just a few months later. I am not sure which month the bridge was upgraded, but by this point the threat of war (stated in Priddle and Hyde as the reason for the upgrade) would surely have been clear. On this basis, it would seem plausible that they had a brief stint on trains via Devizes, but that is the strongest claim I can make. Can anyone contribute evidence for or against this hypothesis?

     

    Furthermore, what would have been used before the Manors? (Or before the Red engines, if the Manors at these sheds were used for something else?) Again, there are no photos, or even textual references, that I have been able to find. The obvious answer would seem to be a 43xx - also a group D engine with Blue RA, and it seems many were allocated at different times to sheds where they might have been used on these trains, including Reading, OOC, and Westbury (though scanning the 1931 timetable, it appears more likely that the locos came from Reading/OOC than Bristol/Westbury.

     

    Any thoughts (including reasoned guesswork) would be much appreciated.

    • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
  15. 2 hours ago, ISW said:

    Has this reduced the 'pulling' power of the loco?

     

    I've found that with BEMF 'on', if you put your finger infront of the loco you can feel it increase the power. With BEMF 'off', a finger just stops the loco.

     

    Ian

    I haven't performed that specific test, but yes, I think so. Previously the loco was moving off at speed step 1 (albeit eratically) whereas afterwards (and before I altered the start voltage) it was only doing so at about step 5. I think that's what you'd expect to happen. As I understand it, the BEMF is a proxy for the motor's speed, and the chip is meant to use the reading to determine whether the motor is running faster or slower than expected at a given speed step, then change the voltage to compensate. In this case, the motor was running slower than expected, so the voltage was increased to speed it up. However, for reasons that I don't understand (and, since it's working OK without BEMF, don't need to) it must have been severely overcompensating at times, leading to the sudden acceleration.

    • Like 1
  16. I have purchased a Hornby Star class on ebay, which was DCC fitted. CV8 reads 151 and CV7 reads 89, I believe indicating that this is some sort of LokPilot. At very low speed steps it is a jerky runner. At around speed step 8 it can suddenly jump up to a very high speed. Often it is just brief wheelslip, but sometimes it races off and has to be brought to a stop. CV29 is set to 34, so analogue running should be disabled. I haven't yet had the chance to test on DC, but will report back when I can. Does anyone have an idea what might be causing this sort of behaviour?

     

    EDIT: The jerkiness at low speeds appears to be the same issue, but with more frequent and shorter duration periods of 'running away' - several per rotation - on a loco which is (apart from that major issue) running correctly.

     

    EDIT: I turned off BEMF by setting CV49 = 0. This has solved the running away issue, although the loco probably needs a few further tweaks it is now usable.

×
×
  • Create New...