Jump to content

D9020 Nimbus

RMweb Gold
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

528 Good

About D9020 Nimbus

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. You haven't seen any of Michael Portillo's programmes, then…
  2. Some standard 009 couplers can be uncoupled using a magnet from above, but some can't—Peco, Bachmann and recent Lilliput for example; "old" made-in-Vienna Lilliput can be magnetically uncoupled.
  3. His reviews can be useful, provided you're aware of his prejudices (which isn't difficult, they're pretty obvious) in that you can at least see how well, or otherwise, models run — it's not always obvious in magazine reviews. And he reviews some models which are hard to find independent reviews of — not thinking of the cheap rubbish found in the above list, but those commissioned by Model Rail — by definition Model Rail can't do an independent review of these, and other magazines don't generally even mention them. The only model of these which I have is the N class. Not the same ve
  4. Rix Products make a plastic uncoupling tool for use with Microtrains couplers on US models—you insert it between the knuckles, twist clockwise, and job done. Should be available from N Scale American Trains in the UK. It works with Dapol Easi-Shunt couplings too, but I haven't had any luck getting them to couple on Peco 009 wagons. Might give it another try, seeing @PaulRhB's video above. Be aware though that some 009 models do not have NEM mounts—especially Minitrains. As far as I can tell from his YouTube videos, Ted Polet appears to use standard N gauge couplings on
  5. I've had it twice in the last week, but I'm still on 13.7. Was planning to update this week — not now I think.
  6. I prefer to view new content in compressed mode. But from time to time, the view switches to expanded mode in the middle of a list of topics — see attachment. iPad/Safari.
  7. Have you actually tried this, I wonder? Yes, you can fit Dapol Easi-Shunt couplings in the pockets on Peco 009 stock (which you can't do on Farish stock fitted with NEM pockets, but that's another story) but they don't work. I found that the two Dapol couplings just butted up against one another and would not couple. I presume they rely on there being some side-to-side movement being allowed by the coupling box, but the Peco ones are totally rigid. Clearly the Dapol couplings don't work in the same way as the Kadee NEM 362 couplings do. The Peco 009 wagons also can't w
  8. Perhaps the change will lead to a revival of specialist UK importers, many of which have closed in recent times, e.g. Winco, Model Masters, Model Junction, … It's not that long ago that buying models from overseas shops was rare, EU or not.
  9. I don't think Dapol locos get split gears. Farish do. So I think Dapol's reliability is better than Farish. I have only one Dapol loco that developed a fault (and was replaced by the shop) but umpteen Farish locos that have developed split gears. You must have either been very unlucky with Dapol, or very lucky with Farish!
  10. But some did survive to 1959, I think, and there is one "preserved" (sort of). It's also an ideal companion to the G5. There were certainly more of these in 1955 than the W1 or P2…
  11. The boiler used on the BR Standard 3MT 2-6-2Ts (and the 2-6-0s for that matter) was of GWR origin (Swindon No. 4, modified). Source: Locomotive Panorama, volume 2 by E.S.Cox (Ian Allan). Chapter 1, page 23. My copy cost £1 in 1974! What's pure LMS, anyway — after all William Stanier was imported from a certain other railway…
  12. It can't, really, but Cyril Freezer's coining of the term — when it really was modern image — seems to have stayed with us. Seems to cause difficulties for those who really are modelling "modern image". Doesn't seem to have an equivalent in other countries, as far as I can tell. Bachmann's "era" system — modelled on that used in continental Europe (especially Germany) though with different numbers — doesn't seem to have caught on with the general modelling public.
  13. A 2P, but not the most recent one which originated with Airfix, issued by Mainline after their demise, went to Dapol and then to Hornby. I still think the ex-LNER D49 is more likely, since they were named. However I've just realised that 2021 is the 40th anniversary of "the year of the loco" in 1981 (I think) which produced four 4-4-0s (D49, Schools, Compound, County) — could there be something similar this year, but with some different types…
  14. Just thinking — this isn't the first time a signaller has made a mistake leading to an accident in the event of a system failure, though on this occasion, without any fatalities. A relief signaller might know how to work the box in normal circumstances, but when something unexpected goes wrong, with the signaller fatigued and under time pressure… It did seem to me reading the report that the signaller was too ready to authorise movement past a signal at Danger. But there may have been many underlying reasons for this.
  15. There seems to have been a tendency in this case to assume a signal had failed if it couldn't be cleared—rather than looking at any other possibility. While fatigue and time pressure may have helped lead to this, I wonder if signals not clearing due to a failure of the signal itself are really that common?
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.