Jump to content

PenrithBeacon

Members
  • Content Count

    3,861
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by PenrithBeacon

  1. Yep, sorry, I hadn't noticed this was a 7mm thread! Cheers
  2. May I ask where you source your chain drives from? Cheers
  3. When I bought a chassis kit off SEF it came with a Branchlines gearbox. They're very good, very good indeed. I too think that the motor in the OP is well worth dumping. In order to ensure good running it might be worth running a 1/8" reamer through the bearings. Cheers
  4. I've had a look at the model a few moments ago and I noticed that I have scuffed the aerial off the Rx. I'll have to solder a short length of wire on and try to remember in future that it might need to be reinforced with a bit of insulating tape.
  5. I did on the phone, odd that it was filtered. Judging by the weather warnings it isn't very wise to go far this weekend. Think I'll stay home.
  6. I'd be surprised if reducing the weight a little has much effect, particularly for a small shunting layout. Some three years ago, this engine was tested out on the NLG's test track and it pulled an enormous train that stretched halfway round the circle! I think it'll be OK. Cheers
  7. One critical comment does not make 'a history of being negative towards this exhibition' and my comment was not as critical as others concerning the 2015 event.Regrettably the trade at the MK show isn't as good as it used to be, why I don't know, perhaps the new customers with their kids aren't buying at the trade stalls, so the traders go elsewhere. Adding Sunday to this event has improved it as it's a lot less crowded, particularly on the Sunday afternoon but the reduced trade is an issue for the enthusiast, though not for the parents of the young families who probably can't afford much anyway. This an expensive game.
  8. This is a view of the underside, the recharging socket is left centre and the SPDT switch is at the top. The coupling loop at the bottom is to be replaced by a S&W hook Cheers
  9. Sorry that it all went very quiet here. The reason is that I gave up on the Jinty for the time being because the AGW wheels I have are 3mm axles and I need 1/8 axles for the conversion. I'll try to do a swop next time I see AGW at a show. That shouldn't be a problem as the packaging hasn't been opened. I turned to a Dapol/ Model Rail Sentinel which has already been converted to P4 using Ultrascale wheels. I decided that it was possible using the components I already had but the mazac weight would need to be chopped about a bit. There is still a lot of weight available after the surgery with a junior hacksaw. I damaged the motor with the soldering iron so I replaced it with with an N-Drive 12V motor, but on reflection it might have been better to use a 6V N20 instead. The motor has a standard worm fitted and it's glued in using epoxy. I'm not as happy as I would like to be with the neatness of the wiring but hopefully I'll get better with more practice Cheers
  10. I'm a bit disappointed with the trade http://www.mkmrs.org.uk/exhibitions/traders/ .
  11. Railroom Electronics do 'DCC Decoder wire stranded 0.5mm' in different colours. All Components do 'EW53 very fine 7/40' in different colours. They appear to be the same to me
  12. Sorry but the comment about the flangeless wheel is irrelevant. The proposed 2-8-2 was to have 5'-3" wheels while the 9F had 5'-0" wheels. the difference is only relevant because a ten-coupled engine would have better adhesion than an eight-coupled engine while the 3" difference in wheel diameter would make no difference at all to top speeds. The 9F could reach 75mph comfortably, with a top speed of around 90, and might have become a mixed traffic design in time if given train heating. The problem, of course, was that time wasn't on the side of steam traction.
  13. The proposed BR 2-8-2 design was opposed by Riddles because he foresaw the need for a heavy freight engine that was more powerful than the existing grouping 2-8-0 designs and he was impressed by the possibilities of the extra adhesion shown by the WD 2-10-0. He therefore insisted that work on the 2-8-2, which was intended as a heavy duty mixed traffic engine, was stopped. History, I think, shows he was right.
  14. There doesn't seem to be any provenance with this engine; it isn't mentioned in any histories of British steam loco design I know of and that tender is alien.
  15. IIRC one of the enthusiast societies ran a special over the branch with two Ivatts, but the train was operated in top and tail mode because it wasn't allowed to double head them. There is some archive cine somewhere in my library but I can't remember where!
  16. https://www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=branch+line+to+lyme+regis&crid=O30J9844YNG1&sprefix=lyme+regis+branch%2Caps%2C824&ref=nb_sb_ss_i_1_17 Didn't take long!
  17. Yes it is, brilliant! I had a few hours in Knott End last summer, took the ferry from Fleetwood. Now there is a souvenir shop on the site of the station but the pub is well worth a try. Cheers
  18. My Dad had one of those, a definite on the wants list Cheers
  19. Always a good viewing, enjoyed it yet again at Alton, please don't retire it yet. Cheers
  20. Having been an engineer for most of my working life I think i'm only too aware of this, and my post should have provided you with the clues that I have that knowledge, assuming you have the nous to work things out. Your last sentence is very much a duplicate of one I posted. Essentially the power classification system for steam locomotives is a way of conveying the power of a locomotive without expecting those at the front end to have to work it out from scratch every time. Although the manager in charge of a shed would have that knowledge, most were very educated men, those employed on the footplate or the traffic office would probably not have the technical education to be able to do it. Which isn't to say that they wouldn't be able to decide, empirically, whether a locomotive would have been able to carry out the task allotted to it. This, of course, calls into question the need for such a system anyway.
  21. There are times when you are infuriatingly condescending. I'm not just on the right lines, everything in my post is simply a rephrasing of the historical records at Kew. You could make the effort yourself. The formula for calculating the tractive effort does include the speed of the engine and when that speed is zero tractive effort is zero. The nominal speed is conventionally considered to be 4mph and that is the figure used in the Ian Allen books. As to the way that BR(S) classified some, but not all their engines, eg 7P 5FA the A (or B) is an index of how well, or not, a locomotive could brake an unfitted train. It has nothing to do with actually moving the train. Some locomotives did have the B allocated eg 2P 2FB for the E4s but by no means all had this form written on cab or bunker.
×
×
  • 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.