GoingUnderground

Whenever I see mention of getting to Ally Pally by train it always reminds me that it did once have a rail service right to the door which almost became part of the Underground. A wonderful opportunity was missed when the uncompleted sections of the "Northern Heights" part of London Transport's 1930s New Works plans was abandoned after WW2.

Ron, If you're into following how Bachmann outsource their decoders it is easy to tell, but not everyone has that knowledge. And the OP simply stated that it was a rebadged ESU product without explaining how they knew what it was. I couldn't tell one from the other, but then I don't buy or use Bachmann decoders. I have seen comments on here in the past that Bachmann switched from ESU to another supplier, but I don't think that the posts that I saw explained how to tell who supplied what to Bachmann. . Whilst they may not be in the current ranges from ESU and Lenz, the sender units do turn up on ebay from time to time. So knowing that they exist could be useful to the OP. There are some on ebay right now from a seller in the US.

CV28 (twenty eight) does not turn on Railcom. In decoders equipped with the autoregistration functionality known as Railcom Plus, it is used to turn RailComPlus on and off. On ESU decoders with Plus the value for Plus to be active/enabled/turned on is 131, and for Plus to be inactive/disabled/off is 3. You do not need Plus to be enabled to read the Loco address. That only needs Railcom itself to be enabled which you do with CV29 (Twenty Nine). With a value of 39 for CV 29 adding 8 to make it 47 should turn on RailCom if the decoder is RailCom capable. Are you sure that it is a rebadged LokPilot Standard, or are you assuming that it is as you've previously read that is how Bachmann sourced the decoder. ESU decoders have had Plus capability for years so if CV 28 reads as 0 then that may be telling you that it isn't a rebadged ESU decoder, and if Bachmann sourced yours from another supplier, especially one in the US where adoption of RailCom has been slower than in Europe, it may not have Railcom capability, which would explain why it won't accept the value of 47. If it turns out that it isn't RailCom capable all is not lost as you could fit a RailCom sender unit in parallel with the decoder. Both Lenz and ESU make the sender modules.

I am correct about there being a redesign last year after the release of firmware 4.2.10. So that is most likely to be the cause. We'll just have to wait for an update to the ECoS firmware. However, I believe that ESU have kept the LokProgrammer software up to date and the most recent version 5.2.2 should correctly recognise all V5 decoders.

If anyone is interested, ESU have just published their 2023 price list. The new DCC items are a LokSound 5 nano DCC with the E24 interface, and a LokPilot 5 nano DCC E24. There is also a LokPilot 5 micro DCC direct. All 3 are shown as being due for release in Q2/23. For anyone waiting for the release of CabControl outside of N America & Australia, the price list, dated 1/2/23, doesn't show a release date, although it normally does for products not yet on sale. The German language webpage for CabControl as of today is showing Q1/23, but as ESU have still to publish online the German language version of the CabControl manual that suggests that release is at least 3-4 weeks away at the earliest as for previous new products ESU have often released the German language manuals online 3-4 weeks before the item goes on sale. ESU are still showing different product codes for CabControl in English and German, 50310 and 50311 respectively. There's no info that I have seen on any differences between them. It may be as simple as the inclusion of the manual in German for the German/European market.

What release of the ECoS firmware is installed on your ECoS? 4.2.10 is the latest version. I recall recently reading that ESU had to update the design of the V5 decoders because of changes due to component shortages. That required a change to the decoder firmware, and ESU have still to release an update to the ECoS firmware so that it recognises the new decoder firmware as a V5. But I will try to check my facts.

Probably about as long as it would take a Russian (other megalomaniac regimes/fanatics/terrorists with sufficiently powerful weapons and delivery systems are available) attack to take out a conventional fossil fuel power station, or key parts of the gas or electric grid, or the North Sea gas pipelines, which would have the same knock-on effect as crippling a wind farm. Or have you already forgotten that they've tried that trick with the Nordstream gas pipeline?

But isn't the existing plan to open Old Oak years before Euston anyway? The temptation to save by not building that final stage will be very significant as the politicians will still be able to say that HS2 reached London. The only saving grace might be that a substantial delay could allow a rethink of the decision not to connect to the CTRL. But I can't see that happening under any circumstances if I'm brutally honest with myself.

That all depends on your definition of benevolent, and whether you agree or disagree with the dictator. Democracy can be bad, very bad if the politicians pursue their idealogies to the detriment of everything else including ignoring the views of the majority, but the alternatives are even worse.

The best analogy to explain our current voting system is the Le Mans 24 hour race where the car (candidate) that has travelled the farthest (has the most votes) after 24 hours (when the polling stations closed) wins the race (election). If you're in front when time is called them you've won no matter how many others are in the race. The same "time' s up" principle so applies to football matches. In these cases there is a winning post, but it's set by the clock not by a physical marker on the ground as it would be in a horse race.

Whilst I don't commute anymore, when I did I always noticed that Monday mornings and Friday afternoons were the busiest days on both trains and roads. So the shift to midweek travelling is only natural once people have a choice as to which days they travel to work. Logic would suggest that as it becomes more widely known that Mondays and Fridays are now less crowded, then commuters will gradually go back to travelling on those two days which over time could reasonably be expected to rebalance passenger numbers across all 5 weekdays.

I think it's disgraceful that passengers getting on at Heathrow are bringing their luggage on to the trains. Just because the line serves Heathrow doesn't give them the right to clutter up the carriages with their heavy and bulky suitcases.

HS2 not going to Euston. 😅🤣😂 Makes a farce of the whole project. Shades of the economy airlines offering flights between cities but actually flying between airports well away from the named cities. Reminds me of the urban myth of the cabbie who picked up tourists new to England at London Heathrow who wanted to go to Birmingham. He took the punters to the M1 at Watford where he dropped them off, telling them that they could walk from there as Birmingham was 'just up the road'. And the story is also being carried by the Guardian. It's not surprising that the cost is soaring. Construction equipment doesn't run on fresh air, and cement needs a lot of energy just to make it, as does steel. Just look at your most recent gas or electric bill and compare the unit cost per kwh to what you were paying a year ago.

The release date for CabControl outside N America & Australia is now being shown by ESU as Q1 2023.

I'm sure that's exactly what they are. And as the DT800 EMU was in the Maerklin catalogue for ir a shorter period than the ST800 it's probably less common than the ST800. We need to remember that these models were made and sold as children's toys so price and ruggedness rather than absolute fidelity to the original were the priority.

Puzzlement over. Having had time to read the product description in the Maerklin 1954 catalogue, the ST800 had screw-on pantos included, presumably to turn it into an equivalent electric loco. Is this where Triang got the idea of using their Transcontinental series double ended diesel loco R160 to create the R257 double ended electric loco thanks to a new roof insert with 2 pantos? The 1959 Triang catenary system looks remarkably similar to the Maerklin one shown in their 1950s catalogues. The product description also says that it was available in red, green or blue. An additional centre car was available as ST800 MT which looks like it would also match the DT800 EMU. The ST800 remained in the Maerklin range from 1954 to 1957 or thereabouts.

The price makes it about as desirable as a Triang Australia 4 car Sydney Suburban set which sells for similar amounts. The only feature of the Maerklin model that puzzles me is that the 1954 catalogue picture of the ST800 that I found shows the loco without pantos withbthe description "diesel express" with, on the same page, what looks like a 2 car EMU with pantos with the curved cab in the same red & pale cream/white livery which it calls a DT800. I'll try to find it again and post a screenshot.

I'm glad that I was able to help.

There is something very similar in the Maerklin catalogue for 1954 which I found using the german word for catalogue "katalog". Of course, it could be German Trix. Are the wheelsets live or fully insulated? If they're fully live that would suggest the maker was more likely to be Maerklin whilst if they're fully insulated then it is more likely to be German Trix.

Trix stopped using AC in the mid/late 1950s. So your comment about AC and Trix is only partly correct. The video was interesting, but a bit painful to watch in places, especially the references to "turning round a Trix loco" to get 2 running under independent control. You only need to reposition the running rail collector shoe to do that. You cannot run a Dublo and a Trix loco under independent control on Trix Twin track because Dublo used live wheelsets. The independent running only worked with Trix locos because Trix used fully insulated wheelsets with both sides insulated. The other difference between Trix Twin and Dublo locos and rolling stock is that the chassis on the Trix locos was live to the centre rail whilst on Dublo it was live to the running rails. This is why the Dublo coaches shorted out with the Trix loco as the Dublo coach bodies and the metal coupling would be live to the running rails whilst the metal coupling on the Trix loco was live to the centre rail.

They would, as they are the same as used on the TC Mk2 stock. But beware, ones made after the introduction of System 6 track will have finer scale wheels which may not run through Super 4 pointwork reliably. I'm facing the same problem myself but in respect of the later container flats, hence my reply.

I'm definitely not an expert in such matters, but it is possible that the rails in the building were laid when the building was constructed but the abandonment of the tram system in favour of conversion to trolleybus operation was becoming an option and hence the plan to connect the shed tracks to the system was scrapped before the connection was made?

As '59/'62 stock would share the running gear Bachmann created for the' 38 Stock and the Gilbow/EFE body shells will require only minimal changes, I'd be surprised if Bachmann don't make them at some point in the future.

I know, but S Stock is only OK if you're modelling the last 10 years. Besides there have been 3 previous batches of S Stock so far, all from Bachmann. But what about the A60/A62, C69/C77, D, F, O/CO, P/CP, Q38, R and T Stock, the Dreadnought Coaches, the District Electric Loco, the various battery locos, and the Standard, '60, '67/'72, '73, '84, '95 and '08 Tube Stock that were in the product lineups for Metromodels and Radley Models at various times in the last 15+ years? IMHO, right now, the cupboard looks decidedly bare.

I'd be very nevous of spending serious money on injection moulding tooling given the way that the main RTR manufacturers seem to be moving into previously neglected areas such as LT/LU rolling stock, especially as they are of limited interest to most modellers and have few options for alternate liveries. The late Phil Radley's approach of making resin castings would seem at least to me to be the better way to go on models with a potentially limited appeal. The change of ownership of Metromodels and the pause in availability of their models combined with the question mark over the future of the Radley Models business following the passing of Phil Radley means that the future of LT/LU modelling looks a bit bleak at the moment.