billy_anorak59

I’m familiar with the TOPS class allocation rationale for pre-TOPS locomotives whereby the TOPS class number allocated roughly increased with the power output of the locomotive, but does anyone know the rationale regarding the class allocation numbers for 1st generation DMUs? It would seem that there is a broad demarcation (this from Wiki), but not down to the specifics of why one class got a particular number over another: Class 100 to 114 ‘Low Density' passenger units (i.e. few doors per carriage) - mostly short (57'0") frame Class 115 to 127 Mix of 'High Density' (i.e. doors to every seating bay) and 'Cross-Country' (long distance) passenger units - long (63'6") frame Class 128 to 131 Parcels units I’ve looked, but I can’t find anything more on this. For example, why was Class 100 allocated to the Gloucester units, and Class 109 to the Wickhams? Both introduced 1957-58, both with a power output of 2x150bhp. Both ‘Low-density’. There must be a reason, probably obvious, but I can’t work it out. Area of operation based, or was it actually pot luck? There’s probably a similar story for the pre-TOPS EMUs too, but with the added complication of pre-nationalisation units. No reason for knowing BTW, I’m just intrigued - the question occured to me while browing the latest 'Diesel Dawn' bookazine on DMUs... I’m sure someone here will have the answer!

As inpiration, how about a bridge along the lines of the one over the Lever Brothers (Port Sunlight) internal railway at Bromborough, Wirral? Built in the '20s, I believe, and carries a two lane road over. I took the photo in 1987.

Do tell. Just for completeness, here's a link back to some of Dave's pictures in question (2017): https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/85326-dave-fs-photos-ongoing-more-added-each-day/page/481/&tab=comments#comment-2973235

Only virtually everything! Thanks..

...and black on one side, green on the other... AFAIK, the locomotive is a 4-Do-4 in all guises - even though the centre coupling rod was removed later, the driving wheels were still coupled via the gearbox.

I think we pretty much reached a consensus a couple of pages ago that the locomotive was symetrical? - see the photos in my post at: https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/149392-kr-models-announce-the-fell-in-oo-and-n/page/21/&tab=comments#comment-4524215 Two sets of photos which show both sides of 10100 on the same dates (dates would appear to be 1954 and 1956-ish). I'm hoping that this is indeed just an EP, because it's not correct for the green version.

Don't want to open a can of worms again (but probably will), but shouldn't the green version have 4 bonnet grills in each corner? (and the numbers weren't in that position either when green...)

The latest: Yet another pipedream? They seem confident enough it's going to happen, even if past experience says otherwise. https://theguideliverpool.com/theres-a-new-transport-museum-opening-in-birkenhead/

Resurrecting an archaic thread, but it's really starting to look like a Baby Deltic now... https://www.babydeltic.co.uk/news-17-september-2021

Both Gaeity and Budgie did push along tanks in OO in the 50s/60s - the Gaeity was an N2 (and maybe did a Pannier too), and Budgie did a Jinty. You can pick the Budgie version up on Ebay quite cheaply (there are some on at the moment for less than a tenner) but the N2 might be a bit more difficult. Just a thought, I don't know if they could use proprietry track, however.

I thought I'd read that the last ones went around March 72 - a few months before the July I was there, so thanks for that. Yes, I was very unlucky that day... St Blazey was nearly as bad - two 08s I think. I came away from the the holiday very disappointed with the Western Region! To add insult to injury, on the trip home, a Western kept pace with our car for a mile or so somewhere near Taunton (Whiteball?) - just too far away to get the number!!

Ah, Truro - scene of my worst spotting experience* As a lad from Wirral, to find myself on holiday in Cornwall was a chance of a lifetime to spot the exotic - Warships, NBL 22's, Hymeks - that sort of thing. However, this was July 1972, and unbeknown to me, all the Warships had gone just a few months before. Anyway, while my parents and sisters walked round Truro, I said I would wait on the platform at the station. Two and a half hours I was there, and nothing. No trains what-so-ever. Zilch. Couldn't believe it. Still bemused to this day - I'm pretty sure it wasn't a Sunday. *Except perhaps persuading my Dad to take me to Newton-le-Willows Motorail terminal, expecting some massive hub of locomotives and cartics. Erm, no...

Rod - spotted this on a local FB page, and thought it might be of interest here - pleasant little film, right from my era. West Kirby makes an appearance at about 11:11, but the closed joint line station is also there a few seconds earlier. WK itself only makes a fleeting appearance but is good as it shows the Class 503's to the fore! Worth a watch anyway. I think anyone can view, so visit: https://www.facebook.com/merseysideinfocus/videos/1086233605516296/

Hi Andy - the layout is approx 12' x 8'. The longest train will be limited to only 4 (maybe 5 at a push) coaches - mainly because of the physical size constraints, but also due to the 1 : 30 incline from the through station to the terminus. Thanks to all who have responded, it's all very much appreciated!

Ah-ha! The light is slowly dawning... Thanks for that - much appreciated!

Thanks for the reply Andy. I think I am getting somewhere, as I have now got the +ve and +ve rails aligned everywhere on my plan (with the caveat that the reversing loop switches polarity somewhere along its length) so your reply is quite timely. The only thing that I don't get is if the controller is reversed, doesn't that mean that the train then goes backwards? Or does the relay take care of things? Apologies if this is basic stuff.

Very useful Phil - it's going to take some mulling over, but its good that you've had some experience of a similar plan and it's challenges, although I think having a double track to the terminus increases the complexity somewhat for me. This bit interests me, thank you - I'll take some time now to see how it might help me in my application. And thanks to all who have taken the time to write thus far - it's appreciated.

Thanks - some interesting ideas there, although I'm not 100% sure why 4 cabs? (It's not you - it's me ). Also, I'm curious as to where and why a redesign of the terminus might be necessary? I'd be loathe to do that by the way, as it matches my prototype (...to a degree anyway - it's been flipped and mirrored, and lost one platform road - further mangling might mean its unrecognisable).

Thanks for the reply. No, the only crossover is that marked 'X' and ther return loop itself. Of course, there are crossovers in the terminus itself, which I'm hoping 'could' be powered by the red or yellow loop controllers, so that a train could directly leave the terminus, and proceed around the red loop (e.g. cab1), leaving me to 'potter' in the terminus (e.g. cab2), until it was time for the train to 'reverse loop' to the yellow (another train could depart the terminus at this stage). The train could then proceed round the yellow loop (e.g. cab3), until time to be driven directly back to the terminus. Cab 2 would be switched out (or restricted) if cab 1 or 3 was in operation. I was hoping cabs 1, 2 and 3 would be interchangeable with what block they were controlling. In answer to your second question, although I can fully see the benefits of DCC, I can't justify the expense of chipping up to 60 locomotives, plus the control systems, plus the technical challenges of DCC comes into play as well - I'm not at all au fait with the technology. Really, I just want to get things working on DC properly, so I can concentrate on what I enjoy - the scenic side of things. Thanks RobinofLoxley! I'm hoping someone might tell me how! (not that relays aren't a mystery to me too...) They are motorised. I understand I am restricting myself, but DCC doesn't stack up for me (price-wise, and at my age), tempting though it is. Appreciate the replies thus far though, thanks!

Can I ask for some help with this one? I just can’t work out what I need to do to make my layout work as I want it to. As the son of an electrician, you’d think I’d know better, but no – I followed the path of mechanical engineering and the nuances of electricity just don’t sink in I’m afraid. I’ve not been lazy – I’ve tried, really I have, but I just can’t work things out, and a solution must be possible? I wasn’t sure whether to put this in the ‘Help and Tips’ area, but here seems a better bet, so here goes… My track-plan is an old C.J.Freezer favourite - an ‘out-and-back plus continuous run’. All points are PECO Insulfrog to keep things as simple as possible for my feeble mind. As you can no doubt work out by this stage, I’m not very good at anything electrically technical, and I don’t want to get involved in the expense of converting my locomotive stock (coming up to 60 years worth in places – I started out when I was 3) to DCC (but I do realise how nice it would be – sound especially). I suspect that my main existing feeds can be used, but I’m not sure – I’m quite prepared to re-visit those, as everything needs reappraisal – and I hope this is where someone here can guide me or at least clarify? It’s probably best to show the track-plan at this point: The main part (the continuous run bit) of the layout is complete and ‘sort-of’ operational (in a very rudimentary fashion), but the high-level terminus has been used for many years as my workbench, and I really need to get things to how they were always intended to be and build the thing! Therefore, now that the upper board containing the terminus section is to be added – well that’s where my difficulties start, as that section needs to be bi-directional, and the circuits ‘come together’ so-to-speak following a ‘reversing loop’ change of direction on the main layout. The point at ‘X’ is where I get confused. If I was to use a common return as I intended, this will lead to a ‘clash’, and I can’t get my head around a solution. Perhaps, I’m over-thinking, but I very much doubt it! The layout is analogue and I would like to work out the wiring requirements for a ‘cab control’ system of working using a common return bus (although the common return bit is not mandatory, it’s just what I have read as being desirable). I hope to use rotary cab selection switches (in order to get a visual feedback on what controller is switched in for any specific section, and I anticipate that any one of three controllers can control any cab on the layout (either main circuit or terminus). I always intended that, in practice, controllers one and two would be used for the main circuits, and controller three could be used for terminus ‘pottering’ movements. But any controller could be used to start/terminate trains in/out of the terminus. It would be good if the ‘reversing loop’ (effectively a long crossover) could be used without having to stop the train in order to throw a DPDT switch, but I’ve got a complete blank on that too. At present, I have two (double Gaugemaster) panel mount controllers using separate transformers, but one question that I also can’t resolve is if a third transformer would be required for the third (a single Gaugemaster) controller, as I have seen various references stating that a short could/would occur if the same power supply is used between sections that could overlap. To see me into my dotage, I would really be most appreciative if someone could spare the time to give me some help with a wiring diagram that shows feeds and (types of) switches - something ‘done proper’, in order that I will have something reliable and properly designed for the future. Something where I wouldn’t have to crawl underneath the layout to correct faults that I had built in years before - ‘cos I can’t bend like I used to… Sorry for being a numpty.

I would have thought it would be pretty easy to have a flipping or rotating section of bulkhead (driver one side, empty the other)? A la Scott (Rotating) or Virgil (Flipping) in the launch sequences of Thunderbirds?

If we're talking about on-train annoucements: From the BBC Kent website - commuters who have written in to complain about Connex .... (2003) Andy, Gillingham "It just gets better and better. Having shortformed peak time units on the Kent Coast routes yesterday (one of the busiest days of the year as most of the UK returned to work) I arrived at Gillingham Station this morning to witness a sea of commuters. Apparently all London bound services were subject to unspecified delays due to 'adverse weather conditions' i.e. approx 1" of snow and a broken down train blocking the London line atTeynham. Fortunately there was a rather ramshackle eight-car slam door unit standing at platform one which the station announcer informed us would constitute to 7:07am slow service to Victoria. We were all advised to board it as Connex could give no undertaking as to when another service would be available. The train ground through Rochester before seizing up completely and catching fire at Cuxton. As the acrid smell of burning filled the carriages a 'Corporal Jones' sound-alike advised us several times over the tannoy 'not to panic'. There followed an interval of several minutes before Corporal Jones announced that we were to 'de-train'into the Kent countryside. I didn't have my Connexspeak to English translation guide with me but I took this to mean we all had to disembark. An interesting situation this. They only managed to run one service this morning and it spontaneously combusted. After several more minutes Corporal Jones announced that they had to remove a fence for us to walk over a footbridge and away from the line and, oh did anyone on the train have a bolt-cutter? I work for a Bank and the only reason that I would have a bolt-cutter in my briefcase would be if I were weeks from retirement and decided to have a go at the vault. However, I made a mental note in future to carry bolt cutters, a fire extinguisher, bottled water and copious amounts of Kendal Mint cake on all Connex journeys. All were then amused for some 20 minutes watching Laurel and Hardy through the train windows trying to demolish a fence with what looked like a rusty knife and a lump of wood. The confused milling of several hundred freezing passengers on the pavement adjacent to the A289 soon attracted the attention of the Kent Constabulary who arrived in force, 'Excuse me sir but you can't park that train 'ere'. We were subsequently directed to the local Sports Centre away from rubber necking motorists and another potential transport disaster. Corporal Jones announced that buses had been arranged to take us back to Medway until some wag pointed out that the whole point of boarding the train in the first place was to travel to London (if that was alright with Connex). This was followed by much muttering into a mobile phone before Corporal Jones announced that a bus would be provided to get us to Dartford after which we were on our own. My day would have been complete had 'revenue protection staff' demanded to see our tickets as we scrambled along the snow lined embankment."

If it's any use, there is a station announcer soundbite just about halfway through the Supertramp song 'Rudy' which was on the Album 'Crime of the Century'. I reckon that the album was dated 1974, so the recording was probably round about then too. The station sounds to be Paddington, given the destinations in the announcement: "The 19.45 train to Bristol Temple Meads will depart from Platform 2, calling at Reading, Didcot, Swindon, Chippenham, Bath Spa, and Bristol Temple Meads. Passengers for Radley, change at Didcot". As a bonus, the track starts with a brief sound clip of what sounds like a Class 50 too!

Can you post them, or are they copyright? Thanks for the info anyway.

I must admit when I saw your post that that was the area I wasn't 100% sure of either, so I've taken a look at the photos I have. The 'early' condition of the loco (2 grills on each nose side, central 'window' on one (or both sides), and outwardly as a 4-8-4), actually has a panel over this area, so they were no help. The 'later' ('exhibition train' condition and possibly to withdrawal) are inconclusive in some cases, but the exhaust end 'upturn' looks to face left on most pictures that are clear. I see what you mean, but as the engine layout was identical from one end to the other, I can't see why the upturn would face left on one side, right on the other. If it was the case it would be an easy fix, I don't think tooling would be affected too much. Interesting though - perhaps others might have better photographs of this area.