Bloodnok

I built this baseboard: (This photo is actually from the weekend before last). Last weekend I got the corner bit cut and mounted (the bit nearest the camera). I would have done more but ... I'm still waiting for the next delivery of wood. It's been ... quite a while ... since I ordered it. Apparently even the timber yard has been subject to panic buying and is on extended delivery schedules. I really need a name for this layout, so I can create a thread for it. Design a layout, I can do that. Build it ... I'm working on it. Name it? Apparently that's the thing I simply can't do...

I can't remember who it was that roped me into that, but it was a hell of a lot of fun. It did spur me on to work on the model and fix a bunch of shape errors in the days beforehand -- plus I got a textured version rendered just in time. It's still my avatar here ... and pretty much everywhere else too. The thing that makes that prank all the more hilarious is ... we got upstaged. By Heljan. Who announced a Kestrel, for real, and while the prank was still in progress. Although it is to my eternal shame that I still have not yet finished/released the Trainz model the prank was based on. I guess "When you turn your hobby into a job, you find yourself in need of a new hobby" is just /that/ true. (Oh, that and I went down the rabbit hole of "Just where on earth would you get sound recordings of a 16LVA24?", and that turns out to be a depressing question to try to answer). RMWeb has been a great community to be in over the years. It's got me back into modelling ... what, three times now? Once virtually (for that prank), and twice physically (both times after an international house-move).

For an 8 pin decoder, have a look at Zimo's MX600R. Features wise they have everything I expected from a Zimo chip and the running quality was excellent. I did a head-to-head comparison with a more expensive MX635R and couldn't tell the difference in practice (even though the latter was nearly double the price and included a stay-alive capacitor). The only thing of note is the current rating is lower -- some locos have acquired a reputation for high current draw, and while a 1.5A peak / 0.8A continuous decoder will drive the vast majority of locos, it's possible a few might need something a little more meaty.

2+1+2 will undoubtedly be popular, as will 2+2+2. But beyond this, why make a balanced set? Real life shortened sets were not balanced. The shortening was very biased to one or other side, hence the common 6+2+2 formation. They sell plenty of individual coaches in their range at the moment. They'll even sell you the APT development / test coach individually, if you happen to want just that one and nothing else. If they really do need to sell the other coaches in pairs for some reason (I can't imagine what that reason might be), then I would have thought something like TS+TRSB as one pair and TF+TU as the other would have been infinitely preferable. Personally, a four car "extension pack" with one of each car in it would also have worked for me, although I appreciate that would not be as flexible for someone who does want a longer train but can't run ten cars on their layout. Edit: Oh, wait, I figured it out. It's pure collector-bait. To someone who wants one of each product type to put in their collection, and who will buy each different product (but not re-numbers), they have now been made to buy twice as many coaches as they would have bought with either single packaging or dissimilar coaches bundled together. It's not a design decision aimed at people who want to run trains. It's aimed at collectors who want to put boxes on shelves.

So with my desire for a ten car set made as 2+2+6 to represent the late service condition, and the fact I would quite like it to climb gradients, I'm now looking at buying SIXTEEN vehicles to make a ten car train, two of which have to be taken apart and reassembled to make what I need? I understand the collector side of this, particularly given it's the anniversary year, but have Hornby forgotten that people might want to use these trains on a layout, representing how they existed in the real world? I can't be all that unique in wanting this particular train formation, can I?

Pantograph isn't on the centre power car -- it's further along. It's quite a clever design, the centre power pack is only present in bi-mode sets, pure electric sets don't have it. Looks like it could be added/removed from sets later that didn't/did have it at delivery if changes are necessary. It also apparently has a passenger gangway through the middle, thus not cutting the train in half like the APT-P did...

I would like to think it's doing well. However I can't shake the nagging feeling that it could have been doing better if people hadn't have had to do detective work to find out what condition and vehicles are represented in each set...

Yes -- and be particularly suspicious of any model bought second-hand. People who use alternative couplings may not notice that the tension locks they put back in aren't of the right height or length.

I'm surprised Bachmann haven't done a 360 tbh. Tooling change from the 350 should be restricted to the gangwayless nose and not fitting the pickup shoes. The 444 or 185 is a much heavier change -- the coaches will all need stretching by ~3m for a start. Both are probably in "new project" territory. OTOH, If someone /were/ to make an Electrostar, I'll be having at least one, if not two. Doesn't fit in my typical modelling era or area at all. But it *would* happen -- I've got enough memories of the real thing I'd want at least one. But please not this year -- there's too much in my "must have" list already. And still a few older things I still haven't managed to save up for yet...

That's true -- they aren't as easy to couple as some other options, particularly if the coaches are to sit with the gangways touching when coupled, as there's not a lot of space under there. Other couplings that keep the pockets lined up must be available -- someone should know of one that may suit. Any way, good luck with finding a coupling solution that works for you -- you've got a vast number of coaches, and it sounds like you've got quite a few different coupling types in use already. Hopefully the information about how and why close coupling mechanisms can result in derailments and decouplings when used with specific coupling types that don't force the pockets to line up is helpful though -- even if not directly in this case, then at least to other readers.

That's the close coupling mechanism. It's really good if used properly, but as supplied can cause problems. The intention is to close the coaches right up close on straight track so there isn't an unsightly gap between the gangways, but still let the coaches go round set-track radius curves. Unfortunately, they don't work properly with tension locks. What actually goes wrong is with weight on the drawbar (perhaps something that doesn't run freely, or is particularly heavy, or just a long train), the coaches want to pull apart, and the springs aren't strong enough to keep the couplers in-line. With both couplers kinked to the side, the train then arrives at the next curve. There's a 50% chance the couplings are on the wrong side (compared to which side they'd go to on the curve), and when this happens you may get a derailment or decoupling. Replace the tension locks with something that keeps the coupling in line and doesn't let it twist on the straight, and the problem goes away. Bachmann provide a fixed bar (which looks a bit like a vacuum hose) in the box -- this works really well (but obviously results in fixed sets). I am using the Hornby R8220 coupler (the one that looks like a Roco clone) -- I found this the best "easy" compromise in Bachmann Mk1s. I didn't have great luck trying kadees -- they had the same problem, not keeping the pockets in-line.

So if I want a late service condition unit, formed (I believe...) DTS-TS-TRSB-TU-TF-TBF-NDM-NDM-TBF-DTS, with black window surrounds on the DTSes, what packs would I need to order, and how many spare vehicles am I going to have left over to rehome afterwards? If I'm decoding what's in each pack correctly, it looks like this ten car train requires me buying fifteen vehicles in total and re-homing five of them afterwards. I do hope I'm wrong about that...

The HO decision was made for me -- I have plenty of places I can run HO, whereas other scales ... not so much. My chosen time period is because I have slightly hazy memories of travelling around the Cologne area by train in what was probably about May '94 ... ish. This is just months after the formation of DBAG, but before the visual impact of it's existence in the form of Verkehrsrot on everything. I didn't realise at the time just how much a time of upheaval this period was... Yes, the "When did the tooling change?" problem. I'm looking at nearly 40 years of history of BR103s at the moment asking myself that exact same question... That's a useful summary. What it doesn't say is ... how widespread was the application of this colour scheme, and how long did they last? As I understand it, "Popfarben" was an experiment which wasn't fully applied across the fleet. Some specific vehicle types were delivered in these colours, leading to odd vehicles mixed into trains otherwise in previous all over green/blue livery. A few entire trains were also painted with a specific colour band as an experiment. The cream/blue (and cream/red) livery that came afterwards seems to have been much more thoroughly applied, but as above there is photographic evidence of plain green survivors in 1990. Were there Popfarben survivors that late also? I'd also like to know how quickly the new DB-AG logo was applied? When did they start applying it, and when did it become ubiquitous?

That was my feeling -- there were several pairs of coaches like that and I was suspicious of all of them... Yes -- there's nothing quite so demotivating than buying a load of stuff and finding out it's not what you should have bought. That ... seems to be much more what I was looking for, both in terms of availability and prices. I must now resist the urge to go order about 20 coaches immediately.

UK railways use continuous air brakes too -- the "brake" part of the name is referring to the handbrake, which was only fitted to coaches which have a guards van from which to operate it. You don't leave a rake of coaches without a handbrake set somewhere in the rake, as there's a risk the air brakes bleed off, and it can roll away.

So far the advice I've seen is: * See if the seller quotes a length * Check the manufacturers information to see if it says (you mention this further down in regards to it saying so on the box for Roco models) * Compare it to the size of a standard object (e.g. the box itself) -- manufacturers will often use a standard size box, so a scale coach will fill the box, whereas a sub-scale coach will have more spare space at the end. There are 7-window and 8-window short mk3s. The real obvious issue is the bogies. They are to scale versus the side of the coach which of course isn't. As a result they don't line up where they should. Compare the outer axle position with the bodyside detail between a scale and non-scale Mk3. Once you know what to look for it's quite obvious in even the most awful eBay photos. Plus there's the not so small issue of the massive D coupling bar, which kinda gives it away, too... However, not so obvious with German stock. There are 1:100 coaches with NEM coupling pockets and close coupling mechanisms, and everything seems much better proportioned despite the less than scale length. The 1:87 on the box is very helpful if a) it's a boxed model, and b) it's in the right box! Here's a worked example: This is a coach listed as 303mm in the description: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Roco-DB-1st-2nd-Class-Express-Coach-in-Cream-Turquoise-ABM-225-44748/283627803167 ... and priced like the seller knows what they have and what they are selling. Here's a pair of coaches, one of which looks similar to the last one: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Roco-H0-2x-div-Personenwagen-1-2-Klasse-der-DB-WI-L0528/133239387193 No length listed, no box pictured, no dead-side-on shot for looking for axle/window alignment issues. Which length are they? I'm *guessing* they are 1:100, purely because 1:87 would be worth mentioning, but ... I don't know for sure.

That's useful -- lots of historic dated photos. I'm surprised to find all over green coaches like this: ... in a picture dated as late as 1990. I'm assuming it's a late survivor, sitting as it is between two blue/cream coaches.

Yes, I bet that was an expensive mistake. Not just a change of chip, either, I believe they have different motors and axles too? A bit earlier than what I'm looking to model, yes.

That's a great recommendation. I've looked through some of the suggested formations, and something instantly stands out -- it appears perfectly acceptable in Germany to run a train with no brake coach. I was assuming I'd need one in every formation, but apparently not. Interesting.

Any advice on how to spot a scale length coach compared to a non-scale coach? That site is a very useful pictorial record. Much of it seems to be earlier than the era I'm interested in, but photos like this one are still very inspirational: Seems great for locos. Most of the ones I look up are there, and those that aren't seem to be current models, where information is still available from the manufacturer. I haven't had such luck with coaches unfortunately. That's a kind offer, thank you.

I'm new to German modelling, and I'm getting a bit lost in the many options on the market. I wonder if anyone can assist me a bit. I think I've got my head around the various German liveries and how they relate to epochs courtesy of this site. I'm still working out exactly which coach types worked in trains together, as DB seems not to have ordered a complete set of anything in one go unless they absolutely had to. Is there a good resource for recorded train formations? I'm looking for trains from the end of Epoch IVb and the beginning of Epoch Va. I'm more lost when it comes to model history though, in terms of what was made, when, by which manufacturers, and to what accuracy levels and standards. I did find this site which (Am I right in thinking "GS"==2-rail DC, "WS"==Märklin AC, "MM"==Märklin Digital?) which has some useful information in to help avoid some obvious pitfalls of a market with multiple incompatible control systems. One thing it doesn't tell me though is the tooling date -- e.g. for a loco released in 2015, say, was this an actual new release, or a re-number of an earlier release on the same tooling? This would be rather useful information to know. Also, while that site seems fairly comprehensive on locos (I haven't encountered a loco on eBay that I've been sufficiently interested in to look up that /isn't/ listed there ... at least not yet), it's very spotty on coaches. Very little of those I see on eBay are featured on the relevant pages. As an example, I have a Eurofima Avmz 207 (Roco catalogue number 45256), which isn't listed on the relevant page. The key bit of information I really need for coaches is the scale or length -- as there's 1:87, 1:93 and 1:100 variants all of coaches which are different lengths to start with, and combined with historically higher standards of modelling. It's nowhere near as easy as filtering out Hornby's short Mk3s, for example.

Not really. Three axle Umbauwagen were rebuilds of three axle donors. They did build bogie Umbauwagen like this: ... and these were sourced from bogie vehicles. They did re-work the source frames so they were all the same length, so some of these will have been shortened from the source vehicle.

... Has a bit of glazing fallen out of the brake from the last coach?

Southern practice was derived from prior semaphore behaviour, which was to clear the main arm for a clear platform (all the way to the buffers) and use a miniature arm for calling-on into a part-occupied platform. This was translated to a green aspect into an unoccupied terminal platform, and a yellow aspect for a part occupied platform when colour lights were installed. This was in what otherwise would have been 4 aspect territory at the time. I'm not sure exactly when this got changed to be a yellow to an unoccupied platform with red + white call-on lights into a part-occupied platform -- but that change was certainly after nationalisation.

Truth is sometimes stranger than fiction...