Armchair Modeller

It was actually in the blog section (correction from my last post Availability (out of the office) by djones | May 7, 2019 | Blog Hi everyone, I'm not back in the 'office' until the 17th of May, so any news will probably come at or slightly after that date. However rest assured i am trying to get answers, results and an update together for you on the various current projects. Dave

It was mentioned on the DJM website - in the news section IIRC.

After Dave's recent visit to China, one might have expected good news on all fronts. Instead, we have had total silence. This suggests strongly to me that DJM was slowly but surely grinding to a halt, even before this latest suggestion of serious financial problems.

I shall check that tomorrow. Thanks for the suggestion.

It was tested on a test track, just a short isolated section of plain track - not on the layout

Even stranger, if I swap the controller feeds around to reverse the current going to the track, exactly the same happens - I would have thought that ought to reverse the problem. I shall obviously have to send it back, but would love to know why this is happening. It makes no sense to me at all. It is a DC model running under DC control.

I tested mine today and it has problems. It pauses for a few seconds then runs fine in left to right. In the other direction it runs very slowly for a few cm then stops. If I turn it around, it runs slowly left to right, but not at all in the other direction. Very weird.

It would be interesting to see a comparison. Certainly if you include ones opened or reopened since the mid-1980s, there must be a reasonable number - the Robin Hood Line, for example.

Mine arrived this morning. After all the comments made here and elsewhere I was dreading it, thinking I might have to send it back. Now I have seen it in the flesh I shall definitely keep it, but with regrets. It is almost good enough - interior detail apart. At first sight, some things do seem like they would be easy to fix, include closer coupling. I can maybe just about understand the undersized angle at the bottom of the body. After all, the 153 has a similar problem and I have lived with that. A lot of the errors are just sloppy though - like the size of the cab windows and the door windows. Difficult to forgive, or understand. The interior needs closer investigation. I think the profile of everything could be reduced to below window level, but I need to think awhile before doing anything. It should not be necessary to do this. Making a top class model out of the Worsley Works etch would, I think, be very challenging for most people. Would all the extra effort involved be worthwhile? My gut feeling is not. Much better to put some of that skill into the Dapol model to bring it up to being an acceptable, though never a perfect model.

Here's a photo of the loco I found on the Web some time ago - presumably taken at the Sentinel Works before delivery to Australia. Apologies, but I cannot remember the source. It was 5ft 3in gauge.

Here's a photo of the original at https://backontrack.org/images/vr_misc/locos2/PICT0029.JPG

I will guard it with my life

Many thanks - that is a very comprehensive and impressive reply! The only signal is an excellent model. I would hate to damage it by moving it. The fact that it was placed there by the original modellers is even more reason to keep it where it is.

I am just beginning the process of restoring an old P4 layout called 'The Ulpha Light Railway' after a long period of storage. This was originally built around 1990 and portrays a fictitious, independent light railway in the Lake District. I have a few queries on the track plan and signalling. I would be very grateful for some expert advice. Ulpha is a terminus, with a relatively infrequent passenger train service. Here are a couple of photos, courtesy of Paul Willis and a rough overhead view by me Here is a track and signalling diagram as things now stand Everything greyed out is off the scenic area. CP means catch point. GF is the signal cabin. At the moment, all points apart from D and F are modelled as if operated from the signal cabin. Points A and B are modelled as being fitted with facing point locks. I assume that most shunting movements in such a sleepy location would be authorised by a green flag, or an unofficial wave of the hand by the signalman. My initial query would be to ask if the existing signalling and catch points etc are correctly placed and adequate for the scenario. My limited knowledge suggests, for example, that maybe there ought to be a catch point between the hand-worked point D and point E, to protect the passenger line? Any expert assistance would be gratefully received.

Agreed! Got mine this morning too. Amazing models.

Yes, apologies - my mental arithmetic let me down. However, the 0.006 inch is right down at the bottom of the flange (more or less). The point where the flange rubs against the railhead is very roughly 3/4 of the way up the taper. The difference in BTB between the wheel back and this point will only be 0.025-0.03mm, which really is quite small. Using the wheels drawn in the diagram, measuring the BTB from the bottom of the taper will be less accurate than measuring the BTB using the wheel backs with a conventional BTB gauge.

That taper makes next to no difference. Based on the EMGS diagram, the difference between BTB at the bottom and top of the taper is only .006 inches, or around 0.015mm (allowing for both wheels). If you take into account where the flange touches the rail, the difference would be even less. There should be no need to work to that level of precision when checking the BTB.

Great project! Before I express an interest, I would appreciate some idea of how long a train modern N gauge locos can haul. It is one thing to buy a prototypical length train, but whether model locos could actually haul it is another matter. Never having run really long trains in N scale, I would be interested to get an idea of how many wagons a Farish Class 66 or Class 60 might actually haul, please.

Well, the LNER and the GWR both had locos called "Seagull". Proof enough for me that seagulls exist!

More by accident than design........... Mallaig to Fort William line

This one might be an alternative - 4 wheel drive and relatively easy to convert as it doesn't have pinpoint axles. It runs reasonably slowly too. Like all chassis this small, it needs weight and as many wheels picking up current as possible. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/361286749161?_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

Sorry - I don't have a larger image.

Yes, looking again I tend to agree with you. The sharp curve of the track makes it difficult to judge exactly, but here's a rough transposition of prototype against model What they seem to have done does put me off rather a lot!

I thought the underframe looked too deep and the whole body too shallow

I am also pretty sure that Branchlines supply conversion wheels for the Derby Lightweight and other Bachmann DMUs.