Jump to content
 

Bachmann headcode box 24

robertcwp

By robertcwp,
in Bachmann

 Share

Recommended Posts

Porcy Mane

Porcy Mane

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, russ p said:

Did the silencers make them much quieter? 

 

Considerably so according to a well known P4 modeller and ex BR employee, that saw them introduced onto the North Eastern region and witnessed them running on a daily basis.  On hearing a SLW sound fitted 24 for the first time he said, "far too loud for a silencer fitted example. Spot on for the later modified exhausts".

  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
'CHARD

'CHARD

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, meatloaf said:

Got mine last week. Runs great but theres 4 screws not mentioned in the instructions if you want to get the body off to DCC it.

 

In fact those four screws that you mention do not need to be removed.  They are to hold underframe/ solebar detail in place and do not engage with the body.  The six screws shown in the instructions are all that need to be removed to release the body.

Link to post
Share on other sites
tractor_37260

tractor_37260

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, robertcwp said:

Interesting article. I did wonder about converting the new Bachmann 24 to a 25/0, possibly 5163 as seen on Derby Sulzers. 

 

What the article referred to above does not pick up on is that the boiler vent and exhaust on the roof need to go, as 25/0s were not boiler fitted.

 

Appears said article post has been removed/deleted ?  shame as it was some impressive modelling..............

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

I posted the article up and I have not got a clue while it was removed,  I only put it up to help anyone who fancied having a ago at doing a conversion, 
shame looks like I’m another rm web bad boy

off I go to pastures new 

Link to post
Share on other sites
woodenhead

woodenhead

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, roomey said:

I posted the article up and I have not got a clue while it was removed,  I only put it up to help anyone who fancied having a ago at doing a conversion, 
shame looks like I’m another rm web bad boy

off I go to pastures new 

Have you asked?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Axlebox

Axlebox

Posted
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, roomey said:

I posted the article up and I have not got a clue while it was removed,  I only put it up to help anyone who fancied having a ago at doing a conversion, 
shame looks like I’m another rm web bad boy

off I go to pastures new 

 

That's my kind of conversion...perhaps we might get an explanation of why it was removed?

Edited by Axlebox
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Bernard Lamb

Bernard Lamb

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, roomey said:

I posted the article up and I have not got a clue while it was removed,  I only put it up to help anyone who fancied having a ago at doing a conversion, 
shame looks like I’m another rm web bad boy

off I go to pastures new 

 

32 minutes ago, roomey said:

I posted the article up and I have not got a clue while it was removed,  I only put it up to help anyone who fancied having a ago at doing a conversion, 
shame looks like I’m another rm web bad boy

off I go to pastures new 

Copyright I would imagine.

Bernard

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Premium
PMP

PMP

Posted
  • RMweb Premium
Posted (edited)

As it was a copy of the printed article, almost certainly removed as being a copyright infringement. If the text and images are available by the author, they can likely be used in their own right

posted as separate items on this thread.

Edited by PMP
Unpredictable text
Link to post
Share on other sites
Porcy Mane

Porcy Mane

Posted
Posted

 

1 minute ago, roomey said:

I am the author 

 

Hmmm. I know it's boxing day and folk have better things to do than look at t'inteterweb but if somebody took time to remove you're post, I'd have thought it a common courtesy for them to expend a little extra time in explaining the reason why.

 

P

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators
Phil Parker

Phil Parker

Posted
  • Administrators
Posted
5 minutes ago, roomey said:

I am the author 

 

In which case, unless you have signed away your copyright, you can post your (not the edited) words and photos. What you can't do is publish the magazine, that copyright doesn't belong to you. It's also impossible for a mod to be sure immediately that it IS you who wrote it. RMweb policy is not to share copyright material.

 

Before sharing it, remember, you were paid for this piece. How fair is it to give away something you have been paid for?

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators
Phil Parker

Phil Parker

Posted
  • Administrators
Posted
4 minutes ago, Porcy Mane said:

Hmmm. I know it's boxing day and folk have better things to do than look at t'inteterweb but if somebody took time to remove you're post, I'd have thought it a common courtesy for them to expend a little extra time in explaining the reason why.

 

Looking at it, it was an automatic hide - but you might also consider it a common courtesy not to break the rules on copyright material everyone signs up for. It's not like the mods are paid to provide a 24/7/365 service to try to stop people breaking the law.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Premium
PMP

PMP

Posted
  • RMweb Premium
Posted
21 minutes ago, roomey said:

I am the author 

I know. Phil P has explained the RMw take on it. Some publishers also have an exclusivity contract on media and medium, when you publish your work with them. I don’t know if RE? has such a clause, but it’s possible an author could also be in breach of copyright of their publisher if they copy their own work onto an unauthorised platform or medium.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators
Phil Parker

Phil Parker

Posted
  • Administrators
Posted
4 minutes ago, PMP said:

I know. Phil P has explained the RMw take on it. Some publishers also have an exclusivity contract on media and medium, when you publish your work with them. I don’t know if RE? has such a clause, but it’s possible an author could also be in breach of copyright of their publisher if they copy their own work onto an unauthorised platform or medium.

 

Most work is sold on a First Serial Rights basis - you hand over copyright to the magazine for them to publish. Once they have, you get it back. In the world of on-line publishing, the lines get blurred a bit and some will now insist that they get to publish on the web too. Each publisher is different in this regard. However, if someone has paid you for your work, is it fair to almost immediately give it away for free?

 

What you don't own is the design and layout, that's the publishers intellectual property. Nor do you own the article as it appeared after editing. You own your original version.

 

As someone who still does a bit of freelancing, I'm a bit extra-sensitive about people ripping off copyright. My feeling is that the articles I write are my job. I deserve to get paid for it and so do other authors. If you are well off enough that you can give away all your work (whatever it is) for free, congratulations.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
adb968008

adb968008

Posted
  • RMweb Gold
Posted (edited)

I saw the article, looks good, but copyrighted.
Why not tell the audience where you can find it instead (mag/edition), for those interested in the model.

 

for those scratching their head...it was about class 25 25008.

https://www.derbysulzers.com/25008.html

 

25009 was equally unusual.

https://www.derbysulzers.com/25009.html

Edited by adb968008
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...