RMweb Premium Clive Mortimore Posted June 8, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 8, 2021 I am not concerned with which control system people use. I am happy with DC and it works well on my layout. I did let my DCC mates(?) take over Hanging Hill at one exhibition, all section switches on and to the same controller. It was good for me when there was a short as all the sound fitted locos went quiet, but that is personal thing, you either like sound or hate noise. Most the shorts were where people were not adhering to my markers at the points end of the sidings. I had lamps, bright coloured oil drums and figures as markers to prevent locos walloping each other. They were also where the DC sections butted on to each other. Even with DCC if bridged and the point not set for that siding there was a short. Anyhow this is not the purpose of this post, it is the question of "socialising" and taking stock to run on a mate's layout of visa-versa. It is sad that in a few weeks time a couple of my guest will not be bringing their DCC fitted locos to run but it is something we as adults realise and do not see it as a problem. It also reminds me of being invited to a school friend's house to see his dad's model railway. I think it was the first proper model railway I had seen, scenery, tunnels, station, it had the lot, so it seemed. My friend said that it was OK for me to bring my engines. So I duly packed D5572 and City of London for a day of model railway fun. Oh dear his dad's layout was 3 rail. I think my friend was as disappointed as me that my engines did get ago, but what a great day we had. I think his dad did to. 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted June 8, 2021 Author Share Posted June 8, 2021 35 minutes ago, t-b-g said: I am not going to join in the DCC vs DC debate. I don't think anybody has anything new to add and it has been covered on this very thread and elsewhere many times before. I will just mention that today is the second anniversary of Roy Jackson leaving us, so I will be thinking of all the often good, sometimes difficult but always entertaining hours spent in his company. We miss you Roy. Tony Gee Is it really two years, Tony? Yes, of course. So much has happened since. In my 'encounters' with Roy, I'm sure there were far more good times than difficult ones (apart from my first chat with him, where I was told to 'go forth and multiply'!). Yes, much-missed. I, too, will say no more about DCC. I don't know enough about it to really make a sensible comment (so just make clottish ones). I also think I need to improve my written communication skills if I attempt to promulgate further about it. Regards, Tony. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Porcy Mane Posted June 8, 2021 Share Posted June 8, 2021 24 minutes ago, Tony Wright said: We seem to be going around in circles. I don't think we are. We are having a civil debate and hopefully our exchange will clear up a few DCC misconceptions. 26 minutes ago, Tony Wright said: I merely observed that a loco (with a slight shorting problem) shut down a DCC system. Yet that same loco, on analogue, worked perfectly (the slight shorting problem not causing any erratic running). A short cannot be described a "Slight". You have either a short circuit condition or you don't. From what you said It was an intermittent short. The most difficult type of s/c faults to reliably detect. It was a "problem" (your description) that existed which should not have regardless of the control system in use. 1 hour ago, Tony Wright said: Does that not illustrate that a DCC layout is more prone to be affected by shorts than a DC one? It might not have been a 'DCC problem', but the loco certainly caused it to be one. Perhaps we agree on that. Perhaps it would be more correct to say that the more sensitive DCC system prevented a faulty locomotive running. I think you would agree that allowing any loco to run with a short circuit under any circumstances and for reasons outlined in my earlier post would be bad practice. 1 hour ago, Tony Wright said: I don't think it's entirely dependent on the size of the layout that it should be wired in sections; sections which can be isolated, irrespective whether it's DCC or DC. Oh I don't know. I think putting power sections into this layout might be a little OTT. (I have suggested it!). 8 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Porcy Mane Posted June 8, 2021 Share Posted June 8, 2021 1 hour ago, t-b-g said: We miss you Roy. You bet! P 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted June 8, 2021 Author Share Posted June 8, 2021 (edited) 30 minutes ago, Porcy Mane said: I don't think we are. We are having a civil debate and hopefully our exchange will clear up a few DCC misconceptions. A short cannot be described a "Slight". You have either a short circuit condition or you don't. From what you said It was an intermittent short. The most difficult type of s/c faults to reliably detect. It was a "problem" (your description) that existed which should not have regardless of the control system in use. Perhaps it would be more correct to say that the more sensitive DCC system prevented a faulty locomotive running. I think you would agree that allowing any loco to run with a short circuit under any circumstances and for reasons outlined in my earlier post would be bad practice. Oh I don't know. I think putting power sections into this layout might be a little OTT. (I have suggested it!). Thanks, As I intimated, I'll say no more on the matter. Regards, Tony. Edited June 8, 2021 by Tony Wright to add something Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Tony Wright Posted June 8, 2021 Author Popular Post Share Posted June 8, 2021 Something new (and unusual?) on Little Bytham today. This is a conversion from a Hornby NB diesel-hydraulic Type 2 into one of the (ill-fated) diesel-electric ones, completed by a friend. He's done a lot of work on the original, and I think it looks quite presentable. No doubt Clive will tell us (I hope) what's wrong (or, with luck, what's right) with it. With its original wheels opened out to the correct b-t-b and its flanges turned down, it actually works (astonishingly) well through all types of pointwork, even with its pancake-type motor. Yes, I know the wheels should be spoked. 20 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gr.king Posted June 8, 2021 Share Posted June 8, 2021 Whilst diesels are not generally my thing, I applaud that for the fact that it's a conversion that required thought, skill and effort, with a neat result, that has turned something RTR that was modest (possibly even cheap and cheerful) into something different, individual and better. 6 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Tony Wright Posted June 8, 2021 Author Popular Post Share Posted June 8, 2021 (edited) I've been invited to give a 'Zoom' talk to a group of about 50 participants regarding Little Bytham. It's on behalf of the Great Central Railway to generate funds. Now, before anyone thinks that I've become computer savvy, I must state that I have less idea about Zoom than I do about DCC (don't you meed a camera on the computer?). What will happen is that the organiser will come here, we'll stand either side of the layout, have his computer in action, with my blathering on about the trainset. There'll be a few action shots and the participants will be invited to ask questions (which, no doubt, I'll evade, lie, dodge and generally mislead with regard to answers). It should last about an hour. Rather than inflict my visage on the unsuspecting participants for too long, the computer will show still images. Like these........................ I'm rather looking forward to it. Edited June 8, 2021 by Tony Wright typo error 37 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted June 8, 2021 Author Share Posted June 8, 2021 7 minutes ago, gr.king said: Whilst diesels are not generally my thing, I applaud that for the fact that it's a conversion that required thought, skill and effort, with a neat result, that has turned something RTR that was modest (possibly even cheap and cheerful) into something different, individual and better. Thanks Graeme, I'll tell David Rae. I don't think he does RMweb. Regards, Tony. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Tony Wright Posted June 8, 2021 Author Popular Post Share Posted June 8, 2021 (edited) And these......................... Edited June 8, 2021 by Tony Wright 30 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axlebox Posted June 8, 2021 Share Posted June 8, 2021 51 minutes ago, Porcy Mane said: Oh I don't know. I think putting power sections into this layout might be a little OTT. (I have suggested it!). I'm not fussy who plays with my trains set (obviously). My first encounter with Roy was him shouting at me (me being Retford shunter 3rd class), he had a glint in his eye...something his daughters remembered fondly, you knew he liked you if his eyes glinted when he shouted at you! If you ever stood in front of Retford and had a controller thrust into your hand and were asked to help with a shunting move, then that was the yard crew...during one lull in proceedings we even had the cheek to run our own train round the layout and back (only Mr Hall noticed) Can't believe its been 2 years. 2 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Tony Wright Posted June 8, 2021 Author Popular Post Share Posted June 8, 2021 and these.................. Astonishingly, most of these shots have been taken since Covid disrupted so much. 33 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Roger Sunderland Posted June 8, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 8, 2021 As an aside and (hopefully) to move away from the DC/DCC debate, because we will never agree, has anybody been following the “kirtley Pete” thread of the model he is building of York station. Simply the most amazing modelling I think I’ve seen IMHO!! 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScRSG Posted June 8, 2021 Share Posted June 8, 2021 Just a little question, if I may. Regarding LNER 10000 in original grey livery. The lack of colour photographs (inevitably) of this loco, can someone please tell me if the bufferbeams were red, and if so were the buffer shanks black? Thanks Chas Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erichill16 Posted June 8, 2021 Share Posted June 8, 2021 1 hour ago, Tony Wright said: Something new (and unusual?) on Little Bytham today. This is a conversion from a Hornby NB diesel-hydraulic Type 2 into one of the (ill-fated) diesel-electric ones, completed by a friend. He's done a lot of work on the original, and I think it looks quite presentable. No doubt Clive will tell us (I hope) what's wrong (or, with luck, what's right) with it. With its original wheels opened out to the correct b-t-b and its flanges turned down, it actually works (astonishingly) well through all types of pointwork, even with its pancake-type motor. Yes, I know the wheels should be spoked. I thought the Hornby one was the diesel-electric version. I remember making the hydraulic one by cutting something like an inch out of the Hornby model. It is a beautifully finished model regardless. Robert 6 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertcwp Posted June 8, 2021 Share Posted June 8, 2021 14 minutes ago, Erichill16 said: I thought the Hornby one was the diesel-electric version. I remember making the hydraulic one by cutting something like an inch out of the Hornby model. It is a beautifully finished model regardless. Robert Correct. The Hornby model was a sort of hybrid of a Pilot Scheme 21 as built and one rebuilt as a 29. I converted one to a 22 back in 1990, since superseded by the Dapol one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Clive Mortimore Posted June 8, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 8, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, Tony Wright said: Something new (and unusual?) on Little Bytham today. This is a conversion from a Hornby NB diesel-hydraulic Type 2 into one of the (ill-fated) diesel-electric ones, completed by a friend. He's done a lot of work on the original, and I think it looks quite presentable. No doubt Clive will tell us (I hope) what's wrong (or, with luck, what's right) with it. With its original wheels opened out to the correct b-t-b and its flanges turned down, it actually works (astonishingly) well through all types of pointwork, even with its pancake-type motor. Yes, I know the wheels should be spoked. Hello Tony As noted by Robert (Erichill16) the D61xx series were diesel-electric. As for what is wrong, it has the wrong radiator grill, only D6100-D6109 had the two part grill. Even they were replaced by the single grill before they were hid in the shed building at Peterborough New England. The other main visual problem with the old Hornby model is the valances around the buffer beam. Here is a photo of D6100 after being banished north of that wall. https://rcts.zenfolio.com/diesel/br/locomotives/21/hA0FE4359#ha0fe4359 Edited June 8, 2021 by Clive Mortimore 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Clive Mortimore Posted June 8, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 8, 2021 Whoops forgot to say the front end has been well modelled. Hornby having made a pigs ear of the model by having the front of a class 29 rebuild and the sides of a pilot scheme loco when new. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted June 9, 2021 Author Share Posted June 9, 2021 6 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said: Hello Tony As noted by Robert (Erichill16) the D61xx series were diesel-electric. As for what is wrong, it has the wrong radiator grill, only D6100-D6109 had the two part grill. Even they were replaced by the single grill before they were hid in the shed building at Peterborough New England. The other main visual problem with the old Hornby model is the valances around the buffer beam. Here is a photo of D6100 after being banished north of that wall. https://rcts.zenfolio.com/diesel/br/locomotives/21/hA0FE4359#ha0fe4359 Many thanks Clive, I was going on what the modifier told me. Regards, Tony. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted June 9, 2021 Author Share Posted June 9, 2021 6 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said: Whoops forgot to say the front end has been well modelled. Hornby having made a pigs ear of the model by having the front of a class 29 rebuild and the sides of a pilot scheme loco when new. Thanks again, Clive. I was told the front end (and rear end, which is which?) had been extensively modified. Does Dapol produce such a loco today? Not that you've got one, I'd imagine - have you scratch-built one? Though they were originally employed on the southern end of the ECML, I never saw one in reality. I believe they were rapidly removed to 'home waters', much further north, such was their unreliability. I did see several examples of the WR hydraulic equivalents. Were they any better? Regards, Tony. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted June 9, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 9, 2021 (edited) Not all that much! I think it's fair (if not charitable) to say that diesels proved not to be North British's forte. John Dapol have done the D61xx though the differences before/after rebuilding (or subsequent) are outside my range of knowledge. They had already made a pretty decent job of the D63xx hydraulics, so hopefully they are good too. Maybe Clive could comment? Edited June 9, 2021 by Dunsignalling Addition 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted June 9, 2021 Author Share Posted June 9, 2021 8 hours ago, ScRSG said: Just a little question, if I may. Regarding LNER 10000 in original grey livery. The lack of colour photographs (inevitably) of this loco, can someone please tell me if the bufferbeams were red, and if so were the buffer shanks black? Thanks Chas Good morning Chas, I honestly don't know................ I know one should never model from a model, but here are four interpretations. The Loveless RTR W1 in O Gauge. And Nick Dunhill's O Gauge one, built (at least in part) from an ACE kit. Built from a SE Finecast kit ( think), running on The Gresley Beat. And another SEF W1 (builder/painter unknown) which I had for sale. Not really conclusive at all, in fact, quite the opposite. As for which is the right 'battleship grey', well............... The 'official' photograph on the cover of the SEF box for the kit has a grey front buffer beam. Does anyone know what Hornby has done with regard to its forthcoming RTR examples? Regards, Tony. 8 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Chamby Posted June 9, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 9, 2021 Photographs of ‘Hush Hush’ show that it had ‘No.10000’ painted on the front buffer beam in typical LNER style. I’m not aware of any other LNER loco that displayed its number on a buffer beam painted in any other colour than red, but my knowledge is far from exhaustive on the subject. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrg1 Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 2 hours ago, Dunsignalling said: Not all that much! I think it's fair (if not charitable) to say that diesels proved not to be North British's forte. John Dapol have done the D61xx though the differences before/after rebuilding (or subsequent) are outside my range of knowledge. They had already made a pretty decent job of the D63xx hydraulics, so hopefully they are good too. Maybe Clive could comment? The class 21s and 22s were built when North British were going downhill. I was told that they were sent to Swindon for a general overhaul before entering service. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwealleans Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 There's a model of the Hush Hush in the NRM annexe which is (as I recall) roughly contemporary with the original. You'd assume that that was painted to match, as the builder would have known and be able to look at the real one. How are the buffer beams treated on that? 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now