Wright writes.....

[Porcy Mane]

4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Just one thing. Why not chuck away those tension-locks on the locos? A simple wire loop, painted black, will engage just as well with the T-Ls on the stock. It's discreet, and your locos will look so much better when running-round stock or leading a train. 

 

 I have a thing about couplings, their representation, accuracy and portrayal. I find myself not noticing the tensions locks on Robs railway. Maybe it's because my eye is drawn away from them by immediately being distracted to the high standard of modelling elsewhere on his layout.

 

Purely a personal opinion but I think there's equal justification that your same suggestion could also be applied to some of the locomotives front couplings on Little Bytham.

 

"Tony, why not chuck away those Romford screw links along with the Smiths couplings. Your locos will look so much better when running-round stock or leading a train".

The Romford's  (ex. ERG) look way over scale and those from Smiths using a tack with squashed end to represent the tommy bar are from a different era. As you probably know, far more accurate representations can be had from the likes of Ambis, Maso-kits and recently introduced and beautifully proportioned Rumney Screw Couplings.

 

The Irish RTR boys have recently given us this excellent representation of an RIV screw coupling where even the hook profile is correct.

 

 

As with so much in railway modelling, it's a hobby and as such a lot boils down to personal preferences. What satisfies one may not satisfy another. As long as we don't beat ourselves up about it, no worries.

 

Now those Hornby tension locks; even with its updates through the eras, it still remains visually intrusive but it works, works well, fulfils its design criteria and has probably made a bit of cash for its patent holders down the years. The fact it works well fulfilling its intended purpose is probably why the majority of household British outline layouts still use it.

 

I've got jam jars full of the things.

 

P

[Porcy Mane]

4 hours ago, MarkC said:

Mind you, a couple of my models have coal which I picked up whilst wandering along a beach at Punta Arenas, Chile, when I was there once waiting for my ship to come in, as it were...

 

Trumped ya!  

 

Most of the coal in my tenders came from about 840 feet directly below a local disused wagonway. Bottom Busty seam, Q23 coalface.

 

Right here

 

Dug it myself. Quite proud of that.

 

P

Edited April 12, 2019 by Porcy Mane
Sort the link oot.

[Barry Ten]

32 minutes ago, Porcy Mane said:

 

 

I've got jam jars full of the things.

 

P

 

I know at least two modellers who went back to tension locks after using scale couplings, so it's well worth keeping them somewhere, as you never know who will appreciate them. I even did a trade with one modeller, who sent me a bag of ready-assembled 3-links in return for all the tension locks I could send.

Edited April 12, 2019 by Barry Ten

[Barry Ten]

2 hours ago, Manxcat said:

 

 

So, should I make all the new ones with brick papers or embossed plasticard? If I mix them would one make the other look strange?

 

 

 

Archie

 

 

I've always been happy to mix the two media on different models and I think they can sit happily together provided there's some sort of

visual separator such as a downpipe, so that the eye doesn't see an immediate juxtaposition. Real brickwork often has very different

textures and colouring from one building to another, so I don't think it's a great sin to combine different materials.

[t-b-g]

I always use "If I want your opinion I will ask for it" as my benchmark.

 

I often do ask for opinions from a small group of close friends and sometimes I will ask somebody if they wish to hear mine.

 

But I try very hard not to inflict my opinion on people who may not want to hear it.

 

I have had a few layouts published and exhibited a few more. In most cases I am very aware of the things that either didn't go as well as I would have liked, or I got wrong, or I never finished properly.

 

Does that mean they should have stayed at home until every last thing was corrected? Or that I should be happy that an "expert" leans on the barrier and points out all the things that I know about?

 

If every person at every show just spent their time pointing out faults, however constructively, I would have done one show and no more. So who chooses which "experts" are allowed to go around constructively mentioning faults? Is everybody supposed to do it or just a select few?

 

That sort of thing doesn't appeal to me. So unless asked, I keep my thoughts to myself.

[MarkC]

22 minutes ago, Porcy Mane said:

 

Trumped ya!  

 

Most of the coal in my tenders came from about 840 feet directly below a local disused wagonway. Bottom Busty seam, Q23 coalface.

 

Right here

 

Dug it myself. Quite proud of that.

 

P

Chapeau, my friend. Chapeau. Mucho respect

[Mallard60022]

Tony, from another thread. Delete when you have noted it. Your PM seems to be full.

As some one else pointed out 30853 Sir Richard Grenville lasted until December 1957 in original condition before having new cylinders and smoke box fitted,  30851 Sir Francis Drake lasted until withdrawal in December 1961 with  the piano front and short smoke box although it had the later smoke deflectors with out the steam pipe bulge over the cylinders, this was due to a mix up when it had new cylinders fitted in 1949 with 8” piston valves instead of 10” so depending your modelling time scale two more locos in BR livery from renumbering 30863.  One thing that Hornby have got wrong on 30863 is the yellow triangle under the number, this should be a letter A the same colour as the numbers, it looks like they have used a photo of the loco in the Irwell book taken ex works at   Eastleigh in 1949. The letters on LSWR and Southern Railway locos built and overhauled at Eastleigh referred to the locos power classification, Ryde works on the IOW also used it and it was usually displayed on the running plate behind the front buffer, in BR days it was applied under the number and lasted into the early 50’s when it was superseded by the BR standard code above the number, Ashford and Brighton didn’t seem to use this system. The yellow triangle under the number denoted that the loco had water treatment fitted, this was used in the early sixty’s when it replaced a yellow dot under the number that had been introduced in the mid 50’s, it changed to the triangle so the yellow dot would not get confused with the Western Regions coulerd dots that where displayed on there loco cabs for route and power classification.

With thanks to the OP 'bagnall' on the other thread.

Phil

Edited April 12, 2019 by Mallard60022

[Mallard60022]

52 minutes ago, Barry Ten said:

 

I know at least two modellers who went back to tension locks after using scale couplings, so it's well worth keeping them somewhere, as you never know who will appreciate them. I even did a trade with one modeller, who sent me a bag of ready-assembled 3-links in return for all the tension locks I could send.

I have decided that, with the few fixed rakes of coaches I will be using and those 'loose coaches' I know will be added/removed from the 'inside of the end coaches' arrangement of trains I will construct from cassettes, I may well retain the small TLs if they are hidden by the Gangway fittings. I find them easier for 'shunting about a bit' before they appear on stage.

Phil

[Mallard60022]

5 hours ago, MarkC said:

Mmm - real coal. I am under strict orders from SWMBO not to pick any more up from the beach when we take the dogs there, until I have used up my existing stocks. (The Durham coast is great for sea coal deposits).

 

Mind you, a couple of my models have coal which I picked up whilst wandering along a beach at Punta Arenas, Chile, when I was there once waiting for my ship to come in, as it were...

My tender contents (and some coal wagons) will be (and some already have been) filled with coal I have found around old railway lines or sites (e.g. Potteric Carr Nature Reserve south of Donny and closed lines in Sussex/Derbyshire). I await the person who will point out to me that the coal in my Bulleid Pacific's or Nelson's tenders is the incorrect type for the locomotive/ era/ area. As long as it looks about the right size and shape (with variety in the wagons) and every tender is not heaped over full then I couldn't give a stuff about my 'large nuts' or my ovoids or even my Steamy Welsh lumps.

P

[woodenhead]

One could argue that Tension Locks are like Brexit

 

Many people want an alternative but each has it's pros and cons, finding a consensus may be difficult

• 3 link
• Sprat & Winkle
• Dingham
• DG
• keen systems close couplings
• Roco
• kadee

[Porcy Mane]

3 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

Many people want an alternative but each has it's pros and cons, finding a consensus may be difficult

 

You forgot the old classic

 

Almost as old as the tension lock.

 

P

[woodenhead]

Just now, Porcy Mane said:

 

You forgot the old classic

 

Almost as old as the tension lock.

 

P

Dang, I knew I would miss one

[jjb1970]

On couplers I think that the gold standard remains Kadee but they need to be properly set up and are ruthless in exposing any less than great track you might have. 

[woodenhead]

Just now, jjb1970 said:

On couplers I think that the gold standard remains Kadee but they need to be properly set up and are ruthless in exposing any less than great track you might have. 

Controversial opinion within a finer scale thread

 

Stuck on the front of a steam engine, hmmm, almost like you want out of TL but want to remain close to what you had before. 

 

ps I use a mix of kadees and TL.

[APOLLO]

+1 here for Kadees, though mine are all O scale on appropriate N American stock. Once set to correct height never any problems. I've never used them in OO though, all my OO is tension lock of varying makes and sizes - they work OK but look awful.  

 

It's time now most RTR has NEM coupler pockets as standard that a new small auto coupling was designed - perhaps something akin to the metal continental type but a bit smaller ?

 

I have a rake of old Hornby Dublo wagons which retain their metal couplings - they work well, are simple and do not look too bad. They would be OK for me as standard. The later plastic ones were a tad bulkier though.

 

Brit15

 

 

[Tony Wright]

5 hours ago, Porcy Mane said:

 

 I have a thing about couplings, their representation, accuracy and portrayal. I find myself not noticing the tensions locks on Robs railway. Maybe it's because my eye is drawn away from them by immediately being distracted to the high standard of modelling elsewhere on his layout.

 

Purely a personal opinion but I think there's equal justification that your same suggestion could also be applied to some of the locomotives front couplings on Little Bytham.

 

"Tony, why not chuck away those Romford screw links along with the Smiths couplings. Your locos will look so much better when running-round stock or leading a train".

The Romford's  (ex. ERG) look way over scale and those from Smiths using a tack with squashed end to represent the tommy bar are from a different era. As you probably know, far more accurate representations can be had from the likes of Ambis, Maso-kits and recently introduced and beautifully proportioned Rumney Screw Couplings.

 

The Irish RTR boys have recently given us this excellent representation of an RIV screw coupling where even the hook profile is correct.

 

 

As with so much in railway modelling, it's a hobby and as such a lot boils down to personal preferences. What satisfies one may not satisfy another. As long as we don't beat ourselves up about it, no worries.

 

Now those Hornby tension locks; even with its updates through the eras, it still remains visually intrusive but it works, works well, fulfils its design criteria and has probably made a bit of cash for its patent holders down the years. The fact it works well fulfilling its intended purpose is probably why the majority of household British outline layouts still use it.

 

I've got jam jars full of the things.

 

P

I'm in agreement with you with regard to the overscale screw couplings on the front buffer beam of many (most) of LB's locos. 

 

However, I don't think they're as obtrusive as any tension-lock, which is implied in your observation. 

 

 

 

What do you think? 

 

Actually, the Bachmann screw-link couplings supplied with their locos are very good.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

4 hours ago, Mallard60022 said:

Tony, from another thread. Delete when you have noted it. Your PM seems to be full.

As some one else pointed out 30853 Sir Richard Grenville lasted until December 1957 in original condition before having new cylinders and smoke box fitted,  30851 Sir Francis Drake lasted until withdrawal in December 1961 with  the piano front and short smoke box although it had the later smoke deflectors with out the steam pipe bulge over the cylinders, this was due to a mix up when it had new cylinders fitted in 1949 with 8” piston valves instead of 10” so depending your modelling time scale two more locos in BR livery from renumbering 30863.  One thing that Hornby have got wrong on 30863 is the yellow triangle under the number, this should be a letter A the same colour as the numbers, it looks like they have used a photo of the loco in the Irwell book taken ex works at   Eastleigh in 1949. The letters on LSWR and Southern Railway locos built and overhauled at Eastleigh referred to the locos power classification, Ryde works on the IOW also used it and it was usually displayed on the running plate behind the front buffer, in BR days it was applied under the number and lasted into the early 50’s when it was superseded by the BR standard code above the number, Ashford and Brighton didn’t seem to use this system. The yellow triangle under the number denoted that the loco had water treatment fitted, this was used in the early sixty’s when it replaced a yellow dot under the number that had been introduced in the mid 50’s, it changed to the triangle so the yellow dot would not get confused with the Western Regions coulerd dots that where displayed on there loco cabs for route and power classification.

With thanks to the OP 'bagnall' on the other thread.

Phil

Thanks for that, Phil,

 

Most useful.

 

The new Hornby LN really does look a fine model.

 

 

 

The differences appear to have been captured exactly. 

 

Now, two questions, if I may, please?

 

Should I expect the 'DCC on-board' one to run on plain old DC? Obviously not with all the functions, but at least run. This one won't.

 

Secondly, how does one empty a PM box? Mine's full, though I cannot empty it. I could on the old RMweb, but not now. 

 

Any comments about the LN, gratefully-received. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

[Mallard60022]

One thing I've not checked Tony is the angle of the Cranks either side. I also don't know if these are typical SR with the emission whatever it is on the Bulleid Pacifics that is not that as used on (say) ER Pacifics.

Phil 

[JamieR4489]

32 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Should I expect the 'DCC on-board' one to run on plain old DC? Obviously not with all the functions, but at least run. This one won't.

Secondly, how does one empty a PM box? Mine's full, though I cannot empty it. I could on the old RMweb, but not now.

There is a CV on the chip which allows the loco to run on DC. However, a DCC controller is needed to change this CV. It's CV number 29. I think you need to change the value to 6 but I'm not sure.

 

To empty your inbox go into the box and then click on the gear symbol. There should be a drop down menu and one of the options is empty.

 

Jamie

Edited April 12, 2019 by JamieR4489
correct info and answer second question

[Northmoor]

10 hours ago, MarkC said:

Mmm - real coal. I am under strict orders from SWMBO not to pick any more up from the beach when we take the dogs there, until I have used up my existing stocks. (The Durham coast is great for sea coal deposits).

 

Mind you, a couple of my models have coal which I picked up whilst wandering along a beach at Punta Arenas, Chile, when I was there once waiting for my ship to come in, as it were...

I also have a small bucket full of sea coal from Seaton Carew - enough for at least 100 locomotives!  Some time I'll start filtering the crushed sea shells out and use it; that's going to be a lonnnngggg job.

[Headstock]

54 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks for that, Phil,

 

Most useful.

 

The new Hornby LN really does look a fine model.

 

The differences appear to have been captured exactly. 

 

Now, two questions, if I may, please?

 

Should I expect the 'DCC on-board' one to run on plain old DC? Obviously not with all the functions, but at least run. This one won't.

 

Secondly, how does one empty a PM box? Mine's full, though I cannot empty it. I could on the old RMweb, but not now. 

 

Any comments about the LN, gratefully-received. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

Evening Tony,

 

is it coloured plastic?

 

Another question if you please, What is the story behind the numberplate six on 60513?

[cctransuk]

4 hours ago, APOLLO said:

I have a rake of old Hornby Dublo wagons which retain their metal couplings - they work well, are simple and do not look too bad.

 

I use nothing else - in the form of the Peco R2 coupling; https://railsofsheffield.com/products/17602/peco-r-2-oo-gauge-peco-r-2-simplex-auto-coupler , and I have hundreds of items of rolling stock.

 

Recently, I've been adapting them to fit in NEM pockets.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, Mallard60022 said:

One thing I've not checked Tony is the angle of the Cranks either side. I also don't know if these are typical SR with the emission whatever it is on the Bulleid Pacifics that is not that as used on (say) ER Pacifics.

Phil 

Phil,

 

As usual with Hornby's (and Bachmann's) outside valve gear locos, the angle of the return crank is wrong on one side. On the Hornby LN it leans the wrong way on the nearside.

 

 

It should lean forward on this side. Oddly enough, the illustration on the box sleeve has it correct.

 

Should the green on the centre splasher be a different shade to the rest?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, Headstock said:

 

Evening Tony,

 

is it coloured plastic?

 

Another question if you please, What is the story behind the numberplate six on 60513?

Good evening Andrew,

 

Coloured plastic? What, the LN? I suppose so, but I'll check.

 

Regarding the '6', it's the 'plate supplied by Jackson Evans when I built the loco (the first independent build of the kit in ???????). It should be correct Gill Sans, which I think it is. If not, I'll replace it with one from Ian Wilson. 

[cctransuk]

35 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

 

 

Should the green on the centre splasher be a different shade to the rest?

 

 

 

No - the rest of the loco should match the centre splasher !!

 

What is it with Hornby? Is their livery paint specifier colour blind?

 

If they can specify the correct colour for a tiny part of the model, why not do so for the rest?

 

It beggars belief !!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.