Jump to content

Please use M,M&M only for topics that do not fit within other forum areas. All topics posted here await admin team approval to ensure they don't belong elsewhere.

Tony Wright

Wright writes.....

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, robertcwp said:

 "This product contains a chemical known to the state of California to cause cancer."  I might stick to shiny couplings and bars for now.

 

I recall sitting in a bar in South Korea in 2000/2001 and reading the label on a can of Coca (or Pepsi?) Cola:

 

" This product has been linked with a higher incidence of Cancer in Lab. Rats"  (or words to that effect).

Also:

 

"Made in the USA"

 

I did note that the same stuff in the UK had no such warning.

 

On a visit to the same place last year the cans have no such warning, so either the link has been disproved or the ingredients changed.

 

edit:  Why do such products not state on the label:  "Repeated use of this product will make your teeth fall out, rot, and/or make you overweight......."

Edited by polybear
  • Like 3
  • Funny 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, CF MRC said:

And now for something completely different:

A4C3DA62_300C_4E85_864E_64A5490AD834.jpe
Thrirty five years since I made the previous one -there is a bit more to it than seen here...


Tim

Lovely stuff, Tim,

 

I assume this complements Caledonian Road Station?

 

1843917187_11CopenhagenFieldslayout3.jpg.01b4b8570a55ccdab7c81481b2ebc7c2.jpg

 

Perfection in miniature?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

Edited by Tony Wright
to add something
  • Like 10
  • Agree 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, polybear said:

 

I recall sitting in a bar in South Korea in 2000/2001 and reading the label on a can of Coca (or Pepsi?) Cola:

 

" This product has been linked with a higher incidence of Cancer in Lab. Rats"  (or words to that effect).

Also:

 

"Made in the USA"

 

I did note that the same stuff in the UK had no such warning.

 

On a visit to the same place last year the cans have no such warning, so either the link has been disproved or the ingredients changed.

 

edit:  Why do such products not state on the label:  "Repeated use of this product will make your teeth fall out, rot, and/or make you overweight......."

 

They changed the ingredients - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/foodanddrinknews/9134453/Coke-and-Pepsi-to-change-formula.html

 

  • Informative/Useful 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

Political correctness gone mad !! ..... and politicians are paid (our) good money to dream up this madness !!

 

The best one in the UK at present is that, if roadworks use temporary traffic lights, there has to be a (at least) two man gang, sitting in a vehicle equipped with a spare set of temporary traffic lights, at all times that the first set of lights are in operation - just in case they fail!!!

 

Now that is a job I could do - even at the age of 70+.

 

John Isherwood.

 

John Isherwood.

 

John, I think the spare lights and van/pick-up are because the provision of traffic lights and other guarding cones, signs etc at temporary works is often undertaken by specialist contractors. They design the roadworks guarding plan which is submitted to the highway authority and as the people actually doing the works are not traffic light specialist they stay on site to ensure that there is minimal disruption if the lights fail. All of this work was previously undertaken by the road contractors / Local authority / Utility but not very often  now, it does cost eye watering amounts of money which someone picks up the tab for. 

  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now here's something thats been puzzling me from Peter Costers GN book where it covers Sandy. Look at the length of the headshunt this side of the points, I don't think you'd even fit a 16 tonner in it..  Was it truncated, or wasn't there room for two buffer stops? Curious... something for the 'prototype for everything' department!

IMG_4514.JPG.ad50d8ae0b3b1811ab37818c3ee9612c.JPG

 

Tony

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Jerry, why not drop the banker before it enters Devonshire Tunnel? That's still a decent run from Bath Junction.

 

Thats the plan at the moment. It would give the right impression and its also the summit of the gradient at home - the Midland passes underneath at this point out of sight. The problem is that I need to be able to reliably uncouple the banker, in a cutting, on the move, with the rest of the train on a hidden 2' radius curve in a tunnel. What could possibly go wrong........!

 

Jerry

  • Like 2
  • Friendly/supportive 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, dibateg said:

Now here's something thats been puzzling me from Peter Costers GN book where it covers Sandy. Look at the length of the headshunt this side of the points, I don't think you'd even fit a 16 tonner in it..  Was it truncated, or wasn't there room for two buffer stops? Curious... something for the 'prototype for everything' department!

 

 

Tony

 

It seems to have been a smidgeon longer in 1900 but by 1924 the signalbox had been built across the end - note how the path across the end of the platform is still a boardwalk behind the buffer stop. The angled locking room wall is presumably to keep the pathway clear. Was the signalbox built on top of the track? And what's that LNER engine doing on the North Western line?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
40 minutes ago, dibateg said:

Now here's something thats been puzzling me from Peter Costers GN book where it covers Sandy. Look at the length of the headshunt this side of the points, I don't think you'd even fit a 16 tonner in it..  Was it truncated, or wasn't there room for two buffer stops? Curious... something for the 'prototype for everything' department!

IMG_4514.JPG.ad50d8ae0b3b1811ab37818c3ee9612c.JPG

 

Tony

 

Hi Tony,

 

Wasn't Sandy a shared station site with the LMS? Could the 'head shunt' actually be a protective measure for the mainlines in the event of an incident during a shunting move with the buffer stop providing a level of protection for the signal box?

Edited by Atso
  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

It seems to have been a smidgeon longer in 1900 but by 1924 the signalbox had been built across the end - note how the path across the end of the platform is still a boardwalk behind the buffer stop. The angled locking room wall is presumably to keep the pathway clear. Was the signalbox built on top of the track? And what's that LNER engine doing on the North Western line?

Hi Stephen

 

After nationalisation some trains were worked by Cambridge based locomotives. Both D16s and B12 would work as far as Oxford. Even into diesel days, until the closure of the Bedford  to Cambridge section Brush Type 2s and ER Cravens units would be regularly seen.

 

As for the short piece of track it was part of the exchange sidings between the LNWR and the GNR, was it ever used.....over to "burnt on the edges Dave" as he is a native of Sandy.

  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Atso said:

 

Hi Tony,

 

Wasn't Sandy a shared station site with the LMS? Could the 'head shunt' actually be a protective measure for the mainlines in the event of an incident during a shunting move with the buffer stop providing a level of protection for the signal box?

 

DELETED

Edited by cctransuk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, dibateg said:

Now here's something thats been puzzling me from Peter Costers GN book where it covers Sandy. Look at the length of the headshunt this side of the points, I don't think you'd even fit a 16 tonner in it..  Was it truncated, or wasn't there room for two buffer stops? Curious... something for the 'prototype for everything' department!

IMG_4514.JPG.ad50d8ae0b3b1811ab37818c3ee9612c.JPG

 

Tony

 

This arrangement allows two separate headshunts to use the same set of buffers where space is limited.  Running in on one road, and out on the other is not possible, but either road can be used... not at the same time of course.

  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dibateg said:

Now here's something thats been puzzling me from Peter Costers GN book where it covers Sandy. Look at the length of the headshunt this side of the points, I don't think you'd even fit a 16 tonner in it..  Was it truncated, or wasn't there room for two buffer stops? Curious... something for the 'prototype for everything' department!

IMG_4514.JPG.ad50d8ae0b3b1811ab37818c3ee9612c.JPG

 

Tony

Probably camera lens distortion but it also looks like a prototype for when your signal box looks like a card kit and was not planted completely plumb.

  • Agree 1
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

Political correctness gone mad !! ..... and politicians are paid (our) good money to dream up this madness !!

 

The best one in the UK at present is that, if roadworks use temporary traffic lights, there has to be a (at least) two man gang, sitting in a vehicle equipped with a spare set of temporary traffic lights, at all times that the first set of lights are in operation - just in case they fail!!!

 

Now that is a job I could do - even at the age of 70+.

 

John Isherwood.

 

John Isherwood.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, jollysmart said:

 

John, I think the spare lights and van/pick-up are because the provision of traffic lights and other guarding cones, signs etc at temporary works is often undertaken by specialist contractors. They design the roadworks guarding plan which is submitted to the highway authority and as the people actually doing the works are not traffic light specialist they stay on site to ensure that there is minimal disruption if the lights fail. All of this work was previously undertaken by the road contractors / Local authority / Utility but not very often  now, it does cost eye watering amounts of money which someone picks up the tab for. 

 

This is going a bit off topic,  but as someone who regularly has lights provided they tend to come with one man who monitors the traffic flow and changes the light changing frequency to keep thr trsffic flowing. This is especially on major roads where traffic flow in each direction can vary during the day.

 

Edit -  For those that think it's an easy job you would not like the abuse and threats directed towards these workmen, I have been amazed that even when drivers don't have to wait for the lights they still open windows and hurl abuse.

Edited by chris p bacon
  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/08/2020 at 11:04, Barry Ten said:

 

pressflos.jpg.c808235176cac9582f417fde80dab542.jpg

 

These are three Dapol ones that run as a fixed rake with 3-links in the middle and Spratt & Winkles on the end. It is a slight fiddle to couple up the 3-links but once done, they don't need to be touched as long as the wagons are on the layout.

 

I find Spratt & Winkles work well for me (with brass blackening) but I can't fit more than about three wagons in an evening. To get around that, I make up fixed rakes with intermediate 3-links wherever possible, some up to 10 wagons long.

 

I also recommend making a fitting jig:

 

jig1.jpg

 

And then throwing it away as it'll prove totally useless.

 

Al

Thank you, 

 

Looking for couplings is there a "best" make or are they all pretty much the same? 

 

Regards Richard 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

And what's that LNER engine doing on the North Western line?

D16/3s often worked on the Cambridge-Oxford services if I remember correctly.

  • Agree 3
  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, jollysmart said:

 

John, I think the spare lights and van/pick-up are because the provision of traffic lights and other guarding cones, signs etc at temporary works is often undertaken by specialist contractors. They design the roadworks guarding plan which is submitted to the highway authority and as the people actually doing the works are not traffic light specialist they stay on site to ensure that there is minimal disruption if the lights fail. All of this work was previously undertaken by the road contractors / Local authority / Utility but not very often  now, it does cost eye watering amounts of money which someone picks up the tab for. 

 

As a former senior local government highways and traffic engineer I recall that, until relatively recently, a contractor or in-house highway works crew were perfectly capable of erecting, maintaining and adjusting temporary traffic signals. The layout and positioning of signs and signals would be designed by the in-house project engineer, and drawings provided to the contractor / works unit.

 

Then came the 'hands-off' concept of works management - the further removed the commissioner from the (potentially risky) implementation the better!

 

Wouldn't it be so much better if the principal contractor designed the works, so that the commissioning body couldn't be held responsible if something went wrong?

 

Wouldn't it be so much better if the principal contractor sub-contracted out all of the work elements and associated traffic managment responsibilities - so that the principal contractor could not be held responsible if anything went wrong?

 

........ and so on, and so on, ad infinitum!

 

Every time a responsibility is passed on there are huge tendering costs, and everyone involved in this ludicrous chain of buck-passing has to have someone on site to represent them - even if there's nothing for them to do for 99% of the time.

 

I can personally vouch for the fact that scheme costs multiplied several-fold as soon as these 'umbrella' contracts became the fashion - and we've all seen how we, via the Treasury, have to bail out these mega-contractors (who actually do very little but sell the work to others) when they fail.

 

Now you know why I got out of local government on the day that my pension matured, and why your taxes - local and national - are so high!

 

It's a mad world!

 

John Isherwood.

 

 

Edited by cctransuk
  • Like 3
  • Agree 4
  • Informative/Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, polybear said:

On a visit to the same place last year the cans have no such warning, so either the link has been disproved or the ingredients changed.

...or the rats are all dead.

  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Clem said:

D16/3s often worked on the Cambridge-Oxford services if I remember correctly.

I have a photograph of a J39 on a passenger train at Woburn Sands.

Probably late 1930s.

Any more LNER machines spotted?

Bernard

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, queensquare said:

 

Thats the plan at the moment. It would give the right impression and its also the summit of the gradient at home - the Midland passes underneath at this point out of sight. The problem is that I need to be able to reliably uncouple the banker, in a cutting, on the move, with the rest of the train on a hidden 2' radius curve in a tunnel. What could possibly go wrong........!

 

Jerry

With DG couplings (with or without the MDE mods)? Absolutely nothing...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, chris p bacon said:

For those that think it's an easy job you would not like the abuse and threats directed towards these workmen, I have been amazed that even when drivers don't have to wait for the lights they still open windows and hurl abuse.

 

Because the sight of such unnecessary and costly resources being wasted - at our expense - is enough to bring fury to the fore in the mildest-mannered driver. I sympathise with the signals crew - but nowhere near as much as I sympathise with the enraged drivers.

 

It is the burgeoning Health & Safety industry that has invented all these 'vital' new regulations - as you would if your business relied upon you 'discovering' ever more risks that must be mitigated. However did we manage before? .... and don't tell me that it's all about avoiding accidents and fatalities; most risk arises from human error, and you cannot legislate against human nature.

 

John Isherwood.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to change the subject for a bit - It seems to me that there is a rush to get to page 2000. The rate of filling pages [with interesting stuff, mind you] seems to have accelerated in the 1900s!

 

Is this the thread on RMWeb with the most postings?

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rka said:

Thank you, 

 

Looking for couplings is there a "best" make or are they all pretty much the same? 

 

Regards Richard 

 

The only provider of Spratt and Winkles that I'm aware of is Wizard models. For the 3-links, you have

a wider choice. Its a toss-up between realism and ease-of-use, and for me the Smith's ones are about

right, although they're somewhat over-scale. However, it still beats a tension lock.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rka said:

Thank you, 

 

Looking for couplings is there a "best" make or are they all pretty much the same? 

 

Regards Richard 

I don't think it's the case that all couplings are the same, Richard,

 

The previous pages have illustrated that. 

 

I suppose the 'industry-standard' (certainly in OO) is the tension-lock. Now, just to muddy the waters, what is a 'standard' tension lock? I think the first was produced by Tri-ang, as as successor to its second coupling system which was a metal hook resting on a metal bar (the bar was not in the form of a 'goalpost', but just bent at right angles - does anyone have a picture to illustrate this, please?). The hook did not lock under tension. 

 

Being metal, it could be bent in many directions, enough to make it able to hook up to Peco/Hornby-Dublo/Trix couplings. In my youth I had Tri-ang but my best friend (whose dad was a test pilot, so well-off) had Hornby-Dublo, and another friend had Trix. By using the Trix track, and ensuring that no Hornby-Dublo train was to be hauled by a Tri-ang loco, and by switching the feed wires around, we ran all our trains. I seem to recall Cyril Freezer telling us that the different systems (and definitely the couplings) were not compatible. Since none of us knew what compatible (or incompatible) meant at the time, we carried on in blissful ignorance! 

 

The tension-locks do just that - while in tension they'll depress uncoupling ramps, and only uncouple when shunted back over them. 

 

Some folk still use the Peco-type coupling (which, at least, resembles a buckeye), but the final manifestation of it by Hornby-Dublo was a gross, nylon affair - which didn't always couple up successfully to the original metal ones.

 

So, the tension-lock became standard. Lima produced what must be the ugliest of the type, and there have been various sizes produced down the years by the RTR boys. Though nominally 'compatible', this is not always the case. Most now are mounted in NEM pockets, which means they can be substituted with relative ease, but beware - not all are at the same height. It's common knowledge that I cannot stand them! 

 

There are various other proprietary semi-automatic types which have been mentioned of late, or, like me, you can make your own. 

 

Three-links and screw-links look most like the prototypes with regard to shackles, but they're a fiddle to couple-up/uncouple, and always require the 'hand of God'. Kaydees look most like buckeyes.

 

It's down to which suits you best.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.