Tri-ang Railways.

[BernardTPM]

Actually I was thinking the deeper aspect of the Airfix girders compared to the standard Triang Hornby spans could be used to represent the heavier portals used either end of overhead section breaks.

[GoingUnderground]

18 hours ago, melmerby said:

Not that rare, Edinburgh in the 21st Century:

https://goo.gl/maps/vH2Unm7BAitu8Srf7

Thank you for that. I know that they are used in reserved areas without a paved/hard surface where cars shouldn't be, but their use in open streets today surprises me as I would have thought that they represented a collision hazard as road markings don't protect anyone. You often see Keep Left bollards taken out and nowadays those are designed to detach and break off.  I would have thought that a traction pole represented a slightly more immovable object, not to mention the damage and disruption when then a falling pole took out the overhead wiring.  Back in the pre WW1 period they were used in unreserved areas of the streets, but then the electric trams would have been some of the fastest vehicles on the street, and there weren't parked vehicles for other "road" users to negotiate.

Edited October 29, 2022 by GoingUnderground

[GoingUnderground]

23 minutes ago, BernardTPM said:

Actually I was thinking the deeper aspect of the Airfix girders compared to the standard Triang Hornby spans could be used to represent the heavier portals used either end of overhead section breaks.

 

30 minutes ago, GoingUnderground said:

.... my conversion was intended to give it the "beefier" look of the power or signal portals used on lines with OHLE. I also modified the feet so that they now clip-fit to Super 4 track.

The Triang double track portals R580/489 are themselves heavier than the standard portal used on the WCML at least as borne out by my own observations when going into London on the Bakerloo via the DC Lines recently. But if the Triang portals were any lighter in construction then they would probably be too delicate to be a plastic moulding and would have to be or a more robust material.

[GoingUnderground]

7 hours ago, Colin_McLeod said:

 

That picture shows the solution very clearly, and also why the overlapp is necessary without recourse to major surgery.

 

 

I had been thinking of that also. I must check the dimensions

 

Edit: just seen Going Underground's post above.  Maybe I'll settle for a simpler solution!

 

 

 

That's very neat. Using Trix for the station platforms themselves may be another option I could use.

 

That's also a very nice layout, and  I like the arrangement for supporting three catenary wires (just beside the colour light signal)

 

 

 

Again, thanks to everyone for these helpful suggestions.

Using British Trix catenary masts may be a solution, but it creates its own problem, actually finding some British Trix catenary in the first place. If you think that finding the Triang catenary portals to buy is hard, they seem to go very quickly on Ebay, in my experience finding British Trix catenary is more like climbing Everest - it can be done, but don't think it's going to be an easy task. 

 

Of all the Triang range, the items that have held their value best are the Sydney Suburban EMU set, R450, R451 and R452; the EM2/Class 77, R351; the AL1, R753; the green Steeplecab, R254, and its maroon economy cousin R252; the TC double-ended electric Loco, R257; and almost all of the Phase 1 and Phase 2 catenary range with the exception of the Series 3 catenary mast bases as they cannot be used with Super 4 track.

 

The Hornby Railways reincarnation of the Triang catenary is also seen less often on Ebay and hence attracts good prices and tends to go quickly. It uses different single masts to the Triang version, but being of the same basic design, they too would be a b**** to remodel to form a 2 arms per mast version like Sagaguy's Modified Trix ones. The grey double track portals, R489, also go quickly and aren't cheap.

 

There is a similar situation with British Trix, with the black and green versions of the EM1 and the blue AL1 holding their values really well, and as I've just said, their catenary is rare with prices to match. The Trix Transpennine DMU also attracts silly prices, especially for the intermediate coaches with their NE running numbers.

 

Even the 2 rail version of the Hornby Dublo AL1, 2245, which was modified in Margate to become the Triang Hornby AL1, R753, holds its price remarkably well due to rarity value, whilst the genuine Binns Road factory made 3 rail version,3245, is probably the rarest of all with known genuine examples in single figures. There never was any HD catenary, they used the Triang catenary in their publicity pictures prior to the Triang Hornby amalgamation and the loco becoming part of the Triang Hornby range.

 

Let us know what you plan to do, and do put up sone piccies to share with us when the time comes..

Edited October 29, 2022 by GoingUnderground

[melmerby]

4 hours ago, GoingUnderground said:

Even the 2 rail version of the Hornby Dublo AL1, 2245, which was modified in Margate to become the Triang Hornby AL1, R753, holds its price remarkably well due to rarity value

AFAIK They only kept the bodyshell replacing the current changeover from a plug in wire to a small switch.

 

I had a 2245 bought new when it came out for IIRC 67/6d and sold it in playworn condition for £100 a while back. It did still have the box, guarantee and oiling instructions.

I bought some Trix blue/grey Mk1s for it to pull but they looked a bit odd being underscale. They are also long gone, together with some Trix Whisky wagons.

[andyman7]

50 minutes ago, melmerby said:

AFAIK They only kept the bodyshell replacing the current changeover from a plug in wire to a small switch.

 

I had a 2245 bought new when it came out for IIRC 67/6d and sold it in playworn condition for £100 a while back. It did still have the box, guarantee and oiling instructions.

I bought some Trix blue/grey Mk1s for it to pull but they looked a bit odd being underscale. They are also long gone, together with some Trix Whisky wagons.

Triang had already been planning a Class AL2 when they acquired Dublo. So the Dublo body was mated to the AL2 chassis hence why the Triang-era E3001 has the wrong bogies

[sagaguy]

I collected Trix catenary masts over the years as and when i saw them for this project,not cheap by any means but it is out there.Funny that the Trix Transpennine unit was mentioned,i have two modified pick up arrangements with a Marklin skate fitted to the brake second wired through to the motor coach via a homemade plug and socket ala Dublo 8f arrangement.There arefour Trix EM1s,twoTriang EM2s with turned down flanges and Hornby modern coach wheels fitted in the trailing bogie,two Triang AL1s and two Dublo AL1s,oh,and nearly forgot the three Trix AL1s converted for 3 rail operation,I`m stiil trying to get them to run from the Trix catenary without the pantographs snagging on the catenary.Anyway,an early video of one of my Transpennines.The first masts i bought was this set from Gumtree and a refinished Trix EM1 in rail blue.

 

                              Ray.

 

 

[sagaguy]

A Dublo AL1doing what it should be doing,collecting current from the wire!.

 

 

                Ray.

[melmerby]

10 hours ago, andyman7 said:

Triang had already been planning a Class AL2 when they acquired Dublo. So the Dublo body was mated to the AL2 chassis hence why the Triang-era E3001 has the wrong bogies

The HD ones seem totally wrong as well, they look far too short.

Didn't they come off the 1000hp Bo-Bo diesel (class 20) ?

 

It was a bit crude, even by the standards of the day, as if it was rushed out.

 

 

[sagaguy]

6 minutes ago, melmerby said:

The HD ones seem totally wrong as well, they look far too short.

Didn't they come off the 1000hp Bo-Bo diesel (class 20) ?

 

It was a bit crude, even by the standards of the day, as if it was rushed out.

 

 

No,it is the same bogie as the Dublo EMU,comparison between the Trix AL1 on the left,Dublo on the right.The Trix model always looks sleeker and more to scale.

 

                         Ray.

[sagaguy]

Short video of two Trix AL1s.

                   Ray.

 

                

 

[melmerby]

31 minutes ago, sagaguy said:

No,it is the same bogie as the Dublo EMU

I knew it was from somewhere else.

The whole thing is rather crude with just one powered axle with traction tyres

[GoingUnderground]

6 hours ago, sagaguy said:

Funny that the Trix Transpennine unit was mentioned,i have two modified pick up arrangements with a Marklin skate fitted to the brake second wired through to the motor coach via a homemade plug and socket ala Dublo 8f arrangement.There arefour Trix EM1s,twoTriang EM2s with turned down flanges and Hornby modern coach wheels fitted in the trailing bogie,two Triang AL1s and two Dublo AL1s,oh,and nearly forgot the three Trix AL1s converted for 3 rail operation,I`m stiil trying to get them to run from the Trix catenary without the pantographs snagging on the catenary.Anyway,an early video of one of my Transpennines.The first masts i bought was this set from Gumtree and a refinished Trix EM1 in rail blue.

 

                              Ray.

 

 

I mentioned the Transpennine unit in the context of vintage models retaining their value as the Transpennine motor cars and coaches still seem to sell very well on Ebay. Outside of them and the EM1, AL1 and catenary equipment, I'm not sure that much else from the British Trix range is of interest to many. But you all may be more up-to-date than I on the prices of vintage models as I tend only to look for items that I want t oadd to my collection or for rebuilding or modification projects or as parts for those projects. 

[andyman7]

2 minutes ago, GoingUnderground said:

I mentioned the Transpennine unit in the context of vintage models retaining their value as the Transpennine motor cars and coaches still seem to sell very well on Ebay. Outside of them and the EM1, AL1 and catenary equipment, I'm not sure that much else from the British Trix range is of interest to many. But you all may be more up-to-date than I on the prices of vintage models as I tend only to look for items that I want t oadd to my collection or for rebuilding or modification projects or as parts for those projects. 

Yes, British Trix/Liliput is a bit of a mixed bunch. The vast majority of the models are pure collectors only and prices are not what they were. However, especially in the case of 70s and 80s British Liliput, many items were produced in such low numbers that high prices can still be achieved in two collectors are after the same thing. There are many items listed in Tony Matthewman's Trix book that I have never ever seen in four decades - for example, any EMS (pre-digital multi train system fitted) items. They were catalogued but did any ever get made? Also the 70s three-rail special order items. And twin-motor options for the locos were listed but again, they never seem to turn up. None of these have any interest to the modern modeller, they are purely the odd outliers of an itinerant range. 

[BernardTPM]

2 hours ago, sagaguy said:

The Trix model always looks sleeker and more to scale.

                         Ray.

Looks like they deepened the body; making it taller would tend to make it look short.

[GoingUnderground]

Talking of twin motored models, Triang did look at them. There was at one stage in the early 1960s a version of the TC series R55 diesel with 2 motors, only one drove the wheels whilst the other was there just to make a noise, a very early attempt at "sound". Pat Hammond says "less than 2,000 were made".

 

The EM2 body was designed to take a second working motor bogie, as shown by the holes in the body at the non-motored dummy end to accommodate the additional bogie and the required contacts to provide it with power. But it would have made for a much more expensive model, and the much cheaper and simpler Magnadhesion fixed the implied adhesion/haulage capacity problem. I did buy an EM2 motor bogie with a view to fitting it to an EM1 to create the planned twin motor bogie version, but that is still waiting in the queue of projects which just keeps getting longer. In fact the loco for which it was intended can without any modification or additional weight haul 6 of the shorter 9" Triang coaches with their higher-friction split axle wheelsets quite well on level track and round curves. The Trix EM1 has little problem with those coaches with its higher weight due to its cast bodyshell and traction tyres. Hammond says that the EM2 didn't go on sale until late 1961 but didn't give a reason for its delay.

 

It must have been the haulage issue that delayed the EM2 going on sale until Magnadhesion was "invented". Was it the reason why there is Magnadhesion, or was it the first loco to benefit from it? I've never seen or heard of an EM2 motor bogie without it, same as I've never seen or heard of the finished model with 2 motor bogies ex-works. Anyone ever seen or heard of a genuine one even if it was a factory proof-of-concept or pre-production model not an after-market conversion? The provision for a second powered bogie must have increased the bodyshell tooling cost.

 

The Class 31 R357 came after the EM2 but shared the same design concept for the nominally Co-Co bogie, but, IIRC, it didn't have provision in the bodyshell for a second motor, and I beleive that it launched with Magnadhesion. I think they were both conceived at the same time judging by the R numbers EM2 R351, Class 31 R357, but the EM2 would have been given priority as it was needed to support sales of the catenary system. I suspect that the delay in the EM2 going on sale was caused by a haulage issue as the January 1961 price list shows it as "Available Later" and Magnadhesion wasn't standard in1961. Without Magnadhesion, the Class 31 would have had the same adhesion/haulage problem as an EM2 without Magnadhesion.. 

 

We may moan about the lack of haulage capacity of the Triang locos especially when compared to the heavier competition from HD and British Trix with teir diecast metal bodies, but they were designed primarily as toys, which meant keeping the price low which inevitably resulted in compromises, and for most kids layouts 3 or at most 4 of the 9" coaches plus a tender loco would probably have been all that they would have had space for on their layout. That was certainly true for me until pester-power persuaded my Dad to board out the loft floor and put up some 4 foot high screening partitions round the sides to which baseboards could be fitted.   

[Halvarras]

I had a Super-4 loft layout in the late 1960s/early 70s and during the latter half of its existence had the clip-fit catenary installed - I recall buying some new gantries in Lawsons of Plymouth in November 1971. I had the Tri-ang AL1 and EM2 models (the latter a pre-owned assembled CKD kit of 27002 'Aurora' in green - the number labels and bolted-on trailing bogie identified it as such). I remember taking a wire support clip with me into town to test out various wire thicknesses in a hardware store until I found one that matched - it was cheaper than Tri-ang's wire and avoided so many joiners! The locos could run off the overhead but because it wasn't 100% reliable I included a 2-way switch to enable an instant flip between track and overhead. The switch was a normal square domestic light switch and I recently discovered that I still have it, still marked 'TRACK' and 'OVERHEAD'! I knew very little about electrics back then but wiring up the layout taught me a lot - after all, getting it wrong with 12v DC wouldn't set the house on fire - it just wouldn't work, so try again.......

It was all disposed of around 1980 (except the switch!) when my modelling objectives took a specific (diesel-hydraulic) direction but I still have EM2 motor and trailing bogies under an MTK D600 Warship. A friend gave me a spare EM2 motor bogie frame after I built it (in 1993) in case I wanted to double-motor the loco by fitting the spare frame with Brush Type 2 innards but that was unnecessary for my BLT, and it sat in the spares box until one day I saw a magazine article on the impressive 'Deepcar' layout and noticed that one of their EM2s was running with a Brush Type 2 motor bogie. I managed to contact the club via the magazine and sent them the EM2 frame to correct this anomoly. Later on the layout appeared at a local show so I was able to identify myself to the grateful operators 🙂!

 

[GoingUnderground]

5 hours ago, Halvarras said:

I had a Super-4 loft layout in the late 1960s/early 70s and during the latter half of its existence had the clip-fit catenary installed - I recall buying some new gantries in Lawsons of Plymouth in November 1971. I had the Tri-ang AL1 and EM2 models (the latter a pre-owned assembled CKD kit of 27002 'Aurora' in green - the number labels and bolted-on trailing bogie identified it as such). I remember taking a wire support clip with me into town to test out various wire thicknesses in a hardware store until I found one that matched - it was cheaper than Tri-ang's wire and avoided so many joiners! The locos could run off the overhead but because it wasn't 100% reliable I included a 2-way switch to enable an instant flip between track and overhead. The switch was a normal square domestic light switch and I recently discovered that I still have it, still marked 'TRACK' and 'OVERHEAD'! I knew very little about electrics back then but wiring up the layout taught me a lot - after all, getting it wrong with 12v DC wouldn't set the house on fire - it just wouldn't work, so try again.......

It was all disposed of around 1980 (except the switch!) when my modelling objectives took a specific (diesel-hydraulic) direction but I still have EM2 motor and trailing bogies under an MTK D600 Warship. A friend gave me a spare EM2 motor bogie frame after I built it (in 1993) in case I wanted to double-motor the loco by fitting the spare frame with Brush Type 2 innards but that was unnecessary for my BLT, and it sat in the spares box until one day I saw a magazine article on the impressive 'Deepcar' layout and noticed that one of their EM2s was running with a Brush Type 2 motor bogie. I managed to contact the club via the magazine and sent them the EM2 frame to correct this anomoly. Later on the layout appeared at a local show so I was able to identify myself to the grateful operators 🙂!

 

Our nearest model shop back in the 1960s stocked yard lengths of substitute/replacement phase 2 catenary wire. I had getting over 15 lengths of it which I used with the double track portals, plus 3 of the Triang 15 foot catenary sets and a couple of the extension sets for the diamond crossings and junction fittings.

 

Deepcar was a marvellous layout, and still exists so I am told. I was fortunate enough to be one of its operators for a couple of outings a few years ago, and was able to run some of my EM1s on it on club nights. It uses Code 100 track but I never replaced the wheels on my Triang EM2s so they have never run on Deepcar. The catenary was quite delicate which meant running RTR locos with the pans down unless the springs had been replaced with weaker ones. We also ran one of my Trix Transpennine units on it at a Train Collectors Show, and an Olivias/Heljan EM1 but with Judith Edge pantographs as the standard Heljan ones would have wrecked the catenary.

 

At risk of going further OT, Deepcar was IMHO an ideal layout, plenty of action, variety with trains entering and leaving the relief roads and the line to Stocksbridge, with some shunting in the yard. IT was also reliable, there was teh odd glitch, but that was most often fixed very rapidly with the quick application of a soldering iron. It was/is visually interesting with the deep cuttings at one end and that truly remarkable catenary.

 

But these days I make do with Triang Phase 2 catenary and get as much enjoyment out of using that as I first did almost 62 years ago. And I always collect from the catenary..

 

I like your comment about the switch. I had a similar arrangement, but not to switch between OH and TK but to switch the orientation of the common return as the layout had both continuous loops and a terminus, and when the EM1and 2s entered the terminus this had the effect of changing the common return rail. So I incorporated SPDT switches into the wiring from the outputs from my Duettes so that the reversed locos could still be driven out and on to the main track. This let me drive 2 OHLE locos at once independently on the same track provided one had been "reversed" and there was no track powered loco on those lines at the time. The loft layout, shared with my brother, was large enough to do this easily, have 2 trains chasing their tails but far enough apart so that if one derailed there was plenty of time to bring the other to a halt.

 

That is something that I don't think I've seen anyone mentioning as doing before, driving 2 locos on 2 rail track with both collecting from the catenary at the same time. It can be done by making sure that the return for each loco is different by the simple expedient of turning one loco round which makes the catenary the common conductor

Edited October 30, 2022 by GoingUnderground
clarification

[great central]

For information, Deepcar very much still exists, although currently stored it made it's last exhibition appearance in March 2020, the week before first Covid lockdown.

It's certainly not 'retired' and may well reappear at a future Nottingham show at least.

[roythebus1]

The Trix/Lilliput AL1 was indeed to scale length and as I've read elsewhere was dimensionally correct. It looks right. But the motor bogies are over-length. the lat Adrian Swain of ABS Models made the patterns for the sideframes, I saw one on the dashboard of his car back in the mid 1970s. The motor bogie casting already existed under one of the contiinental locos and the same bogie was used for the Trix Western, a model that rarely gets a mention.

 

At one time I had probably 6 AL1s, one converted to an 85, another which I still have started as an AL6 conversion, and an original AL1. the others got sold off in 1989 after BR dispensed with my services and money was in short supply. It is only recently that the AL1 has thrown its traction tyres off! Mind you, they are 55 years old! But the motor's as good as new. I used to run these on the MRC's New Annington layout.

 

[cctransuk]

2 minutes ago, roythebus1 said:

The Trix/Lilliput AL1 was indeed to scale length and as I've read elsewhere was dimensionally correct. It looks right. But the motor bogies are over-length. the lat Adrian Swain of ABS Models made the patterns for the sideframes, I saw one on the dashboard of his car back in the mid 1970s. The motor bogie casting already existed under one of the contiinental locos and the same bogie was used for the Trix Western, a model that rarely gets a mention.

 

At one time I had probably 6 AL1s, one converted to an 85, another which I still have started as an AL6 conversion, and an original AL1. the others got sold off in 1989 after BR dispensed with my services and money was in short supply. It is only recently that the AL1 has thrown its traction tyres off! Mind you, they are 55 years old! But the motor's as good as new. I used to run these on the MRC's New Annington layout.

 

 

Years ago, Dapol were selling off Trix AL1 loco bodies cheap; as well as bodies for their various Gresley Pacifics.

 

I bought one of each of the steam loco bodies, plus a couple of AL1s. All bar one AL1 were sold on in due course, but I came across the remaining AL1 only recently.

 

It still has with it a Triang-Hornby AL6 chassis, which I recall required only minimal modification in order to fit the Trix body. I also obtained some MTK moulded nylon Oleo buffers for it.

 

I really must finish that project, which has been dormant for several decades! Michael Edge's BR AC pantographs would be ideal.

 

John Isherwood.

[john new]

Two questions -

 

1) which brass bearing inserts to use? I plan to replace some of the old plastic half and half ones that rotate on  steel axle with more modern pin-points. I know this was answered recently but I can’t find the post. Is it the top hat type or the bearing cup type?

 

2) does anyone in the trade supply suitable replacement wheels for the shorty bogie well wagon with the diamond frame bogies?  I have two to do, one with the older split type and a slightly later one with pin-points. Model to hand of the two is the blue one, model number underneath is marked R118 & R113.

 

Edited October 30, 2022 by john new
Missing word

[sagaguy]

I used modern Hornby coach wheels with Peco brass bearings superglued into the bogie frames,very useful as i then fitted n/s p/ups to improve the return current.Back to Triang,here`s a video of my EM2 running under the wires.As an aside,the wire is 1mm piano wire prebent for curves.

 

                            Ray.

 

[Il Grifone]

There's a video on Youtube of how to fit pinpoint bearings.

I would say you need the insert type for the older plastic wheels on plain steel axles and the tophat for the later ones which are already pinpoint. These latter will require drilling out the bogie frame to fit. Since the priginals are rubbish, I replace the whole bogie with something better (e.g.  the Ratio diamond frame for the brick wagons. This also corrects the buffer height.

[GoingUnderground]

The wheels on the Bogie Well Wagon are 10.3mm in diameter, so you could use Peter's Spares PS33 10mm Container and Lowmac Wagon replacement wheelsets. I've used them to replace missing wheelsets on the Triang container flat with good results, the metal wheels have a bit more mass than the plastic originals which gives it a little bit more inertia and it seems, at least to me, to sit on the rails better due to the slighty higher overall weight.