Hornby dublo

[brianusa]

Aah Brian, that smell of rubber! For three years in a row, I think 1961-63 when I was 13-15, I worked for the two weeks before Christmas in a local bicycle, pram and toy shop. First job in the morning was to sweep the footpath outside the shop.  Does anyone still do that? The owner of the antique shop next door complained that I raised too much dust!

 

Norm, the bike shop owner, worked in a small workshop/storeroom out the back, repairing bikes and doing repaints, all by brush applied enamels. For an extra 5 bob he'd hand apply pin-striping.  His wife and adult son ran the shop, though Norm would come out for specialised discussions with customers about bike options,  My job was to restock the shelves, run errands, wrap parcels and do the twice-daily postage run.  I would help out on the counter at times, usually on late-opening nights on Fridays and Christmas Eve.  They had a primitive adding machine at the counter which, for some strange reason,  they didn't like used; so when a parent brought their child in to choose a dozen farmyard animals by Britains or similar, I had to add up by pencil and paper all those 1/2d, 1/7d, 11d, 2/3d, 9d etc etc, with a hawk-eyed matron standing over me.

 

In the store room were Scalextric sets, the first generation of battery powered Japanese-made trucks and machinery, red and yellow Triang boxes, a small number of blue and white and red and white Dublo boxes, dolls and doll prams and cots, bicycle parts ( brakes, dynamos, dynamo hubs, bells, handlebars, handle grips etc - all British made), tyres hanging from the rafters and, throughout everything, that smell of brand new rubber. For years that  smell could take me back in a flash.  I'd like to be taken back for a day and spend it going through those boxes!

 

I just hope that children today can still enjoy the excitement we felt on visits to such places as these, and those so well described by Garry in his post #613.

 

Mike

 

PS  Dinky Toys were also common on newsagents' shelves as I understand it.  Indeed, I read about a Dinky Toy collector (or did I see him on Antiques Roadshow?) who was on holiday in Wales(?) and, in a small town, discovered a newsagents with a large stock of unsold Dinky Toys, which had been in the shop for years, and all for sale at their original prices.  I believe that he bought the lot!

 

This post sums up rather nicely the shops I remember and no doubt many others also.  Of a certain age, that is!

 

Brian.

[MikeCW]

The original Co-Co (always a Co-co or a Class 5) lacked the ridges for the two tone livery (obviously). 

David, was it Class 5 or Class 55?  I know little about British diesels but the occasional model I've noticed seem to be referred to in "double figures"; Class 20; Class 40; Class 58 etc.

 

Mike

[Il Grifone]

Hi Garry,

 

She looks good as the prototype Deltic! I really must continue with my KItmaster one. I thought it was a Dapol kit when I bought it, but the parts are stamped 'Kitmaster'. I'll probably power her with a Tri-ang bogie.  I have most of the bits - I just need the plastic housing and the pickup spider'. Sooner or later on eBay. (This has just provided me woth a nice new motor for my E2 for not a lot more than is asked for just the gears.)

 

My Deltic* has two of the side frame mountings broken on the trailing bogie. Epoxy solved this for a time, until obviously they failed again. I kept meaning to do a a proper repair and drill through and pin them. Then I spotted a couple of oddments on eBay. The seller didn't know what they were and hoped they were useful to someone They were indeed useful! - HD Co-Co and Bo-Bo trailing bogie blocks. Either nobody else knew either or just didn't want them, but so they came home to me. Great then I found that they changed the offending parts, strengthening them and rotating the mounting 90°. Obviously mine wasn't the only one to break. So do I modify the frames or redo the repair? Decisions! Oh well it's only a diesel....

 

* This poor thing came to me in a sad way. Apart from the bogie, she had a tatty body (the one that got repainted), a broken coupling, a dead ringfield magnet, no traction tyres and messed up wiring. Most were sorted, including converting to 3 rail, but the bogie repair let me down (my fault! I should have done it properly the first time, but I lacked a drill stand at the time. Drilling Dublo alloy with a bit in a pin vice is a non-starter.)

 

David

[andyman7]

I really must continue with my KItmaster one. I thought it was a Dapol kit when I bought it, but the parts are stamped 'Kitmaster'. 

David

Dapol never modified the Deltic mould which has always retained the Kitmaster engraved name. The kits as currently sold now include the Kitmaster name on the header card which had ceased to have any trademark ownership due to non use.

[kevinlms]

David, was it Class 5 or Class 55?  I know little about British diesels but the occasional model I've noticed seem to be referred to in "double figures"; Class 20; Class 40; Class 58 etc.

 

Mike

But the Deltics were not known as Class 55's (nor was any other loco given a Class number, until the introduction of the TOPS system).

The correct term would have been a Type 5 - the types being a band of power range.

[MikeCW]

But the Deltics were not known as Class 55's (nor was any other loco given a Class number, until the introduction of the TOPS system).

The correct term would have been a Type 5 - the types being a band of power range.

Thank you David.  Another small brick in the wall of knowledge! I was aware of the power-based  "Type" classifications in the pilot diesel programme but didn't know precisely the timing, or the reason, for the change from "Type" to "Class" numbering in later years.

 

Mike

[Il Grifone]

From what I remember, The Class 20 etc. came in with TOPS in the early seventies. Before that each design had its own designation divided into types based on power output.. The codes are very convenient and I use them even for the pre-TOPS period. Its easier to write 'Class 20' than 'English Electric Type 1' for instance.

 

I'd have to consult the bible on Dublo's designation of their Co-Co, but I don't think I can access my copy at the moment (temporarily stored boxes of train in the way!). I'm pretty sure it was Class 5 rather than Type 5. It was always 'Warship Class',  'Western Class' etc.. It wouldn't have been 55, as this is the TOPS code for Deltics.

 

 

Dapol never modified the Deltic mould which has always retained the Kitmaster engraved name. The kits as currently sold now include the Kitmaster name on the header card which had ceased to have any trademark ownership due to non use.

 

It could well be Dapol. As I said, it's what I thought I was buying and I don't think the cab window mouldings are present. It came loose in a plastic bag at a bargain price. (A couple of quid IIRC.)

[cypherman]

Hi all,

When I was 14 I worked in a papershop on Saturdays. This shop also doubled up as a model railway shop. I tended to get paid in things for my railway instead of money. An arrangement that was mutually beneficial to both the shop owner and myself. I always seemed to get more this way than if he paid me and I bought what I wanted with the money. I tended to buy a lot of the Superquick buildings available at the time.

[MikeCW]

From what I remember, The Class 20 etc. came in with TOPS in the early seventies. Before that each design had its own designation divided into types based on power output.. The codes are very convenient and I use them even for the pre-TOPS period. Its easier to write 'Class 20' than 'English Electric Type 1' for instance.

 

I'd have to consult the bible on Dublo's designation of their Co-Co, but I don't think I can access my copy at the moment (temporarily stored boxes of train in the way!). I'm pretty sure it was Class 5 rather than Type 5. It was always 'Warship Class',  'Western Class' etc.. It wouldn't have been 55, as this is the TOPS code for Deltics.

 

David, I happened to have the Foster book handy.  The reproduced  Meccano factory drawings are headed "Deltic Diesel Electric Loco" or "Deltic Loco".  The servicing leaflet reproduced in the Appendices is titled "Co-Co Diesel Locomotive".  Foster refers to the model variously as "Co-Co" or "Co-Co Deltic" or "Deltic".

 

But, and here's your confirmation, on page 158 Foster writes: "The original all-green body of the 'Co-Co' diesel electric locomotive continued right to the end of the Hornby Dublo production No 2232 and 3232 and while the 3 rail sold 300 in 1964, 550 remained in stock at the end of the year.  These locomotives were always referred to as Class 3 in the Meccano Magazine whereas the 'Deltic Co-Co' was always called Class 5."

 

The first sentence is a convoluted one which I don't find that easy to follow, but the implication of the quote seems to be that the Meccano magazine referred to the two paint schemes of the Co-Co as Class 3 and Class 5 respectively. So maybe the Class 5 designation was a Meccano rather than a British Railways term?

 

Mike

Edited December 19, 2018 by MikeCW

[Nearholmer]

They weren’ t getting mixed-up with DP2, which is a Type 4, were they?

[Il Grifone]

The Class 5 would indeed have been a Meccano term, as effectively the origihal issue Co-Cos have no prototype.

[Golden Fleece 30]

The Co-Co was never advertised in any catalogue as a Class 3, Class 5, Type 5 etc only as a Co-Co. Even when the Deltic came out Class 5, Type 5 was not used in the descriptions. I cannot say about the Meccanno Mags as I never got them or read them but certainly not used in the catalogue descriptions that I can see. It does not even describe the green one as a Deltic, only a powerful English Electric design, the word Deltic only appeared with the two tone version.

 

Images from 1960 when it was announced until the last one in 1964.

 

What I have just noticed is that the image of the Deltic when it was first introduced does not show a small yellow warning panel, just as the EMU did not. I don't remember anyone ever saying it was sold this way, even by accident, as were some EMU's at the time (Friday afternoon jobs lol). But, the last year of a catalogue shows the Co-Bo with a small yellow panel but I don't think this was ever sold this way either, as far as I can remember they were all done with plain green ends.

 

The initial Deltic image does not even show a name but does have D9012 used, Crepello being the 2-rail version and St Paddy the 3-rail one. Obviously chassis swaps will have occurred to mix all this up.

 

Garry

Edited December 18, 2018 by Golden Fleece 30

[Golden Fleece 30]

They weren’ t getting mixed-up with DP2, which is a Type 4, were they?

I doubt it as DP2 had a different body style grill and windows.  

 

Garry

[Nearholmer]

No more catalogues, please.

 

I’m supposed to be sticking to 0, and not getting tempted into HD, and the catalogues really don’t help!

[MikeCW]

The Co-Co was never advertised in any catalogue as a Class 3, Class 5, Type 5 etc only as a Co-Co.  Even when the Deltic came out Class 5, Type 5 was not used in the descriptions.  I cannot say about the Meccanno Mags as I never got them or read them but certainly not used in the catalogue descriptions that I can see.  It does not even describe the green one as a Deltic only a powerful English Electric design, the word Deltic only appeared with the two tone version.

Garry

I've never owned a Co-Co. As a teenager, I was in the process of discovering interests other than model railways by the time it made the retailers' shelves. My interpretation of the previous discussion and the catalogue pages is that the only difference between Catalogue Numbers 2334 (Deltic Co-Co) and 2232 (Co-Co) was the paint schemes.  Is that right?

Mike

[Golden Fleece 30]

Garry

I've never owned a Co-Co. As a teenager, I was in the process of discovering interests other than model railways by the time it made the retailers' shelves. My interpretation of the previous discussion and the catalogue pages is that the only difference between Catalogue Numbers 2334 (Deltic Co-Co) and 2232 (Co-Co) was the paint schemes.  Is that right?

Mike

That's correct Mike.  The casting mould I guess was altered to have the ridges included for the light green line and the headboard slot above the indicator panel at each end. It could be they had done a lot of the plain green ones previously and could not sell many when the Deltic came out hence a surplus when they closed.

 

My parents bought me the green one when it first came out and was my first Dublo disappointment.  The tyres kept coming off, and, the motor kept slowing down to nearly a stop and then going fast again, just like some Barnstaples/Dorchesters and possibly a few other Ringfield locos.

 

The plain green one was the one used to pull a child and a young lady for a demonstration once although I believe 2 or 3 were coupled together for the young lady.

 

As far as I know the only changes came with the bogie sideframes, originally metal ones screwed on but later plastic clip on ones.  I think this was on the Deltic only though which kind of reiterates that the plain green were never made again after the Deltic came out.

 

Regarding the headboard, this was totally wrong for a Deltic.  It was given a large rectangular one to take the Royal Scot headboard (as per the sets it was in).  The original Blue Deltic was used on the West Coast Main line and I guess Meccanno thought all the others would be so the Royal Scot would have been acceptable although by the time they appeared in both model and real life they were East Coast main line only so should be the Flying Scotsman, Talisman etc instead.

 

Garry

Edited December 18, 2018 by Golden Fleece 30

[Colin_McLeod]

I loved my Dublo green co-co and as a nine year old I was blissfully unaware of its inaccuracies. My co-co is still running and glides over all pointwork as if it was plain track.

[MikeCW]

On a different note I'm converting a West Country "Barnstaple" to 3 rail . So far this has been a straightforward job using an ex-Montrose 3-rail collector.  A couple of challenges lie ahead.  I'll bridge the axle bushes on the insulated driving wheels by the "brass pin" method described above.  I'll also look to find an uninsulated wheelset of the right size for the trailing truck as another path for power from the outside rails.  (Without turning this into a major project I'm stuck with the plastic bogie wheels as they are a representation of the BFB rather than spoked style.)

 

As with such conversions, simply diverting the power feed to the insulated motor brush, from the discarded two rail wiper pick-ups to the newly-installed third rail collector, results in the engine running in the "wrong" direction.  The simplest way to remedy this seems to be to turn the motor magnet. I've done this with open frame motors in the past, but I have no experience of Dublo ringfield motors and need some help.

 

The magnet has a red mark on the bottom.  Do I simply rotate the magnet so this mark is on the top?  Or do I need to extract the magnet and turn it "back to front" so that what was the rear face of the magnet is now at the front?  Or both? I could work it out by trial and error but want to minimise the time the magnet is out of the motor - though I have read conflicting opinions on how susceptible ringfield magnets are to loss of magnetism, compared to the conventional cube type.  

 

Any advice gratefully received.

 

Mike

[sagaguy]

Hi Mike,just rotate the magnet 180 deg.I still can`t understand why you want to go to all the bother of pinning wheels though,all you have to do is ground the 2 rail wiper to the chassis.These locos can be converted in 10 minutes.

 

                           Ray.

[Golden Fleece 30]

Hi Mike,just rotate the magnet 180 deg.I still can`t understand why you want to go to all the bother of pinning wheels though,all you have to do is ground the 2 rail wiper to the chassis.These locos can be converted in 10 minutes.

 

Ray.

It works both ways Ray, some of us cannot understand why you still want to use wipers when you can short out the wheels. If you want to go back to 2 rail fair enough but if not shorting out is our preferred choice.

 

I prefer to swap the wheels from insulated ones but Dublo wheels are not readily available, or cheap, like Tri-ang ones.

 

Garry

Edited December 19, 2018 by Golden Fleece 30

[MikeCW]

Hi Mike,just rotate the magnet 180 deg.I still can`t understand why you want to go to all the bother of pinning wheels though,all you have to do is ground the 2 rail wiper to the chassis.These locos can be converted in 10 minutes.

 

                           Ray.

Thank you Ray

I have a personal preference for binning the wipers. As with the Bo-Bo in the previous posts I prefer a "genuine" 3 rail locomotive i.e. without wipers. My preference would be to replace the insulated driving wheels with uninsulated ones but, rather than going to that expense, as well as the faff of re-quartering a sweet-running chassis, breaking the insulated bush in situ seems an easier option.

 

Doing away with the wipers also made what felt to me to be a tidier job overalI. I thought too that leaving both plastic plates, which comprise the "sandwich" which holds the wire wipers, in place on the bottom of the chassis, and mounting the 3-rail collector onto this sandwich, could result in the body of the 3-rail collector being very close to the top of the third rail.

 

This clearance was made even tighter as I had to replace the central fixing bolt of the 3-rail collector with a longer bolt which could go up to the top of the West Country chassis block. This replacement bolt had a dome head, which I ground down but is still not flush with the collector housing like the original.

 

I held the new bolt to the collector with a nut on the insulated face.  Because the nut was  large and might have shorted out on the chassis, I turned it down to a circular rather than hexagonal shape.

 

Edit:  It has been pointed out in subsequent posts that, if a standard Hornby Dublo collector is being used in place of the wiper pick-ups, the whole wiper installation can be discarded.  There is no need to fit any insulating material between the collector and chassis as the chassis is cleverly designed for either 2 or 3 rail operation, and can accept Dublo wiper pick ups for two rail, or the collector assembly for 3 rail, with no other modification.  All is held in alignment by cast-in lugs on the chassis bottom so there is no need for the plastic tube either. What is needed is the extra-long bolt to hold the 3-rail collector in place, and the fittings for the top of the bolt as shown in the second-to-last photo. As described below, it all works just fine, but involves unnecessary work.

 

 

I kept one of the two wiper "sandwich" plates to provide an insulated mounting face for the 3-rail collector, and opened up the central hole to allow the collector bolt and circular nut to pass through and into the hole in the chassis (which I assume is there for the 3 rail collector on "Dorchester" chassis).  You can see that the hole in the plastic plate doesn't precisely align with the hole in the chassis, requiring some inelegant bodgery.

 

 

 

I further insulated the shaft of the new bolt with shrink wrap and plastic tube as below.

 

 

When fitted to the "Barnstaple"  chassis, I used both the "L" shaped tag and "H" shaped insulated plate which came with the collector off the "Montrose" donor. I have yet to shorten the red wire which was originally attached to the wiper pick-ups on the bottom of the chassis.

 

One other small addition I may make is to put a notch and pin where the collector plate sits on the bottom of the chassis.  At the moment it's held in fore and aft alignment only by the tension of the nut on the top of the chassis.  That will probably be enough but I'd be happier with a more secure arrangement.

 

So, that's the way I approached the job, certainly not a ten minute exercise, but a reasonably straightforward one.

 

Mike

Edited December 19, 2018 by MikeCW

[Golden Fleece 30]

Thank you Ray

I have a personal preference for binning the wipers. As with the Bo-Bo in the previous posts I prefer a "genuine" 3 rail locomotive i.e. without wipers. My preference would be to replace the insulated driving wheels with uninsulated ones but, rather than going to that expense, as well as the faff of re-quartering a sweet-running chassis, breaking the insulated bush in situ seems an easier option.

 

Doing away with the wipers also made what felt to me to be a tidier job overalI. I thought too that leaving both plastic plates, which comprise the "sandwich" which holds the wire wipers, in place on the bottom of the chassis, and mounting the 3-rail collector onto this sandwich, could result in the body of the 3-rail collector being very close to the top of the third rail.

 

This clearance was made even tighter as I had to replace the central fixing bolt of the 3-rail collector with a longer bolt which could go up to the top of the West Country chassis block. This replacement bolt had a dome head, which I ground down but is still not flush with the collector housing like the original.

P1020181.jpg

 

I held the new bolt to the collector with a nut on the insulated face. Because the nut was large and might have shorted out on the chassis, I turned it down to a circular rather than hexagonal shape.

 

 

I kept one of the two wiper "sandwich" plates to provide an insulated mounting face for the 3-rail collector, and opened up the central hole to allow the collector bolt and circular nut to pass through and into the hole in the chassis (which I assume is there for the 3 rail collector on "Dorchester" chassis). You can see that the hole in the plastic plate doesn't precisely align with the hole in the chassis, requiring some inelegant bodgery.

P1020183.jpg

 

 

 

I further insulated the shaft of the new bolt with shrink wrap and plastic tube as below.

P1020182.jpg

 

 

When fitted to the "Barnstaple" chassis, I used both the "L" shaped tag and "H" shaped insulated plate which came with the collector off the "Montrose" donor. I have yet to shorten the red wire which was originally attached to the wiper pick-ups on the bottom of the chassis. P1020178.jpg P1020180.jpg

 

One other small addition I may make is to put a notch and pin where the collector plate sits on the bottom of the chassis. At the moment it's held in fore and aft alignment only by the tension of the nut on the top of the chassis. That will probably be enough but I'd be happier with a more secure arrangement.

 

So, that's the way I approached the job, certainly not a ten minute exercise, but a reasonably straightforward one.

 

Mike

If the 2-rail collector is discarded then the chassis block has the locating pips to hold the collecter square and along with the H top insulator does away with the plastic tube around the screw.

 

The actual longer screw for the W/C is the same one used in the Diesel shunter chassis block too.

 

Garry

Edited December 19, 2018 by Golden Fleece 30

[Golden Fleece 30]

Looking at your post again Mike why did you need the wiper plastic to use as insulation? The base of the collector has a paxolin mount that acts as both an insulator and locating piece which stops the collector moving when in place.

 

Garry

[MikeCW]

Looking at your post again Mike why did you need the wiper plastic to use as insulation? The base of the collector has a paxolin mount that acts as both an insulator and locating piece which stops the collector moving when in place.

 

Garry

Well spotted Garry.

 

 The wiper plastic plate for insulation isn't needed if a Dublo 3-rail collector shoe is used - so I discovered when, prompted by your question and comment in your previous post, I went out to the shed this morning and had a closer look at my lash-up in daylight.

 

I was initially going to fit a Marklin skate so needed an insulating plate to keep the phosphor bronze "turn ups" on the underside of the skate clear of the locomotive chassis.  I abandoned the Marklin skate option as the installation was getting unnecessarily complicated, and decided instead to use a precious Dublo collector which I had put aside for my next "City of London" conversion. (The best part of 20 pounds asked for a second-hand Dublo collector!?) I'd already installed the insulating plate when I made this change.

 

When I looked at the Dublo collector and the pattern of ridges and channels on the bottom of the "Barnstaple" chassis, I couldn't see any correlation between the two, hence the installation described above, with the plastic plate still in place.  I should have had more faith in the Dublo designers and pattern makers.  I discovered this morning (as you and David obviously know) that the ridges each side of the plastic plate, (20738) in the second photo in Post #646, are of two different heights.  The standard Dublo 3-rail collector sits on the edges of these ridges and is held in alignment by a higher ridge hidden in the shadow of the top left driving wheel in the same photo. And in that set up, the paxolin plate on the bottom of the collector holds the metal parts clear of the chassis as you noted.

 

So the plastic plate is now gone, as is the plastic tube, and all is held in place in workmanlike fashion as the people at Binns Road intended. And I flagged this in my Post #646 in case I lead some poor soul to unnecessary complication and effort.

 

Mike

Edited December 19, 2018 by MikeCW

[Golden Fleece 30]

Apart from the R1 all the other Dublo chassis's were designed for both 2 or 3-rail use and pick-ups. You may find some repro EMU, Co-Bo, Deltic pick-ups may catch on a casting which may need a little filing or protective insulation tape used, genuine Dublo ones are fine obviously.

 

Older generation Wrenn locos will take Dublo style pick-ups just like Dublo ones did, but, later ones were different. These lacked the base ridges so the pick - up could twist sideways or move lengthways. These chassis's also lack the two pips to hold the H insulator on top. There is a raised casting which requires the top insulator to be cut and all this does mean the screw will need a plastic tube on just in case something does move.

 

The Wrenn 0-6-2 is not the same as the Dublo one which was never made by Wrenn, they modified the body and used the R1 chassis.

 

The later 8F and Castle tenders also had their plunger holes filled in along with the removal of the raised boss making it harder to fit plungers.

 

Garry