Wright writes.....

[unclebobkt]

      ... .

 

  Though the Elizabethan is only ten cars-long, it's made up of modified plastic RTR cars with brass side overlays, running on white metal bogies - free-running, but heavy. A Hornby A4 will (just) take this, but with considerable slipping all the way round.  ... . 

 

 

 

       How prototypical!

 

  In the real world of 12ins.:1ft. it's v. unlikely that one would see a surer-footed 'Castle.' misbehaving  like that.

     

      

Edited June 11, 2017 by unclebobkt

[Tony Wright]

       How prototypical!

 

  In the real world of 12ins.:1ft. it's v. unlikely that one would see a surer-footed 'Castle.' misbehaving  like that.

     

      

Prototypical? A real  A4 on the Lizzie slipping all the way from Kings Cross to Edinburgh? I think not. 

 

I suppose it's axiomatic that any 4-6-0 will be more sure-footed on starting than any similar-sized (or slightly larger) locomotive with a trailing truck under the cab. My recollections of any ex-GWR 4-6-0s leaving Chester (admittedly on relatively light loads) are of locos showing little evidence of slipping. That was not the case with an A1 leaving Retford, southbound (with a much heavier train). However, what a Castle might have done on, say, the cyclic West Riding diagram which required a Copley Hill A1 to run to Kings Cross and return on extremely-heavy respective trains, both within a shift, I wonder. It was the longest (and hardest?) continuous steam turn in the land. 

 

Anyway, without being partisan, the big LNER/ER/NER/ScR locos were very, very rarely double-headed, even on roads similar to those in S. Devon. 

 

A model Castle's haulage powers? Very good, if Westerner's Castle hauling ten heavy Pullmans on LB is anything to go by. It took them with ease. However, one of its successors, in the form of a Western Diesel was soundly trounced by one of my kit-built A4s. 

 

Don't you just love running trainsets?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[ecgtheow]

Prototypical? A real  A4 on the Lizzie slipping all the way from Kings Cross to Edinburgh? I think not. 

 

I suppose it's axiomatic that any 4-6-0 will be more sure-footed on starting than any similar-sized (or slightly larger) locomotive with a trailing truck under the cab. My recollections of any ex-GWR 4-6-0s leaving Chester (admittedly on relatively light loads) are of locos showing little evidence of slipping. That was not the case with an A1 leaving Retford, southbound (with a much heavier train). However, what a Castle might have done on, say, the cyclic West Riding diagram which required a Copley Hill A1 to run to Kings Cross and return on extremely-heavy respective trains, both within a shift, I wonder. It was the longest (and hardest?) continuous steam turn in the land. 

 

Anyway, without being partisan, the big LNER/ER/NER/ScR locos were very, very rarely double-headed, even on roads similar to those in S. Devon. 

 

A model Castle's haulage powers? Very good, if Westerner's Castle hauling ten heavy Pullmans on LB is anything to go by. It took them with ease. However, one of its successors, in the form of a Western Diesel was soundly trounced by one of my kit-built A4s. 

 

Don't you just love running trainsets?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

You wonder about longest & hardest continuous steam turns. Admittedly the 20th Century Limited was not in the UK but from 1938 the Dreyfus Super Hudson 4-6-4s (6000 hp) ran the 960 miles from New York to Chicago in 16 hours including a few stops & later in the early 1940s the 4-8-4 Niagaras (8000 hp) were scheduled to make the return trip in 15.5 hours. The latter locos ran an average of 26,000 miles/month. That's long hard running, but the Hudsons did find starting difficult which is why they were fitted with boosters on the trailing truck.

[Willie Whizz]

It isn't just the 'older' models for which obtaining spares may be a problem.  On other threads, and on another Forum, there are comments a-plenty on this issue regarding more modern models too - even virtually brand-new ones.  Some commentators seem to be particularly concerned about DJ Models in this respect, though personally I cannot say whether there is any justification.

 

Many of my own locos have been up in the loft un-run for donkey's years awaiting the completion of a working layout (postponed yet again due to still more family health issues - I'm not having much luck lately in that respect, but it may come to us all in the end, so "do as you would be done by" ...) and given all that is being said I'm beginning to wonder whether my older Mainline and Bachmann stuff will be runnable at all.

[ecgtheow]

You wonder about longest & hardest continuous steam turns. Admittedly the 20th Century Limited was not in the UK but from 1938 the Dreyfus Super Hudson 4-6-4s (6000 hp) ran the 960 miles from New York to Chicago in 16 hours including a few stops & later in the early 1940s the 4-8-4 Niagaras (8000 hp) were scheduled to make the return trip in 15.5 hours. The latter locos ran an average of 26,000 miles/month. That's long hard running, but the Hudsons did find starting difficult which is why they were fitted with boosters on the trailing truck.

 

Edit because I checked & found that I got the hp figures wrong: it should be 4000 hp for the Hudsons & 6000 hp for the Niagaras, though the latter were measured at 6,700 ho at 62.5 mph

[The Johnster]

From my own train-watching experiences as a child, at Cardiff (General in those days) station watching the uo 'Red Dragon' departures from platform 2, a Brit would make a meal of it.  The road rises slightly to clear the Penarth Road and Canal Wharf bridges and then drops to clear the Extension Joint overbridge, turning a left curve on the level between the two road bridges.  A Brit would have trouble getting the train moving at all, and would sometimes stall on Penarth Road bridge or even further out, again showing difficulty in getting the train moving.  Even when speed was up to walking pace, and it did not get noticeably above that until the last coach had cleared the platform, slipping was likely and the final indignity would be the 64xx on the following Marshfield stopper giving assistance in rear, probably 2 or 3 coaches worth.  Even when the 70xxx was out of sight and well down the bank it would be heard struggling and slipping as it tried to drag the last few coaches over the hump.  5 or 6 minutes of the twelve minutes allowed to Newport, just clearing the platform.  

 

The Kings, admittedly 8P and not 7MT, just moved off, slowly and stately like, but with never a hint of loose footedness.  Castles, perhaps a fairer comparison to the Brits, pulling Manchester trains out of platform 1 with a sharper curve to handle, might slip a little on a bad day, but mostly just got on with it like GW locos should.  I was more familiar with them on the down side with the 'Pembroke Coast Express', where they just set off with no bother at all, though to be fair getting away from Cardiff on the down is much easier than on the up.

 

Many years later I watched the preserved 'Clun Castle' set off from Newport High Street, from the old down platform heading for the Hereford road, up the short bank onto the Usk bridge, and hence having to negotiate the crossings onto the down, then up relief, followed by the one from the up relief to the up main, followed by the junction at Maindee, so having to overcome the drag of a check rail somewhere along the train for the entire distance.   With 12 on and a driver that I knew for a fact had never driven a Castle except under supervision as a young fireman, and certainly never on a 12 coach express, it just set off as it this happened all the time and steam had to be shut off at Maindee to avoid speeding through the junction.

 

Pacifics have their advantages, but smooth and reliable starting of heavy trains is not one of them.

[Focalplane]

I agree with the traction performance of ten wheelers. Birmingham New Street had difficult inclines up and out of the station(s) and everything seemed to be pulled effortlessly with Jubs, Pats, Mickeys and even B1s. I include the latter because they were frequent visitors from Immingham, as us Brummies like our fresh fish!

[Headstock]

On the other side of the coin, I would say that sustained steaming rate and horsepower are more important to an effective express passenger locomotive than ultra sure-footed starting. In this regard the Castles had an Achilles heal, in that the cylinders could defeat the capacity of the boiler to supply them with steam. If pushed too hard at continuous steaming rates, the locomotive could be winded by the effort. The pacifics, of course, had plenty of boiler power in reserve in this respect. The Castle could have been fitted with smaller cylinders in order to get a more sympathetic relationship with the boiler proportions, however that would have compromised starting tractive effort. Incidentally, during the interchange trials of 1948, having watched A4 Seagull demolish Hemerdon, the GWR inspector turned to the driver and informed him 'One of our engines couldn't have done that'.

 

Edit

The A4 was brought down to 16 mph by a temporary speed restriction at the foot of the bank. The locomotive accelarated up the two miles of 1/42 with fullregulator and 50% cutoff without any sign of slipping.

Edited June 11, 2017 by Headstock

[Tony Teague]

Many of my own locos have been up in the loft un-run for donkey's years awaiting the completion of a working layout (postponed yet again due to still more family health issues - I'm not having much luck lately in that respect, but it may come to us all in the end, so "do as you would be done by" ...) and given all that is being said I'm beginning to wonder whether my older Mainline and Bachmann stuff will be runnable at all.

 

This is a problem that I can relate to. I bought RTR locos and had kit locos made for me over about a 10 year period during which I had no layout at all, and then it took about a further 8 or 9 years to get the layout to a point where I could start to get them out of the storage drawers.

 

The result has been that each loco has to undergo a serious period of testing, back-to-back adjustment, oiling, and running in before it can be used reliably; sometimes this process has been frustrating and some locos have beaten me, and  ended up in a drawer waiting for the next visit of the "loco doctor" (Tony W.)!

 

To be fair, I have not yet reached a loco, whether RTR or kit-built that CANNOT be made to run well - it's just that some take a lot more effort than others, and although I still have a couple of drawers full of locos to go, I am getting there!

 

Good luck when the time comes to get yours out of storage!

 

Tony

Edited June 11, 2017 by Tony Teague

[APOLLO]

Clanking, wheezing, leaking steam, struggling up the 1 in 104 just north of Wigan on the WCML. Will it reach the top, and the 4 track bit at Standish Junction ?

 

 

Next up the bank

 

 

'Nuff said.  Nowt up with Brits, even in their final days !!

 

Brit15

[The Johnster]

It isn't just the 'older' models for which obtaining spares may be a problem.  On other threads, and on another Forum, there are comments a-plenty on this issue regarding more modern models too - even virtually brand-new ones.  Some commentators seem to be particularly concerned about DJ Models in this respect, though personally I cannot say whether there is any justification.

 

Many of my own locos have been up in the loft un-run for donkey's years awaiting the completion of a working layout (postponed yet again due to still more family health issues - I'm not having much luck lately in that respect, but it may come to us all in the end, so "do as you would be done by" ...) and given all that is being said I'm beginning to wonder whether my older Mainline and Bachmann stuff will be runnable at all.

 

Sorry to hear about the family health issues, Willie, and hope that you will be able to relax enough to get some modelling done soon.  I don't want to be the bearer of more bad tidings, but my experience last year of taking up the reigns again and getting models out of storage does not bode well for you.  Mazak rot and wear in the axle guides did for both my Mainline panniers, and a 56xx was going the same way.  Of the panniers, one could not be made to run, and the other, which ran as well as it ever had, which to be honest was not brilliantly by modern standards, after some fixing, fettling, faffing, lubing, and the replacement of some of the gears with those from it's deceased friend, only ran for a few sessions before expiring with a shriek that could almost be described as eldritch as the top of the axle channel wore through and the thing seized irrevocably.  A kit built 64xx, Westward, which had been my best runner, had gone out of quarter and could not be made to run whatever I did to it, and I burned out the motor in the useless attempt.

 

Only my ancient Airfix large prairie, noisy but bombproof reliable, still worked, and better than ever.  Of course, this is on borrowed time as the carbon brushes are irreplaceable; once they've worn out, it's in the drawer with the 2 pannier bodies awaiting a new kitbuilt chassis.   On getting your locos out of storage, expect the grease in the gearboxes to have seized solid (it can be removed with Maplin's spray contact cleaner) and check the chassis blocks for rot.  On one of my panniers, the carbon brushes had crumbled to dust, and I have no idea if Mainline type carbon brushes, or their springs which always ping off into orbit, are obtainable.  The 56xx chassis had no obvious problems but refused to run, and I eventually found a track fixing pin wedged between the chassis blocks which was shorting the loco out.  This chassis runs but I took the opportunity to replace it with a secondhand Baccy current production one to pre-emt the axle channel problem which it is showing signs of, so it is out of service.  You will probably save a lot of time by just completely stripping each loco down, thoroughly cleaning and examining it for wear or rot, and reassembling and relubing it, at least an evening's work for each one.

 

I also managed to persuade my Lima dmu to run, but only after a very serious strip down and thorough cleaning session, and a severe talking to.

 

My advice, FWIW, would be to regard any of your old stock that can be made to run as a bonus, and plan/budget to replace them if necessary.  The modern Bachmann chassis runs a lot quieter, smoother, and controllably slower than the old Mainline split chassis and it's various offshoots as Dapol or earlier Bachmann models, and you will not be disappointed it it.

 

Good luck with it all when you can get around to it, and don't let the initial problems put you off.  Might be a good idea to invest in one or two modern locos so that you can have something to run with while you are resuscitating the old guard!

Edited June 11, 2017 by The Johnster

[great central]

Replies to a couple of things raised earlier if I may?

Regarding waddling 12in-ft locos, I remember quite vividly while spotting at Nuneaton with my dad many years ago, an 8F came off the depot tender first and hurried off to the north, nothing unusual there. A while later we could see this almighty column of smoke and steam coming from an approaching train, obviously something working hard. As it approached the loco was swaying violently from side to side with every piston stroke, looking almost as though the cylinders would hit the platform edge, it was the 'light' 8F dragging an EE type 4 (class 40 later) and about 14 coaches, getting on for 600 tons I would think. Really giving it some, speed was probably well into the 40s.

 

A while ago Tony asked for pictures of kits we'd built in the past. It's now over 30 years since we started building Deepcar and these locos must have been done earlier as without Charlie Petty's class 76 kit the layout wouldn't have been built. I had this pair on display the year before Deepcar's debut in 1991. Maybe not quite what was expected but these were the first of 13 I've done so far, I still have several more to do at some point.

Dead simple one piece resin body mouding mounted over a Lima Western power bogie with the centre wheelset removed, one power bogie in the rear loco and a body stuffed with lead they can handle 20 odd old Hornby HAAs quite easily.

Picture taken with my phone so not perhaps top quality but as my camera is now over 10 years old probably as good as I could do with that.

 

 

 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

Just to try and pull together a few points and comments recently..............

 

First, many thanks for all those posting pictures of their work. 

 

With regard to the 'problems' manifesting themselves with past and present RTR, I can only comment on my own more-recent experiences. In my role as loco doctor at shows I'm often handed elderly Tri-ang locos, which have ceased to function. These have the old XO4-type motor and are as near bomb-proof as any I've ever seen. I carry a stock of spare motors, but these pieces of antiquity usually need no more than new brushes, a pick-up tweak, a clean and some oil and off they go for another's childhood. They're dead easy to get into and are robust, though they are not (by any stretch) 'scale' models. In fairness, whatever a mechanism, if it's not been run for years (decades?), then it's a bit much to expect it to go at the turn of a knob after all that time. At Doncaster, one lovely chap brought along a kit-built loco with a Portescap motor which had 'seized up'. Mike Edge looked at it and both of us told the chap that the original (red) lubricant had dried up. A push on the drivers and it was released. I oiled it and off it went, really smoothly.

 

More modern RTR won't have had time to seize up, but I've encountered the following problems this year at shows.

 

Bodies impossible to remove, or come apart in sections. Even with bits removed (or broken off!), motors impossible to see (particularly diesel/electric-outline) to give a diagnosis. The worst was a Beattie Well Tank (manufacturer unknown). I, sadly, handed it back to its owner suggesting he consult a loco-mortician rather than a doctor! 

 

Motors 'burnt-out' - two Hornby A4s and a Britannia, and a Bachmann Deltic. I fixed the A4 (for a local friend) but the method of holding in the motor proved a fiddle. It's a sort of collar at the rear held in place by a SELF-TAPPING screw. As anyone knows, these are designed to go in, and stay, not be taken out and put back. The bogie was held in place by the same method. Old-fashioned Tri-ang locos used proper brass screws into proper tapped holes. The screws even had blind 'leads'. Not all progress is better. As for the Deltic, how does one get at the motor?

 

Locos crabbing far too much (prototypical?) or really jerky-running (the latter a GWR 0-4-2T tank). 

 

Valve gear all pushed in, probably caused by rough handling. 

 

Stuttering running caused by the loco-to-tender electrical plug/socket working loose or the (flimsy) wires breaking. And, why should it be necessary to remove the leading tender wheelset to undo the link and separate loco and tender? 

 

Having fitted all the extra bits for those who can't (or won't), the loco won't go back into its packaging. 

 

Expanding Mazak damaging the plastic body (Hornby Brush Type 2). 

 

Factory-fitted bits falling off - Heljan O2s' tender handrails, Bachmann Patriot cab steps, etc. 

 

Anyone encountered other problems? 

 

As for the different approach to layout building, whether it be a lifetime's work or one of several, I sort of fit into both camps. How? I've been involved with the building of several different layouts down the years. One thing they have in common is the same theme - that being BR, ER depictions including Fordley Park, Leighford, Stoke Summit, Charwelton and, now, Little Bytham. Having cleared the garage by selling my 'daft' car, I now have space to (possibly) build another in the form of Kiveton Park. The 'lifetime's work' aspect has been my taking over 40 years now to build/modify the locos/rolling stock for these layouts, culminating in Little Bytham. If I do build KP, I won't need to build stock!

 

Such has been the improvement in RTR locos and stock in more recent times, then 40+ years is no longer necessary to build what's needed. With regard to the larger locos, other than the Thompson Pacifics, just about everything can be sourced by merely opening a box and placing the thing on the track. However, will it pull prototype-length trains, many of which (out of necessity) are made of brass/white metal? Some of the following pictures illustrating some of LB's longer/heavier trains are certainly beyond most current RTR locos. 

 

 

The Cliffe-Uddingston cement block train hauled by one of my DJH A2/3s. Though 'only' 32 vehicles-long, these kit-built wagons (by Rob Kinsey) have plenty of liquid lead in them as ballast. They (like the prototype) present a very heavy (though very stable) rake. 

 

 

I've based this type of train on Keith Pirt's pictures (many of which were taken on summer Saturdays), where anything which could turn a wheel was pressed into service. This rake is 14-cars long and, apart from a pair of Bachmann Mk. 1s, all kit-built. My 'prototype' DJH A2/2 has no trouble handling it (even though its prototype slipped profusely), though any RTR Pacific I've tried just says 'no'. 

 

 

One thing I will say about RTR diesels is that they'll pull very well. This modified Bachmann EE Type 4 certainly does, as shown here on the 12-car Flying Scotsman. With one exception (the kit-built Thompson Second with Ladies' Retiring Room) all this set is modified Bachmann, thus quite light. 

 

 

A 13-car Kings Cross-Edinburgh express made up mainly of modified RTR with a couple of kit-builds. Though not as heavy as the all-kit-built rakes, it still takes some shifting - in this case by one of my superannuated Nu-Cast V2s. 

 

 

Another 13-car rake, in the form of The Northumbrian; this time with more kit-built cars, including a heavy catering triplet. A Hornby A4 would really struggle with this, but not a (packed-with-lead) Pro-Scale A4. 

 

 

Though (with one exception) made up of all-plastic kits/modified RTR, the 40+-wagon Scotch Goods still presents a hefty task for a loco. One of my SE Finecast A4s handles it with ease but not an RTR equivalent. 

 

 

A combined West/East Riding rake is made up to 12 cars using mainly kits, so it's some weight.

 

 

Even heavier is this all-metal 13 car mixed set (again, based on a Keith Pirt picture). No RTR Pacific I've tried will take this, which includes an ex-streamlined twin at the rear (by John Houlden). 

 

 

At 'only' 12 cars-long, this Newcastle-Kings Cross express is lighter, though it does include a kit-built catering triplet. 

 

 

The 13-car West Riding certainly takes some shifting. 

 

What do all these pictures show? That I have the space to run scale-length trains, many of which are made up of (heavy) kit-built cars? Or, that it's taken me over 40 years to make them (with some cars made by others)? Perhaps, but more (I hope) to illustrate my personal approach to modelling. Though, as mentioned, LB is one of many layouts I've been involved with the building of, I've stayed 'true' to the principles of making models of one Region during a reasonably tight time period. That has been my choice, and, If I've chosen to produce weighty trains then it's been my responsibility to make the locos to pull them. 

 

There are many other ways of doing things. I've chosen mine; it's a 'way', my 'way', not, by any indicator, the 'way'. 

Edited June 12, 2017 by Tony Wright

[Enterprisingwestern]

Whilst you make the point above about Bachmann Mk1's being light, due to their dull and obtuse angled pinpoints running in gritty plastic sideframes, there is quite a bit of rolling resistance in a rake.

 

Mike.

[Tony Wright]

Whilst you make the point above about Bachmann Mk1's being light, due to their dull and obtuse angled pinpoints running in gritty plastic sideframes, there is quite a bit of rolling resistance in a rake.

 

Mike.

I find a drop of model oil on each bearing seems to make them roll quite easily. 

 

One thing I have found down the years is that I've had to replace the plastic bogies underneath several of my earlier, modified RTR carriages. These are the ones with hacked-about bodies on to which I've fixed replacement metal sides. Substituting Jackson-type wheels for the original plastic ones resulted in the bearing holes in the bogies 'heading north', thus causing the floor pan to eventually catch on the flanges. To be fair, this was after several years' running. 

[St Enodoc]

Just to try and pull together a few points and comments recently..............

 

First, many thanks for all those posting pictures of their work. 

 

With regard to the 'problems' manifesting themselves with past and present RTR, I can only comment on my own more-recent experiences. In my role as loco doctor at shows I'm often handed elderly Tri-ang locos, which have ceased to function. These have the old XO4-type motor and are as near bomb-proof as any I've ever seen. I carry a stock of spare motors, but these pieces of antiquity usually need no more than new brushes, a pick-up tweak, a clean and some oil and off they go for another's childhood. They're dead easy to get into and are robust, though they are not (by any stretch) 'scale' models. In fairness, whatever a mechanism, if it's not been run for years (decades?), then it's a bit much to expect it to go at the turn of a knob after all that time. At Doncaster, one lovely chap brought along a kit-built loco with a Portescap motor which had 'seized up'. Mike Edge looked at it and both of us told the chap that the original (red) lubricant had dried up. A push on the drivers and it was released. I oiled it and off it went, really smoothly.

 

More modern RTR won't have had time to seize up, but I've encountered the following problems this year at shows.

 

Bodies impossible to remove, or come apart in sections. Even with bits removed (or broken off!), motors impossible to see (particularly diesel/electric-outline) to give a diagnosis. The worst was a Beattie Well Tank (manufacturer unknown). I, sadly, handed it back to its owner suggesting he consult a loco-mortician rather than a doctor! 

 

Motors 'burnt-out' - two Hornby A4s and a Britannia, and a Bachmann Deltic. I fixed the A4 (for a local friend) but the method of holding in the motor proved a fiddle. It's a sort of collar at the rear held in place by a SELF-TAPPING screw. As anyone knows, these are designed to go in, and stay, not be taken out and put back. The bogie was held in place by the same method. Old-fashioned Tri-ang locos used proper brass screws into proper tapped holes. The screws even had blind 'leads'. Not all progress is better. As for the Deltic, how does one get at the motor?

 

Locos crabbing far too much (prototypical?) or really jerky-running (the latter a GWR 0-4-2T tank). 

 

Valve gear all pushed in, probably caused by rough handling. 

 

Stuttering running caused by the loco-to-tender electrical plug/socket working loose or the (flimsy) wires breaking. And, why should it be necessary to remove the leading tender wheelset to undo the link and separate loco and tender? 

 

Having fitted all the extra bits for those who can't (or won't), the loco won't go back into its packaging. 

 

Expanding Mazak damaging the plastic body (Hornby Brush Type 2). 

 

Factory-fitted bits falling off - Heljan O2s' tender handrails, Bachmann Patriot cab steps, etc. 

 

Anyone encountered other problems? 

 

As for the different approach to layout building, whether it be a lifetime's work or one of several, I sort of fit into both camps. How? I've been involved with the building of several different layouts down the years. One thing they have in common is the same theme - that being BR, ER depictions including Fordley Park, Leighford, Stoke Summit, Charwelton and, now, Little Bytham. Having cleared the garage by selling my 'daft' car, I now have space to (possibly) build another in the form of Kiveton Park. The 'lifetime's work' aspect has been my taking over 40 years now to build/modify the locos/rolling stock for these layouts, culminating in Little Bytham. If I do build KP, I won't need to build stock!

 

Such has been the improvement in RTR locos and stock in more recent times, then 40+ years is no longer necessary to build what's needed. With regard to the larger locos, other than the Thompson Pacifics, just about everything can be sourced by merely opening a box and placing the thing on the track. However, will it pull prototype-length trains, many of which (out of necessity) are made of brass/white metal? Some of the following pictures illustrating some of LB's longer/heavier trains are certainly beyond most current RTR locos. 

 

Cements.jpg

 

The Cliffe-Uddingston cement block train hauled by one of my DJH A2/3s. Though 'only' 32 vehicles-long, these kit-built wagons (by Rob Kinsey) have plenty of liquid lead in them as ballast. They (like the prototype) present a very heavy (though very stable) rake. 

 

Extra.jpg

 

I've based this type of train on Keith Pirt's pictures (many of which were taken on summer Saturdays), where anything which could turn a wheel was pressed into service. This rake is 14-cars long and, apart from a pair of Bachmann Mk. 1s, all kit-built. My 'prototype' DJH A2/2 has no trouble handling it (even though its prototype slipped profusely), though any RTR Pacific I've tried just says 'no'. 

 

Flying Scotsman.jpg

 

One thing I will say about RTR diesels is that they'll pull very well. This modified Bachmann EE Type 4 certainly does, as shown here on the 12-car Flying Scotsman. With one exception (the kit-built Thompson Second with Ladies' Retiring Room) all this set is modified Bachmann, thus quite light. 

 

Kings Cross-Edinburgh.jpg

 

A 13-car Kings Cross-Edinburgh express made up mainly of modified RTR with a couple of kit-builds. Though not as heavy as the all-kit-built rakes, it still takes some shifting - in this case by one of my superannuated Nu-Cast V2s. 

 

Northumbrian.jpg

 

Another 13-car rake, in the form of The Northumbrian; this time with more kit-built cars, including a heavy catering triplet. A Hornby A4 would really struggle with this, but not a (packed-with-lead) Pro-Scale A4. 

 

Scotch Goods.jpg

 

Though (with one exception) made up of all-plastic kits/modified RTR, the 40+-wagon Scotch Goods still presents a hefty task for a loco. One of my SE Finecast A4s handles it with ease but not an RTR equivalent. 

 

Hull York express.jpg

 

A combined West/East Riding rake is made up to 12 cars using mainly kits, so it's some weight.

 

Mixed express.jpg

 

Even heavier is this all-metal 13 car mixed set (again, based on a Keith Pirt picture). No RTR Pacific I've tried will take this, which includes an ex-streamlined twin at the rear (by John Houlden). 

 

Newcastle-Kings Cross.jpg

 

At 'only' 12 cars-long, this Newcastle-Kings Cross express is lighter, though it does include a kit-built catering triplet. 

 

West Riding.jpg

 

The 13-car West Riding certainly takes some shifting. 

 

What do all these pictures show? That I have the space to run scale-length trains, many of which are made up of (heavy) kit-built cars? Or, that it's taken me over 40 years to make them (with some cars made by others)? Perhaps, but more (I hope) to illustrate my personal approach to modelling. Though, as mentioned, LB is one of many layouts I've been involved with the building of, I've stayed 'true' to the principles of making models of one Region during a reasonably tight time period. That has been my choice, and, If I've chosen to produce weighty trains then it's been my responsibility to make the locos to pull them. 

 

There are many other ways of doing things. I've chosen mine; it's a 'way', my 'way', not, by any indicator, the 'way'. 

Tony, your comments on RTR all resonate with me, especially the one about packaging. Not only do all the add-on bits get in the way but once you have coupled the loco and tender (permanently, with Hornby's plug and socket) they usually won't fit the box either.

 

By the way, regarding Kiveton Park, I'd stick with LB and buy another daft car - as we all know, you're only young twice.

[Tony Wright]

Tony, your comments on RTR all resonate with me, especially the one about packaging. Not only do all the add-on bits get in the way but once you have coupled the loco and tender (permanently, with Hornby's plug and socket) they usually won't fit the box either.

 

By the way, regarding Kiveton Park, I'd stick with LB and buy another daft car - as we all know, you're only young twice.

John,

 

I've had 11 years' fun out of the TVR and it was time for it to go. At 21 years old there were things needing (expensive) attention. For instance, did you know that to replace the exhaust manifold on one side one has to take the whole engine out?!

 

I'm still sticking with LB, but I miss exhibiting a layout where I've played a principal part in its construction. We'll see, anyway, but I think it could be done (with some compression, of course) in 28' x 9'. It's not on a principal main line, so the trains are not that long, so we'll see. 

 

On a different note, I'm trying to find new homes now for the railway books of the late Gerald Scarborough. There must be over 300, including some very nice ones including the works of Essery and Jenkinson (LMS locos/carriages/wagons - anything LMS), Russell's works on GWR locos/carriages and the Southern, plus a few works by Irwell and so on. All are in good condition. If anyone is interested, please PM me. 

 

It would appear that the SH book market is a bit flat. I've looked at Robert Humm's site and he's not buying books from the principal publishers - he's got enough. 

[jacko]

 

On a different note, I'm trying to find new homes now for the railway books of the late Gerald Scarborough. There must be over 300, including some very nice ones including the works of Essery and Jenkinson (LMS locos/carriages/wagons - anything LMS), Russell's works on GWR locos/carriages and the Southern, plus a few works by Irwell and so on. All are in good condition. If anyone is interested, please PM me. 

 

PM.d

 

Graeme

[The Stationmaster]

Would someone please explain the purpose of the three 'repeater' dials attached to the post by the board crossing in the Wood Green pictures. I could make a maesured guess but it would be good to know the actual reason for their being there.

Thank you.

Phil

 

Late to the party as ever.  Pretty clear from the illustrations that they are effectively block instrument repeaters and they are, as others have said, clearly there to warn users of the barrow crossing when a train is approaching.  

 

I suspect that one reason (apart from a possibly poor or confusing view of approaching trains on multiple tracks) for them is that unlike in many places the state of the signals will not necessarily be a good guide to the approach of trains as with relatively short block sections it is more than likely that signals for through trains would have been cleared well in advance thus not necessarily indicating that a train was in the block section immediately in rear of the crossing - that information would instead be given by the 'Approaching' indication (which would be generated by the relevant block instrument being turned to 'Train On Line').

 

Hardly a fail safe device alas but clearly better than nothing and no doubt fully understood by the local staff (one hopes).  Their presence might even be a consequence of an earlier train/platform barrow interface on that crossing.

 

PS For added clarity it should be noted that the terms used on the barrow crossing indicator do not have exactly same meaning as those used on the block instrument, thus  -

 

'Line Clear' on the barrow crossing indicator equates to 'Normal' on a ('modern') 3 position block instrument

(Train) 'Accepted' on the indicator equates to 'Line Clear' on the block instrument  (i.e the Signalman has accepted a train by turning the block instrument to 'Line Clear') , and 

(Train) 'Approaching' on the indicator equates to 'Train On Line' on the block instrument (i.e the train is actually now in the block section immediately in rear of the controlling signalbox and will therefore arrive shortly)

Edited June 12, 2017 by The Stationmaster

[APOLLO]

I have a recent (5 yr old) Bachman B1, bought new and it has never run right. Always a bit jerky, got worse and worse and would hardly run at all. A few weeks ago I decided once again to have a look. "Jump" leads from the track to the wheels, jerky running. Body off and same leads (fitted with small crocodile clips) straight to the motor - perfect smooth running !! 

 

So it was a "pick up" problem - but this loco is a split frame job with no pickups. I took out the 2 small screws underneath holding the plastic plate & wheels in, and without touching the valve gear the front & rear drivers could be lifted slightly - I instantly saw the problem(s). 

1. The factory fitted grease had dried out & virtually turned solid

2. The U shaped grooves that the wheels sit in (and conduct current from the wheel bearings to the frames) where blackened like the frame - and could hardly conduct electricity. 

 

The gunk was removed with switch cleaner & small buds on sticks, the grooves then made back to shiny metal with fine emery paper, whole lot was then slightly lubricated with "electrolube" (wonderful stuff) and re-assembled - a 10 minute job.

 

Result - perfect slow running & she will haul 10 coaches at speed. I have done this with a Bachmann Jubilee also which was starting to play up.

 

I agree that modern diesel models not only run well but also haul well, and so they should with flywheels, both bogies picking up & driving. God knows though how to fix them though (not had any go wrong up to now - fingers crossed)

 

There is something to be said however for the old Hornby Dublo / Wrenn / Tri-ang & Lima locos. Easy to service / lubricate. Lima diesel mechanisms just need a touch of electrolube on each central bearing on the pancake motor, and a touch on one gear (it will self distribute) - but make sure the brass current collecting wheels are all nice & shiny, check the traction tyres are all present and are not loose, these locos will last for ever.

 

I have two old "Mainline" locos, A Standard 4 and a rebuilt Patriot. They both waddle (the plastic driving wheel spoke inserts expand) but otherwise run OK. They run coupled together as a double header on a long goods train as slowly as possible. They sound terrible and look odd waddling away but they get the train around the layout. Some sort of modellers "atmosphere" must be present as I run them quite often - I keep em off the main line though !!

 

Brit15

[Tony Wright]

I have a recent (5 yr old) Bachman B1, bought new and it has never run right. Always a bit jerky, got worse and worse and would hardly run at all. A few weeks ago I decided once again to have a look. "Jump" leads from the track to the wheels, jerky running. Body off and same leads (fitted with small crocodile clips) straight to the motor - perfect smooth running !! 

 

So it was a "pick up" problem - but this loco is a split frame job with no pickups. I took out the 2 small screws underneath holding the plastic plate & wheels in, and without touching the valve gear the front & rear drivers could be lifted slightly - I instantly saw the problem(s). 

1. The factory fitted grease had dried out & virtually turned solid

2. The U shaped grooves that the wheels sit in (and conduct current from the wheel bearings to the frames) where blackened like the frame - and could hardly conduct electricity. 

 

The gunk was removed with switch cleaner & small buds on sticks, the grooves then made back to shiny metal with fine emery paper, whole lot was then slightly lubricated with "electrolube" (wonderful stuff) and re-assembled - a 10 minute job.

 

Result - perfect slow running & she will haul 10 coaches at speed. I have done this with a Bachmann Jubilee also which was starting to play up.

 

I agree that modern diesel models not only run well but also haul well, and so they should with flywheels, both bogies picking up & driving. God knows though how to fix them though (not had any go wrong up to now - fingers crossed)

 

There is something to be said however for the old Hornby Dublo / Wrenn / Tri-ang & Lima locos. Easy to service / lubricate. Lima diesel mechanisms just need a touch of electrolube on each central bearing on the pancake motor, and a touch on one gear (it will self distribute) - but make sure the brass current collecting wheels are all nice & shiny, check the traction tyres are all present and are not loose, these locos will last for ever.

 

I have two old "Mainline" locos, A Standard 4 and a rebuilt Patriot. They both waddle (the plastic driving wheel spoke inserts expand) but otherwise run OK. They run coupled together as a double header on a long goods train as slowly as possible. They sound terrible and look odd waddling away but they get the train around the layout. Some sort of modellers "atmosphere" must be present as I run them quite often - I keep em off the main line though !!

 

Brit15

Thanks Apollo,

 

I recall some years ago watching a layout depicting one of the crossings of the Pennines with four tracks present. It ran double-headed Mainline 4-6-0s, and you could hear them across a crowded exhibition hall!

 

You mention the original split-chassis Bachmann B1 and its jerky running. I've never seen any example of this type run well, even those sent to me for review. Since the body/tender are very good, I just build substitute Comet chassis.  

[DougN]

I have one that ran quite well until a 6yr old master DougN knocked it onto the floor! Never really ran well after its fall!

[jacko]

I have the old Bachmann Ivatt 2-6-2 that was a jerky runner when I first bought it but I've since modified the chassis to fit a DCC decoder and it actually runs quite smoothly now. maybe the two halves of the chassis weren't lined up to well.

 

Graeme

[Barry Ten]

The Bachmann split chassis mechanisms have gained a bad reputation, but when I returned to the hobby in the mid 90s, they were a real revelation. I couldn't believe how smooth and silent they were, compared to the Hornby, Mainline, Lima and Airfix mechanisms of my early teenage years.

 

One of my first "new" loco purchases was a Bachmann Ivatt 2-6-2T. It ran superbly initially but did develop intermittent running after a few years. I gave it a strip down and removed a lot of the gunk from the axle bearings, and it was back to being good again. The model then barely turned a wheel for a decade as, being a split chassis case with valve gear, it wouldn't be a simple job to convert to DCC. Yesterday, feeling in an optimistic frame of mind, I tested it, stripped it down, added a decoder, put it all back together, and after eliminating a few gremlins, the running is what I'd call nigh-on faultless, being almost totally silent and very smooth at slow speeds. Apart from it being nice to get an old loco (and it's easily twenty years since purchase, never mind when it was manufactured) back into running condition, there's no sign of wear or sloppiness in the wheels, so I'd guess it'll be good for a few more years yet, given that most of my engines lead lives of considerable leisure. If it fails, it'll get a Comet chassis (assuming such things remain available) but I'll worry about that day when it comes.

 

In terms of robustness and longevity, few of my Mainline or Airfix modelled fared terribly well (I have a 1979 Mainline Collett goods which will still run, but it needs a warm-up period first), but most of my Hornby tender-drive locos were able to be resurrected after being in storage. Perhaps the most robust of all were among the supposedly crudest, the Lima mechanisms. I have a GWR railcar which has had Ultrascale wheels, but is otherwise the Lima original, and runs very well despite being 35 years old. Perhaps the best of all is a Lima Western, even older, which has had new wheels and the Lima armature replaced by a CD-drive motor, but otherwise retains the pancake-style motor bogie and original gears, and runs like a Swiss watch.  The gears were removed, gently sanded, clean in an Ultrasound bath, before being reassembled. These old Lima mechanisms are quite user-friendly in terms of being able to be stripped down and cleaned pretty easily - more than you could say for the modern equivalent, which would defeat me if anything went majorly wrong with them.

 

Alastair

I have the old Bachmann Ivatt 2-6-2 that was a jerky runner when I first bought it but I've since modified the chassis to fit a DCC decoder and it actually runs quite smoothly now. maybe the two halves of the chassis weren't lined up to well.

 

Graeme

 

Serendipity, as your post came in as I was editing mine.

Edited June 12, 2017 by Barry Ten

[jacko]

Serendipity, as your post came in as I was editing mine.

 

One other thing I noticed on the Ivatt that has surfaced on one or two other locos (including a couple of Duchesses) is that if the slide bars open out towards the tips at all, the crosshead will rotate at the end of it's travel giving an annoying click but also causing some jerky movement.  Popping the crosshead out and pinching the slidebars together (past parallel)  has sorted the problem.

 

Graeme