Wright writes.....

[St Enodoc]

I think the 'wise' answer (not that anyone has ever considered me that) is to exploit what the RTR boys/girls have to offer, freeing up time where appropriate to build what isn't available straight from the box. Just what you're doing.

That is precisely my philosophy Tony, as you know.

[Headstock]

 

I think the 'wise' answer (not that anyone has ever considered me that) is to exploit what the RTR boys/girls have to offer, freeing up time where appropriate to build what isn't available straight from the box. Just what you're doing. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Evening Tony,

 

there is nothing wrong with exploiting RTR, where it may be appropriate. However, it can be pretty boring to look at from the point of view of following a thread or watching a layout for that matter. I exclude the radical remodeling such as Clem's re wheeled K3 or the likes of your Elizabethan set. Both are examples of exploiting RTR that have interesting stories to tell.

[Headstock]

Hi Tony, As always, it was good to see and chat to you and Mo at the show on Saturday. I obviously missed your sound chip demo, but it 'sounds' interesting (any chance of expanding a bit about it?). It was also nice to see your latest beautifully smooth running J6. As mentioned, it would be great to visit you and Mo (and Little Bytham) again and I'll contact you when Chris has fully recovered from her cold/bad chest.

 

I've been enjoying looking at your posts above of your RTR 'upgrades' whether by weather, wiggly wire, chimney or dome. It's amazing how just one or two changes can enhance and bring to life RTR locos. I've also done a few but, of course, the big issue for me is the re-gaugeing to EM. The trickiest one so far has been the K3 which has larger wheels. After a lot of hard thinking, I decided that to use the proprietary chassis and maintain the gear meshing, the chassis would have to be raised by just under a millimetre  which also meant lowering the cylinders in by the same amount in the chassis. It was a bit of a slog but I got there in the end. I must admit to not being very happy with my paint/weathering job with it and it's down for some further work in the paint shop when it gets to the top of the priority list. Anyway, here's a picture. Sorry that the background is a bit monotonous. I'm slowly trying to work westwards (North in real terms) on the scenery/buildings.

 

Cheers for now

 

Clem

 

Evening Clem,

 

Your K3 conversion looks great, you will have to do something about that valve gear though.

[Woodcock29]

"There's a considerable difference between the domes!"

 

Hello Tony

When Britannia herself was introduced her dome was very flat and I suspect this is what Triang/Hornby based earlier models on, both original engine drive and later tender drive versions. I understand BR fitted a taller dome cover later. I'm not sure if any of the other Britannias had the low dome cover initially? When looking at photos of the Britannias I'm not sure that any of the manufacturers, including DJH, have got the dome quite right.   

 

The chimney on the later Hornby models is certainly a problem which I resolved to some degree with files on my Sir John Moore. Clearly it needs further weathering at some stage.

 

Andrew 

[Tony Wright]

Lovely pics as always.  And a question: where can you buy the best replacement chimney for a Brit?

 

Tone

Tone,

 

Good morning.

 

All my replacement domes have come from Markits. They're turned-brass, hollow and dead right in appearance. There is now a problem, however. The chap who used to manufacture the chimneys for Markits suffered a stroke some little time ago, and is now no longer able to make them. 

 

Mark Arscott might still have some in stock, so it's worth a try. 

[Tony Wright]

A question Tony .... certainly when viewed close up and when handled metal kits feel weightier in more ways than one ... more substantial and I think higher quality just in terms of materiality. When they run do you think this sense of mass translates at all into how they look running .... can you sense a greater mass?

 

I was watching an episode of  QI last night by way of relaxation and they played the sound of water being poured into a cup. One recording was of boiling water and one of cold water. Almost everyone listening could tell the difference between the two although it was very subtle and all chose correctly as to which was the hot water - it really was quite clear. Can you tell in a similar way with the locos? I have always believed that properly weighted metal kit built locos look different when running, but have never been able to make a direct comparison.

Good morning Tim,

 

As usual, a most interesting question. 

 

There's definitely a greater sense of 'presence' when we run metal locomotives on LB (which is pretty much all of the time). They 'clunk' over pointwork with a real feeling of 'weight'. It's a very unscientific observation - more a feeling of appealing to the aural sense than anything else. The same is so for metal carriages (or plastic carriages fitted with metal bogies) - the 'de-dum, de-dum' over track joints needs no mucking about with digital sound; it's there already for all to hear. Indeed, I'm delighted when visitors comment about the 'realistic' sound effects. 

 

Speaking of sounds on model railways, I find myself in a bit of a paradox. Every loco I build, I strive to make as quiet as possible. Obviously, they're all steam-outline, so I don't want a whirring noise from the gearbox. But, when they run, I want them to make as 'loud' a noise as possible - not the grinding of ill-fitting gears or an unbalanced motor, but that wonderful 'clatter and bang' as these heavy locos take their heavy trains over track joints and pointwork; at high speed. Certainly, recalling the racket, say, an A1 made as it fairly flew over the flat crossing at Retford 60 years ago is something to try and capture in model form. 

 

As for digital sound - no thank you, at least as far as steam-outline is concerned. To me, many just sound artificial, especially in comparison to the Stentorian bellow of the real 70013 just outside the tents at the weekend. 

 

It's the same with diesel-sound, to me. I ran a sound-fitted Deltic on LB once. Yes, would you believe it, Little Bytham went DCC for a day?!!!!!!!! It was soon ripped out afterwards. I thought it was hopeless. Idling, there was no doubt it was a Deltic, but at full-chat, the mechanical noise it and its train made when running fast, completely obliterated what should have been that wonderful Napier drone. Over 45 years ago, camera at the ready, I first stood on the overbridge at Swayfield, three or so miles north of Little Bytham. On a still day, I could hear a Deltic open up for the climb to Stoke, just north of Essendine. Then, a few minutes later, that familiar nose would appear as the loco blasted past Creeton. The noise was wonderfully-deafening!

 

Oh, happy days. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

Edited June 20, 2018 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

Evening Tony,

 

there is nothing wrong with exploiting RTR, where it may be appropriate. However, it can be pretty boring to look at from the point of view of following a thread or watching a layout for that matter. I exclude the radical remodeling such as Clem's re wheeled K3 or the likes of your Elizabethan set. Both are examples of exploiting RTR that have interesting stories to tell.

Morning Andrew,

 

I entirely agree about RTR being boring at times. I see far too many layouts where just about everything running is 'straight from the box'. As I've said many times, I'm happy enough to see RTR items modified/detailed/renumbered/renamed/weathered (providing it's the owner's work), but in the media and at shows, unaltered 'purchasing power' is all too prevalent these days - or, at least, that's my perception.

 

Even where 'detail' has been added (in the recent past), in pictures or on layouts, it's been knocked off. Missing steps, cylinder drain cocks, 'proper' couplings and vacuum standpipes are often conspicuous by their absence. Solder these items on, and they stay on! One can't do that with RTR.

 

Edited to expand a point. 

Edited June 20, 2018 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

"There's a considerable difference between the domes!"

 

Hello Tony

When Britannia herself was introduced her dome was very flat and I suspect this is what Triang/Hornby based earlier models on, both original engine drive and later tender drive versions. I understand BR fitted a taller dome cover later. I'm not sure if any of the other Britannias had the low dome cover initially? When looking at photos of the Britannias I'm not sure that any of the manufacturers, including DJH, have got the dome quite right.   

 

The chimney on the later Hornby models is certainly a problem which I resolved to some degree with files on my Sir John Moore. Clearly it needs further weathering at some stage.

 

Andrew 

Good morning Andrew,

 

Thanks for your observations. One question, if I may, please? 

 

From the angle of the return crank on your 70041, it looks to still be leaning the 'wrong way', that is towards the rear. In motion, it makes a Brit look like a rebuilt MN or WC/BB. If you haven't already, it's worth doing - making it lean forwards at bottom dead centre.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Hollar]

Tone,

 

Good morning.

 

All my replacement domes have come from Markits. They're turned-brass, hollow and dead right in appearance. There is now a problem, however. The chap who used to manufacture the chimneys for Markits suffered a stroke some little time ago, and is now no longer able to make them. 

 

Mark Arscott might still have some in stock, so it's worth a try. 

Thanks for the pointer, but they are not in the current Markits catalogue. It will have to be some fairy-fingered filing,then.

 

Tone

[Chamby]

With regard to RTR stock, I personally don’t have a problem with it, as long as it is right. Take the Hornby A3 for example, great care needs to be taken to obtain a base model that represents the correct locomotive at the right time. Not wishing to teach members of this thread to suck eggs, but things including:

 

Was is an A1or A3 at the time? If an A3, was it left or right hand drive? Should it have the large or small cab cut-outs to the rear of the windows? Double or single chimney? Smoke deflectors... yes or no, and of which type? Boiler type? Boiler domes... round, banjo or Streamlined? Tender type... Original pattern with rails, or Streamlined (with or without corridor)? And of course there are the livery variations and different lettering styles throughout their lifespan, these locomotives being repainted individually, not as a full cohort.

 

And that is before you consider making any improvements such as wiggly wires and bogie wheels... So using RTR does have to be done with great care and observation, researching the prototype just as you would with a kit build, if it is to be done right. Get it right, for me this is good modelling. Overlook these things, and you quite rightly leave yourself open to accusations of lazy or ignorant modelling, at least among the subsection of our hobby that aim to model accurately.

 

That said, I am therefore by my own definition guilty of some lazy modelling at the moment. But upgrading these models is a part of the longer term plan, for now I am still attempting to construct something worthy for them to run on.

 

This hobby will, for me at least, always be a journey, with the destination still to arrive at.

 

Phil.

 

Edited for better grammar.

Edited June 20, 2018 by Chamby

[Lecorbusier]

Good morning Tim,

 

As usual, a most interesting question. 

 

There's definitely a greater sense of 'presence' when we run metal locomotives on LB (which is pretty much all of the time). They 'clunk' over pointwork with a real feeling of 'weight'. It's a very unscientific observation - more a feeling of appealing to the aural sense than anything else. The same is so for metal carriages (or plastic carriages fitted with metal bogies) - the 'de-dum, de-dum' over track joints needs no mucking about with digital sound; it's there already for all to hear. Indeed, I'm delighted when visitors comment about the 'realistic' sound effects. 

 

As for digital sound - no thank you, at least as far as steam-outline is concerned. To me, many just sound artificial, especially in comparison to the Stentorian bellow of the real 70013 just outside the tents at the weekend. 

 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

Tony,

 

I fully agree on the sound the Loco's and stock make on the rails on Little Bytham ... indeed I think I have commented on it before. I was also wondering if you could tell the greater mass and inertia of the kit built locos by site as well ... perhaps less hunting and a greater solidity of movement ..... just wondering.

 

On the recorded sound front Ive always wondered whether the way to go might be high quality speakers located about the base board rather than in the locos themselves. You would need to be pretty advanced at electronics and programming, but it should be possible to have micro chips in every piece of stock (locos/carriages/trucks) which activate the speakers by proximity and grade the volume as the train passes. You might then get a sense of the train moving through the landscape with sound that doesn't sound tinny, is not limited to the loco's themselves and has some sense of distance. Nature sounds could be overlain as well. Whether anyone would ever be bothered to refine such a design such that it became commercially available and viable is a moot point. 

 

For myself I can't make up my mind about sound chips ... they certainly sound tinny and toy like (like listening to music in a lift), but I can see the fun and attraction. I assume you can turn them on and off and so you can 'play' as the mood takes you.

[Clem]

Evening Clem,

 

Your K3 conversion looks great, you will have to do something about that valve gear though.

 

Hi Andrew, I does look wrong from that angle, I agree but it is correct. One of the difficulties with Gibson wheels I find, is the fact that unlike Markits wheels, the return crank cannot be soldered to the crank pin but has to be tapped, threaded on and Loctite'd in position so I make sure I have enough clearance with it. Here is a sideways view of it.

 

I've also noticed in the photo that the traces of spider web on the tender means that the cannibal spiders are back in the layout room. (I think they're known as 'harvest men' spiders. We've been infested with this horrible creatures for the last three or four years and whilst I don't usually kill spiders, for this particular species I have no mercy. They reproduce in large numbers and were a huge problem when our building work was in progress and I couldn't get into the layout room for several months. The web that this particular species produces has the consistency of impact adhesive stringing. As their everyday name suggests, they kill everything including other spiders but do more damage to models if given a chance. Does anyone else suffer from these little beasts?

[Tony Wright]

Hi Andrew, I does look wrong from that angle, I agree but it is correct. One of the difficulties with Gibson wheels I find, is the fact that unlike Markits wheels, the return crank cannot be soldered to the crank pin but has to be tapped, threaded on and Loctite'd in position so I make sure I have enough clearance with it. Here is a sideways view of it.

 

I've also noticed in the photo that the traces of spider web on the tender means that the cannibal spiders are back in the layout room. (I think they're known as 'harvest men' spiders. We've been infested with this horrible creatures for the last three or four years and whilst I don't usually kill spiders, for this particular species I have no mercy. They reproduce in large numbers and were a huge problem when our building work was in progress and I couldn't get into the layout room for several months. The web that this particular species produces has the consistency of impact adhesive stringing. As their everyday name suggests, they kill everything including other spiders but do more damage to models if given a chance. Does anyone else suffer from these little beasts?

I assume you've used the Bachmann valve gear, Clem? As I did, when I fiddled with my Bachmann K3. 

 

Because I always use Romford/Markits drivers, I have the luxury of being able to solder the return crank in place. With the (cast metal) Bachmann return crank, I force-fitted a brass washer into its centre, then soldered this to the crankpin. It still looked a little obese, though; but, weathered-down, it's not too bad.

 

Another thing I found was that the front end of the radius rod was not anchored in any way, resulting in its bouncing up and down in a most un-prototypical manner. I just drilled a hole through the valve guides and through the rod, force-fitting a brass pin in place. Though the radius rod then cannot move backwards and forwards, at least it doesn't wobble around. 

 

Spiders? Though I don't seem to have harvestmen, I do get some pretty big ones (garden wolves, I think). They will insist on cr@pping on the roofs of stock, leaving blobs of grey/white. I've also jumped out of bed once or twice in response to the alarms going off because one of the little (big) b#ggers has crawled across the front of the motion-sensitive sensors, setting them off. Actually, I don't mind spiders' presence too much, though it is irritating to run a train (after a day or two of inactivity on the layout), and then take its picture; only to find strings of web across its front. 

[Tony Wright]

Tony,

 

I fully agree on the sound the Loco's and stock make on the rails on Little Bytham ... indeed I think I have commented on it before. I was also wondering if you could tell the greater mass and inertia of the kit built locos by site as well ... perhaps less hunting and a greater solidity of movement ..... just wondering.

 

On the recorded sound front Ive always wondered whether the way to go might be high quality speakers located about the base board rather than in the locos themselves. You would need to be pretty advanced at electronics and programming, but it should be possible to have micro chips in every piece of stock (locos/carriages/trucks) which activate the speakers by proximity and grade the volume as the train passes. You might then get a sense of the train moving through the landscape with sound that doesn't sound tinny, is not limited to the loco's themselves and has some sense of distance. Nature sounds could be overlain as well. Whether anyone would ever be bothered to refine such a design such that it became commercially available and viable is a moot point. 

 

For myself I can't make up my mind about sound chips ... they certainly sound tinny and toy like (like listening to music in a lift), but I can see the fun and attraction. I assume you can turn them on and off and so you can 'play' as the mood takes you.

Tim,

 

There's certainly far less hunting with my kit-built locos because the side-play between the wheels and the frames is far less than with RTR locos. In fairness, my locos don't have to negotiate 'train set' curves; my minimum radius (out of sight) is three feet on the GN main line. 

 

I have resorted to fitting fibre washers to the axles of RTR locos (just by taking a one eighth nick out of each and pushing them over the axles between the rear of the wheels and the frames, using tweezers) to take out the extra slop, but they still waddle more. 

Edited June 20, 2018 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

We've done it! Or, rather, you've all done it! 

 

Adding up everything from the weekend at Quorn, with the cheque I'm sending off later today, that means that I'll have now sent over £1,000 to Cancer Research this year (and we're not yet halfway through). The monies have come from a variety of sources, including.....

 

Donations for my fixing locos at shows.

 

Donations made to Mo and me at shows, even though I've fixed nothing and only spoken to someone and/or offered advice.

 

Donations of models/kits to be sold by Mo and me at shows.

 

Donations made by members of RMweb.

 

A 10% donation from Mo and my selling of models on behalf of bereaved families (in some cases, bereaved because of cancer!). 

 

Donations made by visitors to Little Bytham.

 

I hope I've missed nobody's method out. If I have, please inform me.

 

May I please thank all of you out there who've contributed to this most-noble cause? It's made me feel very humble, seeing so much generosity. 

Edited June 20, 2018 by Tony Wright

[Chamby]

Tim,

 

There's certainly far less hunting with my kit-built locos because the side-play between the wheels and the frames is far less than with RTR locos. In fairness, my locos don't have to negotiate 'train set' curves; my minimum radius (out of sight) is three feet on the GN main line. 

 

I have resorted to fitting fibre washers to the axles of RTR locos (just by taking a one eighth nick out of each and pushing them over the axles between the rear of the wheels and the frames, using tweezers) to take out the extra slop, but they still waddle more.

 

Ah, waddling... yes, this is the biggest problem with RTR steam loco’s in my experience. It always amazes me how you can have two otherwise identical RTR locomotives, one will run really nicely but the other waddles like a drunken duck. The art of fettling remains a ‘running in’ task for the modeller, inevitably.

[APOLLO]

Deltics - you don't have to see one, just hear one !

 

 

As to DCC and sound, technically wonderful as it is it is not for me either.

 

A few months ago I bought quite cheaply a secondhand though mint Atlas O gauge F7 diesel loco (American outline). 

 

 

Quite a nice loco (but no Deltic!!)

 

On placing her on  the layout power was applied - nothing, turned up the controller (non DCC) and the headlamp starts flashing, next a loud engine start noise was emitted, then off she moves with the various hisses clanks, thumps and engine acceleration etc sounds. What the hell do I have here ? - no instructions were  in the box.

 

It turns out (thanks Google) that the loco is fitted with the Atlas Quantum sound system, this works on either DC or DCC. Flicking the reversing switch on the controller and the bell starts, flick again and the bell rate slows stops, Slow change of direction switch sounds the horn. You have to actually stop the loco to reverse it.. All good fun and a surprise buy for me - BUT it is loud (you can hear it outside the shed !!) and it gets on your nerves after a bit, no off switch on the loco either. I had to google for the instructions - which are quite complicated the further I delve into them - A magnetic wand is needed to switch / reset various parameters etc. I don't have a magnetic wand so she will stay as is.

 

I won't (knowingly) buy another Atlas sound loco - the neighbours might complain !!.

 

Technology - where next ?

 

Brit15

 

 

[Woodcock29]

Good morning Andrew,

 

Thanks for your observations. One question, if I may, please? 

 

From the angle of the return crank on your 70041, it looks to still be leaning the 'wrong way', that is towards the rear. In motion, it makes a Brit look like a rebuilt MN or WC/BB. If you haven't already, it's worth doing - making it lean forwards at bottom dead centre.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Tony you're quite right I hadn't got around to changing the return crank - now duly attended to. It still has Hornby bogie wheels which I think for the BR standards don't look too bad really - they have the correct bevelled rim and 9 spokes. I must confess I haven't changed the bogie wheels on many of my Hornby LNER/ER pacifics. Firstly, the LNER green ones need to be lined and Hornby have generally done a good job with that and in the case of the BR ones they don't get run very often and I have quite a number which all adds up!

 

Andrew

[Killybegs]

Lovely pics as always.  And a question: where can you buy the best replacement chimney for a Brit?

 

Tone

 

I agree with others' suggestions to use needle files to improve the chimney. This is my effort. Like one of Tony's Brits, this is also on a Comet chassis.

 

[Headstock]

Hi Andrew, I does look wrong from that angle, I agree but it is correct. One of the difficulties with Gibson wheels I find, is the fact that unlike Markits wheels, the return crank cannot be soldered to the crank pin but has to be tapped, threaded on and Loctite'd in position so I make sure I have enough clearance with it. Here is a sideways view of it.

 

I've also noticed in the photo that the traces of spider web on the tender means that the cannibal spiders are back in the layout room. (I think they're known as 'harvest men' spiders. We've been infested with this horrible creatures for the last three or four years and whilst I don't usually kill spiders, for this particular species I have no mercy. They reproduce in large numbers and were a huge problem when our building work was in progress and I couldn't get into the layout room for several months. The web that this particular species produces has the consistency of impact adhesive stringing. As their everyday name suggests, they kill everything including other spiders but do more damage to models if given a chance. Does anyone else suffer from these little beasts?

 

Good morning Clem,

 

The replacement wheels look superb. The Bachmann K3 is a somewhat squat looking plodder, you have restored the locomotives true proportions to that of a leggy fast freight locomotive. With regard to the valve gear, I was a little surprised you didn't go for the SE Finecast version.

 

I see what you mean about the return crank, not very LNER. However, its the radius rod that dose my head in on the Bachmann model, it must be a good foot (in scale) short of the valve spindle guide. In addition, in middle gear, it should run in a dead straight line from above the valve guide, through the expansion link, including the lifting link and connecting to the weigh shaft. I'm thinking that there may be some benefit in raising the height of the cylinders back under the running board to get a better alignment. This also may look better as the cylinder cover plate doesn't curve over the top of the cylinders like an LMS locomotive, it ends flush with and is bolted to the running board. I also think that it would really be worth losing that big screw sticking out of the motion bracket.

 

It looks as if your killer spiders have eaten the loco crew. I should demand that they spin up a replacement radius rod as repentance.

[Clive Mortimore]

Ah, waddling... yes, this is the biggest problem with RTR steam loco’s in my experience. It always amazes me how you can have two otherwise identical RTR locomotives, one will run really nicely but the other waddles like a drunken duck. The art of fettling remains a ‘running in’ task for the modeller, inevitably.

Hi Phil

 

Locos waddling, real ones do. When Replica first marketed the Class 03 shunter I was working in a model shop and loads of customers complained about them waddling. I told them it is prototypical for a short wheel base diesel. As an apprentice with the CEGB I worked at Cliff Quay power station in Ipswich, to get there in the mornings I had walk along the quayside where BR done their best to try and mow me down with class 03s lurching from side to side as they bombed about.

 

I have also had the pleasure of driving 03s and 04s at Mangapps  Railway Museum. You don't half feel the sideways waddle as the loco moves in a zig zag down the track.

 

And one must not forget the nick name given to Montague the pannier tank in the Thomas stories because he waddled..................Duck. 

[Clem]

I assume you've used the Bachmann valve gear, Clem? As I did, when I fiddled with my Bachmann K3. 

 

Because I always use Romford/Markits drivers, I have the luxury of being able to solder the return crank in place. With the (cast metal) Bachmann return crank, I force-fitted a brass washer into its centre, then soldered this to the crankpin. It still looked a little obese, though; but, weathered-down, it's not too bad.

 

Another thing I found was that the front end of the radius rod was not anchored in any way, resulting in its bouncing up and down in a most un-prototypical manner. I just drilled a hole through the valve guides and through the rod, force-fitting a brass pin in place. Though the radius rod then cannot move backwards and forwards, at least it doesn't wobble around. 

 

Spiders? Though I don't seem to have harvestmen, I do get some pretty big ones (garden wolves, I think). They will insist on cr@pping on the roofs of stock, leaving blobs of grey/white. I've also jumped out of bed once or twice in response to the alarms going off because one of the little (big) b#ggers has crawled across the front of the motion-sensitive sensors, setting them off. Actually, I don't mind spiders' presence too much, though it is irritating to run a train (after a day or two of inactivity on the layout), and then take its picture; only to find strings of web across its front. 

 

Hi Tony, 

Actually, for the K3, I did it slightly differently, and as you suggest, I did use the Bachmann valve gear. I screwed a brass collar (I seem to remember using the original Bachmann bearing for this collar) on the the crankpin. This collar was tapped for the crankpin and secured with Loctite so that the return crank was fixed when secured with the original screw. I didn't feel too confident with this method but, touch wood, it's not failed so far. I made a lot of notes on the conversion but unfortunately I seem to have left out those details but that's what I recall doing with it. For the L1 conversion I used the Gibson return crank as described previously (tapped and Loctite'd) but decided to go down a bit of different path for this one. I did make a lot of notes about the conversion but annoyingly I seem to have not covered that particular task in them. For the Nucast K2 that I converted last year I tried another very risky strategy which has again held up fine in running. Instead of the 14 BA screws provided for the Gibson crankpins, for the central driving wheel I used brass 14BA screws and very quickly soldered the return crank on to them. Bearing in mind, the plastic centred Gibson wheels,  I held thin nosed pliers against the rods and pin closer to the wheel to try and act as a heat sink. It has worked but I'm not sure I'll risk repeating it! 

 

The floating radius rod is quite interesting. As bought, it does have a certain movement which is not totally unprototypical. Friction from the expansion link does move it back and forth a little. But as soon as it's painted, with the paint in the joints,  it seems to change the motion into an up and down motion. I've tried to cure this with an invisible stop above the valve spindle and have achieved some success with it, although it's still less than perfect. I did attempt on one side of the K3 to get the valve gear working, pinning it in forward gear but have left it on the other side as was. I love to see valve gear working prototypically with the radius rod moving back and forth though it has to be correct. Do you remember the old Hornby Dublo Duchesses in full forward gear? Anyway, in retrospect, I think you were spot on pinning your K3 in a neutral position and I will any further K3 conversions.

[Lecorbusier]

I agree with others' suggestions to use needle files to improve the chimney. This is my effort. Like one of Tony's Brits, this is also on a Comet chassis.

 

brit chimney.jpg

So ... by my calcs ... ±£125 for the base Hornby model, £40 for the Comet chassis, £69 for a markits Britannia wheel set pack, ±£40 for a motor and gearbox combo .... total £274 ?

 

So unless used directly from the box as is (with a few tweaks and weathering), it seems to me that there is little to no difference between RTR and Kit building in cost terms and the choice is very much what might be best for the project or the builder's preference?

[Bucoops]

Hi Phil

 

 

I have also had the pleasure of driving 03s and 04s at Mangapps  Railway Museum. You don't half feel the sideways waddle as the loco moves in a zig zag down the track.

 

 

2325 was always my favourite to drive. When were you active down there? Life got in the way in about 1999 so have rarely been back since

[polybear]

Spiders? Though I don't seem to have harvestmen, I do get some pretty big ones (garden wolves, I think). They will insist on cr@pping on the roofs of stock, leaving blobs of grey/white. I've also jumped out of bed once or twice in response to the alarms going off because one of the little (big) b#ggers has crawled across the front of the motion-sensitive sensors, setting them off. Actually, I don't mind spiders' presence too much, though it is irritating to run a train (after a day or two of inactivity on the layout), and then take its picture; only to find strings of web across its front. 

 

 

Hi Tony,

 

If you swap the standard PIR Alarm Motion Sensor for a "Dual-Technology" Motion Sensor you shouldn't have this problem.  A Dual Tech Sensor has two separate lenses - one is for PIR and the other is a microwave sensor that detects movement.  The Alarm Sensor can be pre-set (usually a little shorting link inside the unit) such that it requires both sensors (PIR and Microwave) to be triggered simultaneously in order to set the alarm off.  So unless the spider is literally the size of a Tarantula walking across the unit then there's very, very little danger of it setting the thing off.

 

Dual Tech Sensors are great for minimising false alarms in general; they're also useful in kitchens, conservatories etc. where rising heat can cause false triggers.  Fitting one is usually a straight swap, with no wiring changes etc. or changes to Alarm Panel programming.

 

HTH

Brian