Wright writes.....

[davidw]

7 minutes ago, Simon A.C. Martin said:

Noting the excellent Jamieson example of a Gresley V2, and having shared this with LNER Modellers on Facebook, I thought I might venture to show one of Graeme King's resin V2 kits as completed by me recently, in the spirit of "layout loco" modelling.

 

 

 

 

I originally purchased a trio of his resin kits and they are all now complete after having sat waiting for painting after nearly five years since they were bought. They are all on the 2011/2012 release of Bachmann's warmed over Gresley V2 model, with lots of added parts (whitemetal buffers from Lanarkshire models for example). Graeme's kit is a virtual straight swap for the Bachmann original but is far more accurate in many areas. I had to make a couple of modifications to the cylinders to be correct for the other locos (Green Arrow has the earlier torpedo shaped ends to the valve spindles for the conjugated gear).

 

I chose to make one of them as 4771 Green Arrow as she was early on in the second world war. Wartime livery isn't modelled that much (is my observation anyway), and I am hoping after getting this model weathered and coaled, she will look the part on my Ganwick Curve layout.

 

In terms of running, I doubt this model could pull what the Jamieson loco pulls, but having added some lead to the bodyshell over the front of the drivers, she will pull 12 of the Hornby Gresley coaches, and has had some nice running on some lengthy mixed goods rakes (up to 20 wagons with no slipping).

That looks really good SAC. I've a few of Graeme's V2 bodies. Improves the older V2 and gives it a new lease of life. I've a Mike Trice 3d print body to build and recently managed to get a BR green latest tooling Bachmann V2 for a ridiculously low price.

Just a few more to get,😁

[Guest Simon A.C. Martin]

1 minute ago, davidw said:

That looks really good SAC. I've a few of Graeme's V2 bodies. Improves the older V2 and gives it a new lease of life. I've a Mike Trice 3d print body to build and recently managed to get a BR green latest tooling Bachmann V2 for a ridiculously low price.

Just a few more to get,😁

 

Thanks David. Mike Trice's V2 kit is the other excellent option, I have seen a few on the net built up and they do look very good. I don't know what the availability of Graeme's is like (I am sure Graeme can confirm), but I am content with my trio as they are.

[MikeParkin65]

18 minutes ago, Simon A.C. Martin said:

Noting the excellent Jamieson example of a Gresley V2, and having shared this with LNER Modellers on Facebook, I thought I might venture to show one of Graeme King's resin V2 kits as completed by me recently, in the spirit of "layout loco" modelling.

 

 

 

 

I originally purchased a trio of his resin kits and they are all now complete after having sat waiting for painting after nearly five years since they were bought. They are all on the 2011/2012 release of Bachmann's warmed over Gresley V2 model, with lots of added parts (whitemetal buffers from Lanarkshire models for example). Graeme's kit is a virtual straight swap for the Bachmann original but is far more accurate in many areas. I had to make a couple of modifications to the cylinders to be correct for the other locos (Green Arrow has the earlier torpedo shaped ends to the valve spindles for the conjugated gear).

 

I chose to make one of them as 4771 Green Arrow as she was early on in the second world war. Wartime livery isn't modelled that much (is my observation anyway), and I am hoping after getting this model weathered and coaled, she will look the part on my Ganwick Curve layout.

 

In terms of running, I doubt this model could pull what the Jamieson loco pulls, but having added some lead to the bodyshell over the front of the drivers, she will pull 12 of the Hornby Gresley coaches, and has had some nice running on some lengthy mixed goods rakes (up to 20 wagons with no slipping).

Lovely work and I wish these bodies were available as the warmed up Bachmann chassis is a very smooth runner. One pedantic point - I think 4771 is unique in lacking the front steps. I was looking at photos only last night before adding the detailing to a recently acquired 60847. 

[Jol Wilkinson]

I remain total unconvinced by the "rigid is best" argument. When I modelled in 00, albeit many years ago, I was rarely able to build a loco that ran well. When I moved to P4, where springing or compensation is rather more common, I found I was able to produce models that consistently ran properly. Accepted, many or the kits I was then building were later designs with etched chassis, rather than the slabs of brass or even lumps of white metal chassis supplied earlier by some kit manufacturers.

 

No doubt heavy large locos have the benefit of mass and inertia, as well as beating the track into submission as they proceed at speed, so maintaining better wheel/rail contact but what I want is something that will start, stop and run at various speeds smoothly and consistently. For me compensation provides that. The Precursor Tank in the attached photo has pickups only on the driving wheels but will run happily and without problem under exhibition conditions.

 

 

[Guest Simon A.C. Martin]

12 minutes ago, MikeParkin65 said:

Lovely work and I wish these bodies were available as the warmed up Bachmann chassis is a very smooth runner. One pedantic point - I think 4771 is unique in lacking the front steps. I was looking at photos only last night before adding the detailing to a recently acquired 60847. 

 

Not pedantic: accurate! I have just had a look at my reference photos and there are no steps anywhere. I will remove them at the earliest opportunity.

 

Every day is a school day!

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

Please don't include me with Messrs. Wright and Jackson when it comes to my operating preferences!

 

Neither of them has or had much interest in operating layouts, whereas I do.

 

I do like to see an express running but watching a whole parade of them one after the other soon bores me and when I see points and sidings that never get used, I think it a bit of a waste. 

 

If offered a choice between a big roundy roundy with a parade of expresses that all just rattle round one after the other, or a layout with lots of shunting and remarshalling of trains, then the second category wins hands down for me every time.

 

Building a small shunting loco that will creep slowly up and down all day long, starting, stopping and changing direction, is quite a bit more challenging than building a big express loco in my view. You don't get all the advantages of mass and momentum to help you.

 

Of the locos I have built, the ones that give me the most satisfaction are those that are good for shunting.

Good afternoon Tony,

 

I don't think 'Barclay', as I read it, was referring to you, but I could be wrong.

 

You're right. The discussions do become repetitive, but may I come back to what I'd call an 'accurate' representation of operation. 

 

Retford is a model of an actual location, so we can draw on empirical evidence (and anecdotal) to help with how the place was operated. It generally was a succession of long distance, long trains passing through on the main line, with the occasional stopper (Leeds trains, usually). There were the east/west stoppers, of course, and the freights/light engines going over the flat crossing. 

 

Now, I can't remember how many days I spent 'spotting' at that marvellous location from the mid-'50s to the early-'60s, but it was many (only in school holidays). I can honestly tell you that I have no recollection of most of the more remote points and sidings ever being used. Occasionally, both Up and Down through freights would be put 'inside', but I never witnessed any shunting taking place (other than a K1 coming off the GC in reverse, to eventually cross over to the Up sidings to pick up a ready-made-up train). 

 

There was always a B1 (a Retford 'Rocket') standing in a siding beyond the north end of the Up platform, but I never saw that move (a standby loco?). There were a few locos which came on and off the GN shed, but most stood there all day (including, on one wonderful occasion, 60109 HERMIT, fresh from Donny Plant and in light steam. It never moved from 10.00 am until 6.00 pm). 

 

So, if an 'accurate' representation is to be made of a day's operation on Retford, then it's express after express, freight after freight and the occasional stoppers (always heralded by the station bell). There'd be very little shunting (I never saw anything shoved into the goods shed or taken out), and those spoken-of sidings would remain for weeks with rust-covered tops to their rails. 

 

Of course, we have no means of knowing how Buckingham was actually operated, because it's a (wonderful) work of fiction. I know you and your friends derive enormous pleasure from operating it (much more than I get from running Little Bytham, but then my preference has always been to make things), and that has great merit. But, when it comes to 'accuracy', I'd take Retford's running (and operating) any day.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

17 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

I remain total unconvinced by the "rigid is best" argument. When I modelled in 00, albeit many years ago, I was rarely able to build a loco that ran well. When I moved to P4, where springing or compensation is rather more common, I found I was able to produce models that consistently ran properly. Accepted, many or the kits I was then building were later designs with etched chassis, rather than the slabs of brass or even lumps of white metal chassis supplied earlier by some kit manufacturers.

 

No doubt heavy large locos have the benefit of mass and inertia, as well as beating the track into submission as they proceed at speed, so maintaining better wheel/rail contact but what I want is something that will start, stop and run at various speeds smoothly and consistently. For me compensation provides that. The Precursor Tank in the attached photo has pickups only on the driving wheels but will run happily and without problem under exhibition conditions.

 

 

Good afternoon Jol,

 

I don't think it's a case of 'rigid is best' (or should that be better?), it's a case of what's 'best' (or better?) for the builder. 

 

You might recall some time ago, I wrote a piece for the Scalefour News (amazingly, there wasn't a landslide of resignations), where, among other things, I suggested that a much greater degree of skill was needed to build in the finest 4mm gauge. For years (it's been my perception that) the propaganda has been churned out that all one needs are jigs and gauges and anyone can build in P4. 

 

Well, for a start, I certainly couldn't; I'm not skilled or disciplined enough! Clearly, you are (I've seen your locos run). It's modest of you not to mention that. 

 

In OO and/or EM, I jig-assemble all my frames as rigid units, and away I go - well in excess of 550 times now. 

 

Clearly, it's a case of whatever works for the individual.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited September 3, 2022 by Tony Wright
clumsy grammar

[Barclay]

8 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

 

I don't think 'Barclay', as I read it, was referring to you, but I could be wrong.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

You're not wrong !

[t-b-g]

1 minute ago, Barclay said:

You're not wrong !

 

My apologies. I took you, Tony and Roy to mean the three of us!

[Tony Wright]

Resin-bodied V2s have been mentioned...........

 

Here's Bytham's quartet...........

 

 

I put together this pair of Graeme King's V2 bodies, building Comet frames and using Bachmann tenders.

 

 

I painted/weathered this one.

 

 

And Geoff Haynes painted/weathered this one.

 

Some little time ago, I built a pair of Mike Trice examples, writing them up in BRM.

 

 

Both had Comet frames; this one has a Bachmann tender.

 

 

 

And this one has a South Eastern Finecast tender. Geoff Haynes painted both.

 

All have Romford/Markits wheels and DJH, Comet or Portescap motor/gearbox combinations. 

 

I don't know whether both sources are still available, but they make up well in my opinion.

 

 

[Ray Flintoft]

Nice to see some V.2's again as I have just completed an old Nucast kit , replacing the cast lump chassis with a Comet chassis kit . The locomotive , no 60824 , was a St. Margarets based engine which turned up at York on 24/4/66 , I believe off a railtour . This was too much temptation and she was promptly used on York turns until at least 1st of May , the last time I noted her .

                         Ray .

[t-b-g]

14 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Good afternoon Tony,

 

I don't think 'Barclay', as I read it, was referring to you, but I could be wrong.

 

You're right. The discussions do become repetitive, but may I come back to what I'd call an 'accurate' representation of operation. 

 

Retford is a model of an actual location, so we can draw on empirical evidence (and anecdotal) to help with how the place was operated. It generally was a succession of long distance, long trains passing through on the main line, with the occasional stopper (Leeds trains, usually). There were the east/west stoppers, of course, and the freights/light engines going over the flat crossing. 

 

Now, I can't remember how many days I spent 'spotting' at that marvellous location from the mid-'50s to the early-'60s, but it was many (only in school holidays). I can honestly tell you that I have no recollection of most of the more remote points and sidings ever being used. Occasionally, both Up and Down through freights would be put 'inside', but I never witnessed any shunting taking place (other than a K1 coming off the GC in reverse, to eventually cross over to the Up sidings to pick up a ready-made-up train). 

 

There was always a B1 (a Retford 'Rocket') standing in a siding beyond the north end of the Up platform, but I never saw that move (a standby loco?). There were a few locos which came on and off the GN shed, but most stood there all day (including, on one wonderful occasion, 60109 HERMIT, fresh from Donny Plant and in light steam. It never moved from 10.00 am until 6.00 pm). 

 

So, if an 'accurate' representation is to be made of a day's operation on Retford, then it's express after express, freight after freight and the occasional stoppers (always heralded by the station bell). There'd be very little shunting (I never saw anything shoved into the goods shed or taken out), and those spoken-of sidings would remain for weeks with rust-covered tops to their rails. 

 

Of course, we have no means of knowing how Buckingham was actually operated, because it's a (wonderful) work of fiction. I know you and your friends derive enormous pleasure from operating it (much more than I get from running Little Bytham, but then my preference has always been to make things), and that has great merit. But, when it comes to 'accuracy', I'd take Retford's running (and operating) any day.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

"Accurate" running sounds a great idea until you actually do it.

 

On the famous "running days" when visitors came to see Retford, it was run prototypically, even down to the gaps between trains so that not too many trains were on scene at any one time. It was run a train, pause, run another one, pause and so on.

 

After the first few trains the viewers would wander off and start conversing to other visitors and nobody watched around 95% of the sequence.

 

Give me entertaining and interesting operation over accurate any time!

[Compound2632]

If one has the luxury of a 4-track main-line, one wants to see the passenger train on the main / fast overhauling the goods or mineral plodding along the relief / slow. Even better, if only a 2-track main line, one wants to set that mineral train back into the lay-bye to let the passenger pass, then have it slowly wending its way in the latter's wake.* If there's only going to be one train on stage at a time, one might as well model a single track line!

 

*You don't even need a 40-wagon lay-bye to do this; the goods can be set back onto the other running line.

[Tony Wright]

The latest carriage from Hornby..............

 

 

 

[Northmoor]

5 hours ago, t-b-g said:

"Accurate" running sounds a great idea until you actually do it.

 

On the famous "running days" when visitors came to see Retford, it was run prototypically, even down to the gaps between trains so that not too many trains were on scene at any one time. It was run a train, pause, run another one, pause and so on.

 

After the first few trains the viewers would wander off and start conversing to other visitors and nobody watched around 95% of the sequence.

 

Give me entertaining and interesting operation over accurate any time!

I think even the busiest main line needs to be operated on the speeded-up clock.  Has anyone ever operated a model of a typical steam age branch line, accurately?  It would provoke an interesting response at exhibitions, when after the two-coach passenger service leaves, the operator invites their "audience" to return and view the next train movement, in four hours..........

 

Oh and thanks Tony, my parcel arrived safely today (handy, as I was working from home so able to sign for it).  Considering a 42xx isn't a particularly small loco, this doesn't actually look like a difficult kit to build (you are all welcome to quote that back to me in future) and the quality of the parts is good, very little flash and the long sections straighter than I would have expected.

 

It's funny how the K's instructions refer to gluing everything together, but I'll certainly try and use solder where possible, even though I haven't done any in years.  What surprised me was how the driving wheels have all rusted in their sealed packet (nothing some fine emery won't clean off, I'm sure) as there is no sign of anything else in the box having got damp.  I have so many - far too many - projects in the Round Tuit pile but I could see this one leap-frogging quite a few.

[ROY@34F]

On 01/09/2022 at 18:54, Tony Wright said:

A good suggestion Steven,

 

Looking through about 50 prototype pictures at random after reading your post, well over 30 showed the locos (whatever their condition) displaying pretty clean white-painted lamps (these are ER subjects - some other systems used red- or black-painted lamps).

 

Anyway, here's a selection............

 

 

 

 

 

 

I believe lamps were there to denote the class of train (in most cases; in parts of the ex-GE suburban sections, they denoted routes). Thus, they had to be clearly visible to a signalman in daylight, hence the general propensity for keeping them clean. I assume it would be the stores' responsibility for keeping lamps in good order.

 

Anyway, not all Bytham's loco lamps are gleaming white................

 

 

 

 

Though a few more could do with a wash of dirty thinners.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

oil

 

 

Hello Tony . Just want to say my two penarth about lamps . When disposing an engine , the lamps were returned to the stores , along with oil bottles . One of the shed workers or a cleaner would go round the loco depot collecting lamps and bottles that were left on . They used a wheelbarrow with two wooden shafts fitted to each corner of the barrow to hang lamps on . The lamps were  wiped over and topped up with paraffin by the store man , the wicks checked and stored ready for re-issue to crews preparing  engines . And the oil bottles topped up with oil .  So they were completely randomly issued . Mostly a grubby white but sometimes of course one may be far cleaner than the other . Except in the case of a royal train or other special , where nice clean new lamps would be used . And of course four of them for royal train .    I felt I just ought to try to  make it clear from someone who was there ; albeit 60 years ago ... cripes , a bit frightening is that  !

 

     Regards , Roy

[Jesse Sim]

14 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Stuart,

 

I'm inclined to agree, but then 0-4-0s at Little Bytham in BR days were not very common.

 

Where I have built smaller locos, and where they have to run slowly over complex trackwork, some (and whisper this very quietly) equipped with dead-frog points, I either employ bogie/pony/tender pick-ups, or, in the absence of such devices, attach them to a match truck fitted with pick-ups.

 

Like these on Grantham..................

 

 

Tender pick-ups on this McGowan D9; painted by Geoff Haynes.

 

 

Bogie pick-ups on this South Eastern Finecast C12; painted by Graham Nicholas, for whom it was made. 

 

 

Tender pick-ups on the DJH C2, but no need for extras on the Jamieson V2 - more drivers and a longer wheelbase; both painted by Geoff Haynes.

 

I built both these locos for myself, but they're now the property of Grantham team members. 

 

 

The need to be able to crawl across dead-frog crossings without stalling is imperative. 

 

 

Just visible to the left is the pick-up-attached match truck for the SEF J69; painted by Graham Nicholas, for whom it was built.

 

 

And, a clearer view.

 

 

Tender pick-ups on a London Road D2 I built for Mark Allatt; painted by Ian Rathbone. Note the dead-frog pointwork, at least in part.

 

 

No need for extra pick-ups here. Built from an ACE kit (with extensive modifications), also for Mark Allatt, and also painted by Ian Rathbone. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Speaking of C2’s, I recently added tender pick ups to the one you made me Tony, it runs much betterer now. It struggled over some insul frog points in the back section of my fiddlyard. I should have spent the money and changed them to electro frogs but I tried to re-use as much as I could. 
 

I’ll have to do the same to the D2. 
 

I’ve never seen bogie pick ups, could I trouble you for an underneath shot? 

[St Enodoc]

5 hours ago, Northmoor said:

I think even the busiest main line needs to be operated on the speeded-up clock.  Has anyone ever operated a model of a typical steam age branch line, accurately?  It would provoke an interesting response at exhibitions, when after the two-coach passenger service leaves, the operator invites their "audience" to return and view the next train movement, in four hours..........

I have operated layouts with real-time clocks, where the gaps between trains can be far too long (an owner of one such, known to TW and others here, simply moves the clock forward manually if that happens, which rather defeats the point).

 

I have also operated layouts with fast clocks, where the available time for shunting is usually far too short.

 

My overall preference is for a sequence, which overcomes both problems. You do need to try to replicate the time for trains to clear the block before the next appears but when remarshalling in the storage areas is needed then that often takes care of itself. The signalmen can regulate things too.

[Tony Wright]

6 hours ago, Jesse Sim said:

Speaking of C2’s, I recently added tender pick ups to the one you made me Tony, it runs much betterer now. It struggled over some insul frog points in the back section of my fiddlyard. I should have spent the money and changed them to electro frogs but I tried to re-use as much as I could. 
 

I’ll have to do the same to the D2. 
 

I’ve never seen bogie pick ups, could I trouble you for an underneath shot? 

Good morning Jesse,

 

You'll have to ask Graham Nicholas for a bogie pick-up shot on his C12. It's really no more than wipers one side (or both for DCC for preference), the other side being live (though both axles might be insulated on Graham's C12; I can't recall how I did it). Thin wires then transfer the juice as appropriate (thin enough not to interfere with the bogie's swing). 

 

Dead-frog pointwork is a 'solution looking for a problem'. One 'solves' the problem of needing (slightly) more-complex wiring but introduces the annoyance of stuttering running. I honestly cannot see how dead-frogs can be tolerated if decent running is a prerequisite. Banish them all henceforth!

 

Granted, tender pick-up (or bogie/pony pick-up) might well be a good idea, however one's trackwork is configured, but I've always found it an unnecessary encumbrance. No tender loco I build for LB has tender pick-ups; no need, though Roy Jackson used to fit them to his locos (hence why many of his Pacifics used to run as 4-6-0s, the wires fouling the pony). 

 

I know it's been aired before, but an 'all-live metal locomotive' is probably not best for DCC. It's not a problem for DC; in fact, it's an advantage because all the wheels on the 'live-side' (bogie/drivers/pony/tender) return the current, only the insulated drivers having pick-ups.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

12 hours ago, Northmoor said:

I think even the busiest main line needs to be operated on the speeded-up clock.  Has anyone ever operated a model of a typical steam age branch line, accurately?  It would provoke an interesting response at exhibitions, when after the two-coach passenger service leaves, the operator invites their "audience" to return and view the next train movement, in four hours..........

 

Oh and thanks Tony, my parcel arrived safely today (handy, as I was working from home so able to sign for it).  Considering a 42xx isn't a particularly small loco, this doesn't actually look like a difficult kit to build (you are all welcome to quote that back to me in future) and the quality of the parts is good, very little flash and the long sections straighter than I would have expected.

 

It's funny how the K's instructions refer to gluing everything together, but I'll certainly try and use solder where possible, even though I haven't done any in years.  What surprised me was how the driving wheels have all rusted in their sealed packet (nothing some fine emery won't clean off, I'm sure) as there is no sign of anything else in the box having got damp.  I have so many - far too many - projects in the Round Tuit pile but I could see this one leap-frogging quite a few.

Good morning Rob,

 

Thanks for letting me know of the kit's safe arrival.

 

I noticed the rusted wheels (you're surely not contemplating using the K's ones, are you?). 

 

I've done my best to check any kit before it's sent out and, so far, every one has seemed fine. At least some monies can now go to the previous owner, and the kits will be built.

 

You mention operating a typical steam-age branch line - 'accurately'. If WMRC members had done that with Moretonhamstead, they would (literally) have told any viewers 'Please come back in four hours (or more) to see the same train returning from Newton!'. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited September 3, 2022 by Tony Wright
typo error

[Tony Wright]

6 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

I have operated layouts with real-time clocks, where the gaps between trains can be far too long (an owner of one such, known to TW and others here, simply moves the clock forward manually if that happens, which rather defeats the point).

 

I have also operated layouts with fast clocks, where the available time for shunting is usually far too short.

 

My overall preference is for a sequence, which overcomes both problems. You do need to try to replicate the time for trains to clear the block before the next appears but when remarshalling in the storage areas is needed then that often takes care of itself. The signalmen can regulate things too.

Good morning John,

 

I think there's a difference between operating a layout at home (with friends or not) and at an exhibition. At the latter, the usual mantra is 'keeping trains running at all times!'. This, of course, is absurd regarding realism. For instance, as part of Stoke Summit's sequence, on occasions an empty mineral train would be allowed off the Down slow to take the double track section through Stoke Tunnel and beyond. As soon as it arrived in the fiddle yard, the Down fast boards would be off and a Pacific on a flyer would fizz through. Now, in reality, that unfitted freight would have just about reached High Dyke before the express scattered its wagons all over the interchange sidings! 'Replicate the time for trains to clear the block...........?' Spectators would have complained and walked off. 

 

With running at home, there's no imperative for 'entertainment', other than that enjoyed by the operators. Little Bytham runs to a sequence (and many on here have driven it, and might like to comment if it works - or not). A sequence derived from the appropriate PTTs and WTTs, resulting in around 60 train movements in around two and a half hours. Of course, even with a capacity of near 50 different trans, I can only replicate a fraction of what might have passed through LB on a summer's day in 1958, but it's 'representative'. Representative, for example, inasmuch I have the Down 'Flying Scotsman' and the Up 'Elizabethan', but not the other way round (using the same set to represent both trains is absurd to me). Once a train has run (and, say, the pick-up has three movements in the sequence) and is back to the fiddle yard, no notice is taken of how long it might take to clear the block, and the next movement is signalled straight away (or should be, if I'm paying attention). I have to say it suits me, my regular operators (who often bring their own locos - we just pop them on in place of mine) and visitors. Of course, some just like to dive into the MR/M&GNR section and operate that to their heart's content. There are (nominally) nine different trains on that, but by the time they've finished it could be 99!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited September 3, 2022 by Tony Wright

[thegreenhowards]

22 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Stuart,

 

I'm inclined to agree, but then 0-4-0s at Little Bytham in BR days were not very common.

 

Where I have built smaller locos, and where they have to run slowly over complex trackwork, some (and whisper this very quietly) equipped with dead-frog points, I either employ bogie/pony/tender pick-ups, or, in the absence of such devices, attach them to a match truck fitted with pick-ups.

 

Without wishing to reopen another favourite debate (well perhaps just a little!), the same can be achieved very simply with a DCC chip and a stayalive!

 

I’ll now duck!

 

Andy

[Chuffer Davies]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

 

I know it's been aired before, but an 'all-live metal locomotive' is probably not best for DCC. It's not a problem for DC; in fact, it's an advantage because all the wheels on the 'live-side' (bogie/drivers/pony/tender) return the current, only the insulated drivers having pick-ups.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Hi ,

it has indeed been aired before. As before you have stated your opinion that all metal locomotives are not ideal for DCC.  I do not share this opinion. Most of my models are etched (all) metal construction and DCC fitted and I have never given fitting DCC to these models a second thought.  You just need to be sensible about ensuring the motor’s terminals are unable to touch any part of the metalwork so as to avoid short circuiting the decoder.  
 

My practice with using bogie and pony trucks to collect current is to make them live to one side of the chassis.  If I’m building a prairie the pony truck at the front will be shorted to the opposite rail as the rear one.  Or if I’m building a 4-6-0 then I will short the bogie to one side and short the tender wheels to the other side but I never fit wiper pickups to undriven axles.

Frank

[thegreenhowards]

11 minutes ago, Chuffer Davies said:

Hi ,

it has indeed been aired before. As before you have stated your opinion that all metal locomotives are not ideal for DCC.  I do not share this opinion. Most of my models are etched (all) metal construction and DCC fitted and I have never given fitting DCC to these models a second thought.  You just need to be sensible about ensuring the motor’s terminals are unable to touch any part of the metalwork so as to avoid short circuiting the decoder.  
 

My practice with using bogie and pony trucks to collect current is to make them live to one side of the chassis.  If I’m building a prairie the pony truck at the front will be shorted to the opposite rail as the rear one.  Or if I’m building a 4-6-0 then I will short the bogie to one side and short the tender wheels to the other side but I never fit wiper pickups to undriven axles.

Frank

I tend to agree, with some reservations.

 

I have several live frame locos running on DCC. It’s no problem provided that shorts are ruthlessly tracked down and eliminated as they are more serious in DCC than with DC. With 0-6-0s it’s no problem but floppy bogies can short out and have to be sorted out with a combination of insulating through araldite or tape and making less floppy. The only insurmountable problem is live frame motors which have to be replaced.

 

Having said that, when I’m building from scratch (rather than sorting out a secondhand purchase), I tend to build fully insulated for robustness with driver wiper pick ups and a stayalive if necessary.

 

Andy

 

 

[Tony Wright]

42 minutes ago, Chuffer Davies said:

Hi ,

it has indeed been aired before. As before you have stated your opinion that all metal locomotives are not ideal for DCC.  I do not share this opinion. Most of my models are etched (all) metal construction and DCC fitted and I have never given fitting DCC to these models a second thought.  You just need to be sensible about ensuring the motor’s terminals are unable to touch any part of the metalwork so as to avoid short circuiting the decoder.  
 

My practice with using bogie and pony trucks to collect current is to make them live to one side of the chassis.  If I’m building a prairie the pony truck at the front will be shorted to the opposite rail as the rear one.  Or if I’m building a 4-6-0 then I will short the bogie to one side and short the tender wheels to the other side but I never fit wiper pickups to undriven axles.

Frank

It's good to differ, Frank.

 

It is, after all, a matter of opinion. It's just that I've witnessed 'chips being fried' (admittedly on DC control) where, for whatever reason, a short circuit has occurred (at high speed, usually, with the taps full-on) and the decoder has 'melted'. It's happened on Little Bytham, where - and I apologise again Andy (The Green Howards) - an all-metal loco (with the American pick-up arrangement) shorted out, cooking the decoder instantly (I think it also fried the Portescap!). Could it be that the 'trip' on DC is slower than on DCC? 

 

I still maintain (opinion or not) that for DCC it's better to have a totally, electrically dead set of metal frames and loco body; just pick-ups to the all-insulated wheels.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.