Leaderboard

Progress has been made on various projects I thought I'd share. First up, on the small river bridge, I re-drew the 3d model for the girders and added the walk-way and handrail supports. These were threaded with brass wire and bent to shape. The result makes for a fairly unique bridge, certainly one in the 'you couldn't make this up' category. While I've been waiting for paint to dry I decided to start preparing some trees. I'd bought some tree armatures sold under the brand name 'Footpath' by Model Scenery Supplies. These seemed good value to me at £9.85 for 5 armatures about 140mm tall. As supplied they are a little squashed together in the packet, the wire is well twisted, but on the recommendation of MSS I applied a little solder to the major joints just to stop them unwrapping. The wire is quite robust but nowhere near as painful on the fingers as picture wire or brake cable. I found that a little extra winding is worthwhile at the ends of the branches, this probably took about 5-10 minutes per armature. I've added some bark (sorry I don't know the source, it was just a plastic bag in my scenics box labelled 'bark'!. I mixed whatever this was with some PVA and painted it on in a number of layers. Finally I thought I'd show a bit more progress on the Crownline J20. The tender is now fitted with a revised sprung chassis and a motor fitted to the gearbox. The loco has moved 'on jump leads' along a test track and seems to do so smoothly and without binding. I've now got to a point where the 'hot work' has been done on the boiler so stuck on a couple of the parts which I had 3D printed. I wasn't happy with the rather prominent washout plugs just being represented by a half-etched circle so I drilled these out a stuck a more detailed fitting behind the boiler cladding. I also printed the sandboxes, complete with the flange around the base, rather than use the fold up etch from the kit. I retained the etch cover on the front though. Now what else can I do to procrastinate over static grass? David

To take good photos of model railways it's really important to control the depth of field or focal depth of the image. This is best demonstrated by @KNP's wonderful photographs of his masterpiece, Little Muddle. This blog entry describes my first experiments in improving depth of field in my photos. Why Depth of Field matters Definition: The Depth of field is the distance between the nearest and furthest objects that are acceptably in focus. I'm not a photography expert and I don't claim to understand all the technicalities of depth of field but in a nutshell, the closer the camera is to the subject, the smaller the depth of field. Or to put it another way, when the camera is close to the scene only details at a very specific distance from the camera will be in focus and the rest of the image will be blurry. (This is to do with the angles of light rays entering the camera.) Real world photos have a much deeper range of good focus because of the greater distance between the camera and the subject. (Technically, because of the smaller angles at which the light rays enter the camera.) So small depth of field is a problem when photographing models for two reasons: When you focus on a particular item of interest it means that many other details are out of focus. E.g. you focus on the smokebox of a loco and then the cab, which is only a few centimetres further back, is blurred. The lack of focus is not just annoying in it's own right but it's a dead give-away that you photographed a model, no matter how realistic your detailing was! Focus Stacking So we want a way to increase the depth of field when photographing our models and this is where technology comes to the rescue in the form of "Focus stacking" or "Focus merging". A focus stacking algorithm analyses several photos taken at different focal lengths and mixes the best focused parts, the sharpest parts, to create one good image. How to do focus stacking To apply focus stacking you need to: Capture your images digitally. Many compact digital cameras and Smartphones have very good lenses and high resolution sensors and are perfect for this task. Capture a number of images without the camera moving. To ensure that the camera doesn't move while capturing the images you need you ideally need some sort of tripod. A mini tripod with a swivel mount and flexible legs is ideal. Capture images at a range of focal distances. You could attempt to refocus manually between each shot but it's much easier and more reliable to let the software on the camera do this for you. Some cameras have that feature built-in and there are apps for Smartphones to do it. Collect the images together and process them in a suitable software package. Many high-end photo processing software packages have the ability to perform focus stacking and there are some free apps and utilities. My first experiment I used my Android SmartPhone, a OnePlus 3, mounted in a swivel head on a small tripod. To capture the images automatically I installed a free app called, OpenCamera, which gives much more control than the standard Android Camera app. Here it is in operation: The two large sliders on screen set the front and back focus points for the stack. The smaller third slider is the zoom factor. The software is set to take 16 images in this example but it can take up to 200! [Edit: OpenCamera requires a phone and a version of Android that allows apps to control the camera focus.] To process the images I first tried an open source desktop application called CombineZP but I found it to be difficult to use and not very reliable. In the end I settled on Affinity Photo, a highly accomplished and very affordable desktop photo editing package which has a good focus stacking feature. (This was a hard thing for me to do because the Affinity software is "the competition" in my professional life!) Here are two of the raw images, numbers 2 and 12 from the stack of 16: You can see that image number 2 is focused near the smokebox door of the loco but the background is out of focus. And image number 12 shows the background train in focus but the loco is blurred. Then the full stack of 16 photos was given to Affinity Photo and it produced this result (after cropping): You can see that the process works and it was quite easy once I had gathered together all the necessary tools. I will do some more experiments and try some creative ideas.

Sometimes a simple, experience can assist in the clarification of thoughts and ideas. While on a recent visit to the northern edge of the Forest of Dean, I came across one of those fine examples of ‘Reuse’ (and indeed ‘Reversion’). The capital ‘Rs’ are a reflection of those increasingly important ‘R’ words: Reduce, Reuse and Recycle*. I made an unexpected discovery: the remains of a B.R. plywood van. After a ridiculously short working lives, many of the B.R. fleet of short wheelbase fitted van bodies ended up being sold as agricultural buildings as the 1955 Modernisation Plan (which did little to modernise the railway, but a lot to take it back to 1945 or earlier, especially in the matter of wagons) was put out to grass with the arrival of the Beeching Report. Some of these purchases from B.R. have been well cared for, still providing useful cover for farming activities. Others have not faired so well with the plywood delaminating and rotting or, in this case due to its hill top location, blown away. The characteristic pressed steel ends and the angle iron framework for the roof and sides remain. The growth of a tree - I think it is a elderberry - just adds a nice touch. Out of the useless comes forth fruit! It is likely that at least some of these vehicles never earned the cost of building them. In the early 1970s, at the extreme end of their revenue earning service, about 70 such vehicles stood all year in the yard at Weymouth so they could to handle about eight weeks of revenue earning with the Channel Island potato and tomato traffic, although most the tomato traffic had already gone to the roads by then. The cost of building and maintaining these short vehicles was inflated by the need for a much higher ratio of the expensive bits - wheels, running gear, brakes and buffers - to the load space found in standard U.I.C.** designs found in Europe, where vans were at least twice if not three times the capacity. Why were they so short? Because that was the size of British railway vans! It always had been. And that was what the infrastructure could carry. This head-in-the-sand view of changing design and technology did much to destroy rail freight in the UK. Even the ‘Palvans’ built to take pallets had a lower capacity than the largest contemporary road vehicle competition. While the 16tons mineral wagon seldom survived like the vans, they illustrate well the point that infrastructure controlled the railway. Beeching wanted the railway to stop using its coal wagons being used as ‘bunkers’. Robens - the boss of the Nation Coal Board - did not wish to pay (c £10m @ 1965) for the improved railway operating efficiency by having to rebuild his pit-head loading areas. Beeching won with his Merry-Go-Round trains. Higher capacity, higher speeds, a hugely reduced wagon fleet and even reduced traction requirements. Excellent; but too late. The technology for MRG had been there in the 1950s but there was no will for it to be introduced. To return to the van, standing floor-less in the field. It could be seen as a metaphor for the poor planning, poor investment and lack of imagination on the post-1945 railway. That the plan is to model this as a diorama rather than as some detail on the corner of large layout is also a metaphor for my changing approach to modelling. In a world of diminishing resources, questions need to be asked about the culture of over-production and over-consumption: and railway modelling should not escape such an interrogation. Better to build or small and meaningful diorama than some all consuming sprawling ‘empire’. As one who has changed my behaviour on a number of occasions over the last 68 years, railway modelling is a residual pastime from a different age. As a non-car owning, vegetarian who lives in a house with solar panels (electricity generation) and a 33 year old heat pump (hot water production) and who has not flown since my work as an international human rights observer just nearly fifteen years ago, it seems odd that I have been tempted to return to the rather questionable and many ways unsustainable activity of ‘out-of-the-box’ railway modelling. For some years I have been increasingly concerned about the human fascination for injection moulded petroleum based plastic and the way this fascination, or perhaps I should say addiction, is passed on through contents of the average child’s brightly coloured toy box. (Although I hear that Lego are going over to bioplastic.) It is also a concerning to look at the environmental impact of modelling as with so many other products. This is not just about the materials used, but the whole pyramid that imports of finished models stand on, dodgy chemical industries, industrial pollution, international shipping (a very dirty industry), packaging, production energy, etc. It seems, that modern ‘out-of-the-box’ modelling is, a long way from the days of Hornby tinplate, when there were few worries about the future of the environment or resources. When having a ‘consuming’ (both meanings) hobby was unquestioningly a good thing. However, my comments are based on an increasing feeling of cognitive dissonance (that is inconsistent thought, beliefs or attitudes) especially as relating to behavioural decisions and attitude change in relation my railway modelling. To make such a diorama with freedom to use whatever scale, probably 12mm to 1foot, and the most appropriate materials, also make this a metaphor. That this model of a recycled van is expressing a challenge to working within a new set of criteria for an environment that must question waste and inappropriate use of resources, at all scales. This piece also reflects my reduction in the size of modelling projects. Over the last ten years most of my exhibition layouts were reduced to what could be carried by public transport. It also reflects my move towards the arts as a means of expression. Art has a much longer tradition of using metaphor than modelling. Perhaps we need to consider these things more carefully and move beyond playing trains and building ever bigger layouts. In any modelling activity there is always an element of “you can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs”. However, waste can be kept to a minimum and care of finished products can make for a longer life expectancy. Sadly, some recent work of mine has, like this BR fitted van, has been scrapped too early in its life, not for want of good design and careful construction but for want a proper care and storage. And that in a project to recycle a layout… Ironic, or what!! Although the resources wasted in a breaking up a model railway are small compared to the waste of a fleet of poorly conceived wagons, it’s the frame of mind that is important. So the experience of finding a van body in a field has helped me move on with my attitude to modelling. I doubt if others will follow… but that is not the point. One has to move when the time is right for you. There is a wonderful poem by Dorothy Nimmo - ‘The Pottery Lesson’ (a Google search will find it) - about a potter who breaks their pots as soon as they have been made, which ends “Why do you break your pots as soon as you have made them? I can’t answer that question. When you can answer that question you will no longer be broken.” If you have got this far well done! *The three R's - reduce, reuse and recycle - all help to cut down on the amount of waste we throw away. They conserve natural resources, landfill space and energy. Plus, the three R's save land and money communities must use to dispose of waste in landfills. **U.I.C. Union Internationle des Chemins de fer.

In my previous post, I made the self-fulfilling prophesy that I would be distracted by the forum thread on GWR standard gauge 'tilt' wagons, started by drduncan. Initially there was some discussion as to whether the photo shown was, in fact, of a Broad Gauge wagon but the dimensions (especially the height) seemed sufficiently different to indicate that the vehicle under discussion was indeed Standard Gauge. Something 'clicked' for me and I decided that I had to add one to my stock, so I began to prepare simple drawings by scaling the photograph, using the assumption that the wheelbase was 9' 9", as in the BG versions. The result, produced in Autosketch by tracing over the photograph, looked like this: Because the original was of metal construction, I wanted to do the same with my model but I also decided to try a new way of marking out my 10 thou (0.25 mm) brass sheet, making use of my Silhouette Portrait cutter. Previously, my method has been to cut out sections of drawings on paper and stick these to brass sheet, using a glue pen. I then simply cut out the parts by following the printed lines with jewellers' snips. This time, I decided to use a diamond scriber in the pen holder of the Silhouette cutter, to mark out the outlines of the components directly onto brass sheet. As well as the outlines, this method also enabled me to scribe details, such as planking and guidelines for attaching surface details. In addition, I realised that if I drew the outline of my rectangular brass sheet on a sheet of paper and also added the Silhouette registration marks, then I could scribe both sides of the brass sheet, in registration. To do this, I lightly taped the brass to the paper, aligned with my outline drawing, and then scribed the detail. I then turned the brass over and scribed the other side with the appropriate designs - remembering to flip the Silhouette image to correspond with the way I turned the sheet over. Scribing Brass Sheet with a Silhouette Cutter After cutting out the individual components, I assembled the basic shape of the Tilt Wagon, as shown below. I have a set of socket spanners in a wide range of diameters which provide useful 'jigs' for setting the curvature of the end bonnets. I used super-glue to fix the bonnets inside the folded wagon sides and then inserted the curved ends into the bonnets. I prefer using super-glue to solder where there are lots of different small parts to be fitted together, as it avoids earlier joints melting while new ones are being made. Inevitably, some glue extrudes from the sides of the joints and I use a small stainless steel chisel, intended for wax carving, to remove this excess while it is still at a 'cheesy' consistency. A prominent feature of the prototype is the extensive use of rivets! I decided to 'cheat' and use the rivet strips that are currently available from 'Mainly Trains'. I realise that this means the rivet heads are on a raised 'plinth' but I find that the near-perfect alignment is preferable, at normal viewing distances, to my attempts at embossing even lines! Additional details are the angle-iron stiffeners along the tops of the sides and on the side doors (1mm brass angle), and the wooden cross-bar at the top of the doors (plasticard). I still have to add the rails above the sides and between the tops of the end bonnets. There remains the little matter of a chassis! I find that the GWR W-irons from MJT are still listed as "temporarily out of stock", as they have been all year! In addition, I see that 'Mainly Trains' have a notice on their website that "After 35 Years of trading we are beginning the process of winding down." It looks rather ominous for the future supply of many very useful detailing components! Perhaps I shall have to turn to completely scratch-building the chassis as well.... In the meantime, my 'work in progress' looks like this, making an interesting comparison with a round-ended 3-planker from David Geen. Continue to next part Mike

Evening all. It's been a while since I updated this blog. Still not too sure about the new software and I haven't had either the time or the inclination to go and update all the previous entries and their photos links etc. I've been working my way through the drawings for the goods shed, to the point where it's now ready to cut (I hope). In the meantime, the station board's been put up, ballasted and the point rodding stools added ahead of the platform sides. There's a lot to do on this board with lots of subtle changes in ground levels. I suspect that not much will change for a while as most of the activity will proceed off layout for now, but I've attached a couple of photos of today's progress.

Good evening all, Decided to skip Ally Pally this year as have a few shows coming up and thought I would put in a shift at home...which also allows me to go off piste to do some modelling Research has been continuing on the project and firstly many thanks to Argos of this Parish who has provided a lot of new information about the line and history. I also posted a thread on typical rolling stock to Oban and this has heralded some great leads too. A couple of small tasks for the mock up were undertaken including adding a new fascia to the base of the water as well as the top to frame the view/conceal the lighting. In addition, one of the things I realised from the information received was that the siding closest to the hotel was in fact a loop...so to increase operational interest I think I will extend this to the fiddle yard so a train can pull in and wait...or perhaps leave a few wagons. I think I will make the signal cabin which can just be seen in a cheeky photo taken of the Ian Futers book which shows top left the original image which caught my idea for this layout proposal. The sketchbook has also taken a beating this week between meetings and journeys to work. Ideas on how to create the water (using a technique told to me by some nice chaps doing a demo stand next to me at the Steyning show) so as to create some depth to the loch. I have also looked at the fascias and realised that the main scenic board needs its own return ends (as opposed to using the fiddle yard ends) so that I can curve the backscene at both ends. Finally an alternative tweak to the track plan by splaying the line to the centre to try and capture some of the curve at the end of the station. The jury is still out on this as it may reduce some of the water at the front and I am not so convinced about this. Following on from the train formation information received I dug out some of my old N gauge stock to represent an oil train - excuse the crass weathering which was done when I was a teenager This will be redone of course. The 27 has been posed as I have sent both my 37’s to Kevin at Coastal DCC to see if he can take a look at them and solve the problems experienced recently. Am also trying to gauge whether I can include a mixed freight composed of Railfreight wagons...must admit I always liked that livery A few more photos of the mock-up. It is crude enough to allow me to add/subtract, hack and chop it about - the key is to not be too precious. Time spent in foamboard is cheaper than when the timber has been cut... As always, comments welcomed... Pete

When I laid the track for the previous version of Addleford Green I learned a few lessons. I had elected to mount the point motors directly beneath the track, therefore having to cut holes in the baseboard. I had never done this before but felt it might help with the dreaded point motor alignment. Despite my drilling and cutting being somewhat gung-ho, everything worked well. That was until it came to ballasting. I'm not sure if it was due to the over-large holes beneath the track or a lack of track pins, but when it came to ballasting I found that the glue seeped beneath the track, along with ballast itself, and actually lifted it up. This created small differences in height between rails and although it didn't adversely affect running, it was annoying to say the least. I've never had this problem with ballast before. This time around I decided to use PVA glue to hold the track down - no track pins! This should eliminate any potential lifting - I hope. Plus track pins aren't exactly realistic and I'm aiming for a higher standard this time around. The track used on Addleford Green is Peco code 100 streamline with electrofrog turnouts. I'm not overtly fussy about the accuracy of track and tend to be quite clumsy when working around it, so prefer something a bit more sturdy! Besides, with some appropriate weathering and careful ballasting I find code 100 to look perfectly acceptable. This may seem a bit at odds with my previous statement of wanting to build something more realistic but I go by the old tenet of "If it looks right..." and to me, it does! I ultimately always prefer Peco track over the offerings from Hornby, simply because Peco's flexible track is easier to work with. Point motors are Hattons own HAT-PM-01 solenoids which are a far cry from the old Peco ones. The metal arm to operate accessories was insanely perfect for my micro switches. On the previous version I had used insulfrogs because I had little experience with anything else. But because I wanted slow running and were to use mostly short wheelbase locos I soon found the plastic insulated frogs to be a real issue. I also started to have a problem with the blades of the turnouts needing to be cleaned on every operation due to dirt buildup stopping conductivity. Having a complete restart allowed me to review these issues. I read long and hard about the pros and cons of making electrofrogs "electrically friendly"; some said it was a must, some said they could be used as they were, straight out of the box. Wanting to have the most solid possible wiring, I elected to cut the wires underneath the turnout, bond the switchblades to the main outside rails and power the frog from a polarity switcher. There are many articles on RMweb about this, so instead here's a photo of how my switch marries up with my point motors: Here is the entire underneath of the baseboard, currently supported on two bricks! Short legs will follow in due course. Please be kind to my wiring; I'm far from being an electrician but I have tried to be as neat as possible. Continuing with the theme of electrical stability, I have attached dropper wires to every piece of track using 16/0.2mm wire. The power bus wires are stripped from inside a household mains flex cable. Copper adhesive slug tape has been used as a point where multiple wires can join - works a treat! Power comes from an ancient Hornby R965 controller which I have had for a good 15 years. The control panel fascia is a piece of satin white acrylic with a track diagram spray painted on from a homemade card template. I painted the switch levers to differentiate momentary point switches (black) and isolation switches (brown). Micro switches for point polarity switching were bought cheaply from eBay and were far easier to install than I had anticipated. The point motors were a real pain to get lined up - a perennial modelling issue and nothing to do with Hattons' point motors - and I have easy access to both sides of my board. I can't imagine how hard it is for those with bigger layouts! Track weathering has begun on top. I started by masking areas I didn't want painted and placed small pieces of card between the blades of points. This kept the points from gumming up with paint and also maintained the connectivity of the blades by keeping them free of paint. Although this idea is redundant due to my level of wiring, it can't hurt to have a backup - belt and braces! I began painting with a coat of Halfords grey primer from a spray can. Previously I had not used primer first which lead to a poor effect when the actual coloured paint was applied. Paint was wiped from the rail heads immediately after application. It dries pretty darn fast so you have to be quick! After the primer had dried fully it was followed with an all-over coat of Phoenix Precision Paints Sleeper Grime. Used with the primer this had a great effect. The sides of the rails and chairs will be picked out separately with Phoenix's Rusty Rail paint, which I have seen used to good effect elsewhere. All for now, Jonathan Next blog: More track weathering and planning scenics...

Well I must be mad, I have the proof even though I admit it myself, the Domestic Overlord was right I am as nutty as a Squirrels tummy, how have I reached this conclusion? I tried to line the splasher's on two of the Jubilee's clogging up my WORKBENCH of DOOM I had tried a couple of times to line the splasher's before but it was not really a success so I put off the process, well today as the Domestic Overlords ban on me using superglue is still active I got my trusty bow pen out, gave my left hand a stern talking to add a little more lining to the locomotives. I thought what could really go wrong, if the worst thing happens I make a complete mess of it and ruin two locomotives or if Im lucky actually take a step closer to finishing the loco's I will let you decide which outcome I have achieved. I'm not naturally left handed so I have found this process to be quite exhausting and very slow but its getting there, I have to admit to a bit of a cheat though. The splasher's should have a black line outside the yellow line, I had previously tried to paint the black line but I could not get it fine enough so I think the loco's will just have to do without it. If you look at previous posts on the painting of these Jubilees you will see where I have managed to paint the correct black/yellow lines you will probably agree I have made the right decision. I still have to apply the yellow lines at the bottom of the slasher's but after managing to line the cylinders and boiler my hands were shaking beyond control so I gave up, still two of the three locomotives are getting there. There is still a lot of lining needing to be completed (on the footsteps and tender under frame) though I may just leave these areas unlined and hide them under a decent coat of grime, which may extend to several other areas on the locomotives. Going forward I think if I ever decide to add anymore passenger locomotives to the fleet they will definitely be painted un wartime unlined black, if not I think I may have to retire my old trusty bow pen and try and get a more modern finer one, who would have thought N gauge modelling would be so much fun I still have no idea on what identities to apply to these loco's but I must admit it gives me a very good excuse to do some research, well just reading some more railway books. Anyway I think I need a lie down in a nice dark room, so until the next time as ever Happy Modelling

I was very please to accept an invitation to run some stock on the Manchester Model Railway Club's "Slattocks Junction" P4 layout recently. As the layout is set on the Manchester to Rochdale line, it is the perfect setting for my locos as I hope the photo shows. Besides railways, in various scales, I have a great interest in the cotton mills which dominated the landscape of my native Oldham during my childhood so, I have been pleased to be able to help in some small way with encouragement and some architectural information in the marvelous model of "Alpha Mill", which appears , or rather dominates, the background of the photo. The photo was taken by my good friend, David Clarke who, as explained in earlier entries, painted, lined and weathered the featured loco. Here we see Caprotti fitted Black 5, 44741 at the head of a parcels train passing the mill and then on to the canal bridge. Besides 44741, I took three other locos which ran with varying degrees of success. My Stanier 2-6-4 tank ran faultlessly, the Crab struggled a bit with the weight of an 8 coach passenger train, whilst Jubilee 45701 ran well but had an intermittent short as did EE type 4 diesel, D211. Later investigation of the Jubilee revealed a brake hanger had become dislodged and was catching one of the driving wheel flanges. Unfortunately, this required a major disassembly to put right, but this has been achieved without damage to the finish. I think the diesel was just on the limit of curvature it can accommodate. Anyway, thanks to all the guys in the Manchester club for their warm welcome and kind hospitality and allowing me to play trains for an afternoon. Dave.

This loco, allocated to Stafford shed and will be numbered 48755 had a Fowler tender so it will be a little different from my other 8F. This model is well travelled and must be the ultimate in collaborative modelling. My friend David Borman built the chassis (Comet) and tender (Brassmasters) . Dave Holt detailed under the cab and modified the front pony truck. I then fitted balance weights to the drivers and the cylinder drain cocks (both Brassmasters) before painting the chassis. The body is a Hornby one with lots of additional details (mainly from the Brassmasters 8F detaing kit) plus some Comet etches and has been modified to fit the chassis. Still needs some work on the body before painting particularly around the steam pipes into the smokebox. The eagle eyed will notice the grey body is different from the black one as it has the boiler bottom.

Tonight I have once again been looking at the Manor chassis. Checking against other stock I found that one reason for the fouling wheels is that I had removed too much material from the chassis and it was now running too low. the soloution was back to my original plan, fitting the Mitchell frame overlays to the Comet frames. So far these have only been tacked into place to allow testing, using the break mounting holes for alignment. however now I had the opposite problem in that the chassis was slightly high and had these unsightly gaps (presumably in part due to the chassis being designed for a Bachmann model with a thick plastic footplate. At this point I compared with the P4 chassis under my Mitchell 43xx, which imideatly highlighted a problem. The comet axle holes are about 1mm lower than the Mitchell ones (again presumably to allow OO flanges to clear the thick plastic splashers. Which leaves 2 options, cut out the hornblocks and resolder in the correct place. Or remove 1mm from the length of the frames. the front will also need work, adding a mm or so of meterial to the front frames and raising the clyinders This photo shows a Markits wheel in both chassis, the frames are the same height. The red line shows the top of wheel vs the top of chassis, while the blue line shows the material to be removed / added at this point I wish I had spoken to Dave Gene at Wells last year and bought a replacement Mitchell chassis.

Morning all! Now, own up: Who had dirty thoughts on their mind when you clicked to browse here? With some idle time available, I remembered how I wanted to finish and post this small article on another piece of motive power for my Spanish section which had found its way to me several weeks ago. So, let's have a look at a Series 316 diesel-electric locomotive as operated by PW and logistics operator Azvi, a company based at Seville. This locomotive is, to my mind, an excellent example for the diversity of origins of Spanish motive power in Ye Olden Days. It also will go on to show that as in most any other country, motive power retired from the state railway inventory continues to find a second life with private operators and permanent way builders. I needed to consult several different online sources in order to distil a comprehensive piece of information about these locomotives as my impression is that much information about Spanish motive power past and present exists primarily in print, and is not that easily obtained outside of Spain. Reservations against the strongly authoritarian Franco regime notwithstanding and with the Cold War order asserting itself for the indefinite future, the Western world had come to accept Spain as a strategic partner by the 1950s, which did certainly play a role in the economic upturn taking hold of the country. By that time, the Spanish railway sector had seen innovations like the groundbreaking Talgo coach formations with their independent wheel running gears, at that time powered by custom-built single ended diesel-electric locomotives of American design and assembled by American Car and Foundry, with traction equipment having been provided by General Electric. These four locomotives were initially designated 1T to 4T but redesignated Series 350 in later years. Aside from these innovative designs which continued to evolve over the following decades, the general task of replacing steam locomotives in all types of service remained as well. As a result, Renfe turned to foreign locomotive builders on various occasions as the domestic industry still had to catch up with a backlog of acquiring knowledge and skills. To obtain mainline diesel locomotives for general freight work – also to be able to work passenger services if required – Renfe contracted ALCO to build an initial lot of 17 Co’Co’ configured diesel-electric locomotives based on the DL-500 design. Originally designated Series 1600 and later renumbered as Series 316 when standardised, UIC compliant running numbers were introduced in Spain, these locomotives were delivered in 1955 and 1956. Initially concentrated mainly in Andalusia, the last 316s were withdrawn from Renfe service in 1993. In 1957 and 1958, Renfe had also received 24 Series 1800 – later renumbered Series 318 – locomotives which were mostly identical to the 316s but had uprated power. The last 318s were withdrawn in 1994. Of the 316s, nine were procured and returned to revenue service by various operators, while only one of the 318s was so retained. Specifically, ex-1601 and 1614 were purchased by PW builder and logistics operator Azvi; 1602 and 1610 by VIAS (not to be confused with the German passenger TOC operating in the Rhine-Main area); 1603, 1608 and 1616 by COMSA; 1604 by Portuguese operator NEOPUL; and 1617 and ex-318-009 by TECSA. One interesting fact about the 316s and 318s is that in spite of their typical American style body with a prominent nose on one end and flat "rear" end, all locomotives except ex-1615/316-015 – which had been the first to be delivered – were actually double-ended, with a fully equipped cab present on the "flat" end as well. 1615 is also nicknamed "Marilyn", though I understand this nickname having been extended to the entire series and to be related both to their, shall we say, busty appearance and, indeed, suave vibrations. The overall design is typical for ALCO diesel-electrics of the time, with a 1,327 kW prime mover and attached generator powering nose-suspended DC traction motors. Obviously, UIC buffers and draw gear were provided in lieu of AAR knuckle couplers, with the locomotives also being dually outfitted for vacuum and air brakes as the former type of brake was still used in Spain at the time they were procured. Although they were intended mainly for freight services, they were also outfitted with steam coach heating boilers. They were also outfitted with the typical Spanish lighting clusters, consisting of one large, central light – in this case consisting of two stacked lenses, replaced by a large single sealed beam lens on the 318 – and five marker lights. Given that the class does enjoy much popularity within the Spanish railfan community, it is probably no surprise that Electrotren came forward with a H0 scale model of it. Already released in various Renfe guises and with both the original silver livery with green trim stripes, the later dark green livery with yellow stripes and the 1980s/90s era "Taxi" livery of black and yellow, a special edition representing ex-1601, or 316-001, in its current appearance for Azvi was released for Basar Valira, who seem to be a fairly large hobby shop based, of all places, in Andorra. The DC version of it is marketed with reference 2408. While I'm not directly familiar with the prototype as of yet, the Electrotren model does seem to give a good representation of the "Marilyns." There are not many detailing parts to be attached – in fact, only the air horns and rear view mirrors. One thing I especially liked when prepping the model after unboxing it was that two pairs of bufferbeams are provided and can be swapped out easily in one piece – one with coupler cutouts and one without but with brake pipes and faux UIC couplers. Note that these Spanish ALCO locomotives retained the backlit running number boards typical of American motive power. I do wonder if the rear cab on these locomotives was similarly spacious as the front cab as I would think the gangway door took away some of the available interior space! I imagine it should look interesting running these locomotives with the flat cab in front. While looking at the bogies, my impression is that the frames seem to have been deliberately made of thicker plastic so as to give the appearance of broad gauge bogies, although the model is gauged for regular 16.5 mm H0 scale track. Also note there being separate access doors for the front cab and to the engine room. The braking information lettering is formatted a bit differently on these locomotives. Next to the forward door, there is a table specifying the 316's air braking gear to be based on a Westinghouse type valve with settings G and P, and braking weights of 58 tonnes for "G" and 62 for "P". Next to this, the rhomboid table indicates the maximum running speed of 120 kph. The table next to the centre door gives further braking gear indications: Service weight of 110 tonnes, vacuum braking weight of 62 tonnes, no separate indication for towed braking weight, and handbrake weight of 8 tonnes. Further lettering towards the rear cab includes indications for fuel filler and engine oil drain cock, as well as a table with the locomotive's TSI formatted running number: 93 71 1304 001-1 – highlighting that class numbers within the UIC-TSI system do not necessarily correspond to class numbers existing in the older numbering systems utilised in individual countries. In my impression, the model's paintwork and lettering is clean and crisp, and with a suitably flat finish that does not look too plasticky. I do wonder if the model could further profit from replacing the various grilles with brass etchings or some such materials from the aftermarket sector… The prominent fan towards Cab 2 is non-moving and perhaps that, too, could be an item for further tweaking? Dangerous thoughts, I know! And, as usual, a Youtube video for the finishing touch. Thanks for reading!