DCB

Maybe that is a possible revenue stream for Hornby, spares for older models , which seem to last for 50-70 years even if their recent efforts don't. The Nellie/Polly/Connie locos seemed to start with a black loco with solid non see through wheels a steel strip chassis with Mazak spacers rivetted in, unique I believe for Hornby and an X04 motor, 2 start worm small worm wheel (same as transcon ) Later they received separate steel tyres and much later shiny plated tyres. Some plated tyre ones have a huge dome and some have a Can motor similar to contemporary Scalextric cars, not as good as an X04 similar but not the same as 101 smokey Joe etc.. The Romfrord 30/40/60:1 gear sets fit the chassis and X04 as does the Triang TT single start worm for slower sub 100MPH top speed. Its a pretty little thing but could not be built as a full size loco as the firebox would hit the crank axle and the connecting rods would foul the leading axle . It needs outside cylinders and ideally outside valve gear unless the drive was from the front axle a la Dolgoch I am planning stretched 2-4-0T versions which would have leading axle drive from inside cylinders for my 5 X 2 00 gauge layout. and maybe a non stretched outside cyl 0-6-0T version.

Maybe vape oil might work, if the cars full of vape fumes are anything to go by Has anyone ever heard a shoveling sound from an actual steam loco actually in steam let alone actually running? The sound of shovelling precedes the glow of the door opening when working hard when the glow is more a brilliant flash. This weekend recording locos on the NYMR P3 ( J27?) Std4 Tank and Black 5 shows the background hiss of boiling water is the dominant sound of a steam locomotive, the hiss of escaping injector steam, steam leaks sizzling safety valves. To be fair they don't sound anything like any DCC sound, but that's because the sound is synchronised with loco speed, where the pulses should be synchronised with wheel speed and the volume by the operator, depending on whether accelerating, pulling hard, coasting or just powering along gently.

It's the interface issue. But the real thing which irritates me is the unrealistic operation DCC enthusiasts think is good. Full size Trains can't creep for extended periods unless Slow speed fitted for MGR operations , but they can stop to the nearest 6" or less so coaches never move when couping up. I am working on sound, So many sound locos chuff like they are pulling 400 tons when running light. Real ones usually give 4 or 8 chuffs then coast. But its the interface. I want a speed control knob Hand held one handed. ideally wireless. Everything else can be on the console, Whistle button would be nice

Please give one example of a suitable controller or pair of controllers , where two operators can operate Railway traction similar to two cars being operated on the same lane of a Scalextric Digital track.

My first train was Hornby Dublo 3 rail and I had two Duchesses and an 0-6-2 tank The tank would just haul all my 17 (?) wagons around my not exactly level layout at a crawl but stopped dead if it slipped, very realistic. The opposite to most RTR where a burst of wheel slip gets a stalled train underway again. What I want from DCC is a capability for me to drive the train engine and my son drive the banker independently, rather than to consist them. I am pretty sure we could do it with Scalextric DCC Hand throttles but I'm not aware of any Model railway DCC equipment giving that sort of immediacy of response.

Someone could get a lot of free publicity for naming a loco inappropriately. Or a gasp at an exhibition when it or even 7930 "That's Hall" appears. They say you can't rewrite history but we modellers can. 70014 painted name Iron Duck anyone? My layout has posters for Harry Markle and Anton Deck appearing at the local theatre

There is something about a loco drive steamer easing away with just a hint of a slip , or judging how much wellie you can give it without excess slipping which the clunky Railway DCC does not fit well with. Its not a DCC issue, Scalextric DCC hand throttles are great, but no one seems to make a decent real time speed control for railways. I keep planning something I call "Protoslip" for a Bullied where the drive is shared between a heavy tender and a light loco powered from the sae motor with a differential so it the drivers slip the tender loses power. The gulf berween whats possible with DCC and what the trade churns out is well sad. The Tender drive shown has traction tyres. I banned them because they make the tracks so filthy

My layout has hardboard projecting above the baseboard surface to stop stock falling off so leaning on it is painful. Leaning on an exhibition layout is sheer bad manners, why it might damage the static grass or fencing which should like the railway boundary!

The signalling problem comes from the illogical track layout. I would expect the milk dock point to be operated from the signal box, locked in the straight position when either starter or home signals are off. But I would not expect the station to have a milk dock. Milk was typically dealt with at passenger platforms, loaded and especially unloaded., off peak in London. It was a fairly quick operation, rolling churns around on their edges prior to going to tankers. The dock would never have a "Train" enter, just a few wagons propelled in. "Dock" platforms are often higher than the 3ft passenger platform maximum to make loading vans easier.;

Why? He and Fuller, potentially saved millions of lives by inventing Blitzkreig in place of WW1 style trench warfare.

I think operationally a std 4 point BLT would be more interesting. The sidings are very short, very awkward, and there is nowhere to put anything out of the way, sort of like a chess match unless you want to model BR steam circa 1965/7 with 3 wagons and a van. @Harlequin's solution is a lot more user friendly and visually better, though I would have deleted his short spur behind the goods shed as being little use. In practice the tracks are so close to the edge that there is no real room for even low relief scenery, trans might actually hit the wall. It's too cramped. At present I am constantly moving the goods shed on my terminus "Ugleigh" not on software but physically moving it around the baseboard as what looks good on paper dose not translate to looking "Right" on the baseboard.

The 3901 was one of Churchward's few failures. He saw the French compounds, thought I can do better than that, and made the Saints, they pulled better but rode worse so he built the Stars, and then when everyone else had moved to Atlantics and 4-6-0s he said "Bring it on," and built the "Bear" He saw LNWR 2-8-0s and built the 97 and the 28XX, much better, but when Hoy on the L&Y brought out his 2-6-2 T which was supremely ugly Churchward said "I can do uglier than that" but failed (Just). The 3901 was on paper a rebuild of 1890s 2301 class Dean Goods locos. Churchward wanted to build 45XX but new build money (capital) was not forthcoming so he used the repair fund to "Rebuild" Dean Goods retaining the wheels, /cylinders / motion etc with Churchward's 44/45/46XX tiny Std no 5 boiler and a 45XX cab and the ugliest tanks he could devise. Even though the 1890s Dean boiler was not as good as the final 2301 or indeed its progeny the 57XX there can be little doubt it was a better steamer than the std no 5. It's so much bigger. and the final 2301 boiler was much better than the Ivatt 2MT boiler when tested in the 1950 when they tried to replace 2301 with Ivatt and 78000 2-6-0s They were as were the 42XX 56XX 31XX 3150 etc , But lets face it who checks the height of their locos from rail level apart from me as my clearances are minimal and ridiculously over height Hornby King and 2721 won't fit my hidden sidings. But caveat time. Churchward locos had wooden cab roofs overlaid with (tarred?) canvas. Collett changed this to steel sheets which lowered the roof, most dramatically in the new build Prairies starting 6100 which earlier locos were altered to conform, but even the 42/56/72 XX had this change. It affects the cab eaves which almost every model gets wrong, Bachmann 56XX spectacularly so, as the drawings would not have changed. Changes started circa 1929(?) and were unpopular with enginemen from my reading of Engineman's reminiscences. The model has the Airfix City of Truro boiler. The Airfix smokebox is too big in diameter for a std no 2 and too small for a std no 4 and is much larger than the std 5. 45XX That sort of hurts the illusion, massive loco tiny boiler. as do the photographs with the 45XX (should be same boiler) and 81XX (built 5 years after last 3901 scrapped) which emphasises the issue. For me the lack of curved drop ends to the footplate is noticeable but lets face it you would need to be around 100 to remember them so full marks for creating something different.

Looks like a Taxi service from the free car parking at the Junction as by the station its pay and display or supermarket (Morrisons) 3 hr max. Or... The Mallaig trains are often 4 car 2 X 2 units and the Glasgow 1X 2 car units . The units arrive as a pair from Mallaig and one remains at the buffers while the other heads for Glasgow picking up another at Crianlarich to arrive at Queen St as a 2 +2. At some stage the units need to be swapped so the same one does not continually shuttle FY to Mallaig until it runs out of fuel.

You need to measure your stock. N gauge is notoriously over width, about 12 scale feet instead of 9 on some "Heritage" models but you should be safe with 1" per track plus around 1/2" at one edge very much as @Dungrange suggests. I can't really get my head around why the sidings are between tracks and the three running lines so widely spaced, I would have the sidings outside, actually I would have a train lift one or both ends based on a Nellyvator but bodged with junk from a skip to suit my budget (Virtually non existant)

If you must have an engine shed, why not have a disused one.. I was de cobwebbing my BLT today and decided that it made a lot of sense for my one and a half Airfix engine shed to be rendered "Disused" and rented to an Engineering firm,