34theletterbetweenB&D

I do exactly as Dominion suggests above for wagons and there is no trouble with slightly overheight Kadee coupler tails magnetically uncoupling using Kadee's permanent magnet and electromagnet uncouplers. And were there any trouble, slightly straightening the trip pin would sort it. No adhesive, but some measurement is required, method/bodge. Assess where Kadee coupler head needs to be positioned ahead of the NEM pocket mounting for the item it is being fitted on, to identify a Bachmann cranked tension lock that provides a 'platform' at correct height of sufficient length, which may be modified to take a pivotting Kadee coupler head. Cut off all the tension lock parts, thin the resulting 'platform' so that it fits snugly in the horizontal slot in the rear of the Kadee coupler head, adjust length as required, drill hole in the platform to take the hinge pin, and assemble. (Typically I drop and lose the Kadee pin, so usually it's a piece of 'Florists' soft iron wire as a substitute pin.) Those I did for an original Bach class 40 on my layout have put in over fifteen years trouble free service, and a few others I finagled for friends at much the same time have generated no failure reports.

Should have phrased the question better! Has any brand offering DCC fitted / sound models ceased offering a DCC ready option ?

Undoubtedly the case, increasing functionality on offer to tempt the punters to pay more. Has any brand offering UK subject models tried going to market with no DCC ready option? That would be a natural development. That would be me, the gorriler of 3B; and any contemporaries of like mind. Though it is not for maintenance as such, and there is method in my madness. I want to inspect the model's mechanism design and general construction with a view to detecting any weakness, making improvements and alterations to suit my operation, and in some cases assessing it for redeployment into a different body. The 'have it apart inspection' only commences once the infant mortality test running is successfully completed, typically within three days of the item being in my possession. Since 2004 I have not had a single mechanical failure on a new RTR OO purchase that would require a replacement part, and the two items requiring spares for repair of faults found within a week of purchase were obtained without any diffculty, one each from Bach and Hornby via the retailer, (long retired) but that's information now 20 years out of date due to lack of mechanical failures to 'test the system 'since. What remains weak in RTR OO in my experience are the electrical arrangements. That's where most of my 'improvements and alterations' now occur on the mechanism as designed and assembled. Here my experience is expanded by frequent purchases of s/h 'non and unreliable runners' mostly from a large, famed, and now departed trader. Not once was there any fault in the mechanical side, all of the trouble was electrical continuity in what looked like the original arrangements, unaltered by previous owners. It's an ill wind that blows nobody any good. Credit where due, my last half dozen new RTR OO purchases spread over four brands, were adequate as supplied in this respect, four (steam tender locos) have been altered by choice to better accord with my ideas, and two (tank locos) are unviolated. This is a significant improvement over the situation just ten years ago.

I cannot be the only one that has attempted what is drawn and/or described, only to conclude that it is at least in part the product of imagination, in proposing unnecessary or damaging actions, while ignoring those that are essential. As for total absence of any instruction or diagram, my interpretation is one of two alternative messages: Really, best not, even though it is the only way to access the decoder socket and mechanism. We are so delighted with the elegant body attachment that you will be too - once you work it out. But topping my Grrr list is the use of some randomly selected number of subtly different screw types, which must therefore be carefully laid out to ensure they are reinserted correctly. However, overall there has been a trend to improvement over the 25 years since good RTR OO became the norm.

"We are aware some users may be experiencing slow performance. We are monitoring and investigating this." This is very generous. The NHS can't tell me where my personal oomph in third gear has gone, so alternative opinions are most welcome. (It needed two goes to successfully kick a football back over the nearby primary school prison style fence yesterday, in case that helps the diagnosis.)

I would 'apply to source' if that is practical: may yield all sorts of useful stuff.

If you suspect it had little to no prior operation and you have as yet not given it much track time; I would suggest a couple of hours running, alternating direction every quarter hour or thereabouts, may satisfactorily 'quiet' the mechanism by distributing the factory lubricant in the gear train. The mechanism design is inherently quiet running, if some noise reduction isn't apparent within the first hour, then would be the time to look inside. Not to discourage you from taking the top off for a look inside - and it will be necessary for decoder fitting if that's on the to do list - but my fumble fingers always knock off a piece of underframe detail; fortunately repair is simple.

It's the G5 I have, and apart from an 'eccentric' pivot arrangement for the bogie (very easily altered to a simple pivot on the bogie centre) it's a lovely piece altogether: and performs!

I have been a little surprised at the lack of comment from the Southern interest concerning the desireable construction of Bachmann's two fairly recent 0-4-4T productions. These have a well thought out construction and mechanism layout, largely diecast ahead of the rear driver axle, plastic body to the rear, gearbox on the rear driver, light coreless motor to the rear along with the decoder location. The centre of mass is thus within the coupled wheelbase, resulting in stable traction. That's the way to do it!

Ah, now I thnk I understand: you intend fully modelling the splashers, so that each wheel will be between the inside and outside faces of its respective splasher? Modelling this is typically not attempted in OO, because of clearance constraints and 'invisibility' on many subjects; other than wheels under the cab; where you see that the cab floor is grossly constricted in width. More readily possible with EM, especially with early locos where the small diameter boiler and an open cab leaves the inner face of the splasher on view. As already mentioned artfully nudging the positioning to make for the best achievable appearance is all your own work!

I presume that's caused by the wall thickness of the material, starting from correct exterior dimensions of the splashers, that results in the 18mm dimension. (Consideration of the interior radius of the splasher will also be required to ensure these do not foul the overscale flanges.) Before any questions of whether the drawing is correctly dimensioned or further 'how to' planning, you need the maximum width dimensions of the planned OO and EM wheelsets, including balance weights and any side rods and crankpins that move inside the splasher; and an allowance for side to side movement of the wheelsets which allows the model to move around the planned minimum radius curves. Realistically, you may be looking for an alternative thin material choice such as etched metal sheet, to fabricate splashers which will be only slightly overscale in external width once placed on the EM model; the OO gauge compromise typically allows correct overall width.

If the user advice is to solely use cold potable water directly obtained from mains supply - drinking water in short - I think they are covered. It is water that is heated and then left static below 50C that promotes potential growth of the bacterium. Amazingly, given the prevalance of showers and doubtless a great many flaky hot water systems in private accomodation, we don't have an epidemic: so the risk must be miniscule.

The good news is that the model runs; and the implication of this is that it is only a poor connection somewhere resulting in no power to the decoder and/or motor. To find out where to concentrate the search, first a question. When the 'poke of a finget' is required, is the sound playing or silent while the loco isn't moving? If the sound is playing, then the fault must be in the motor power circuit from the decoder to the motor, including the interior parts of the motor. But if the sound also starts only when the motor starts after poking with a finger, then you are almost certainly looking at a fault in current collection from the pick-up wheels contact with the rails, via the pick up wires and all the connections to the decoder. It is often very helpful to 'go back to basics' in solving such a problem, which means disconnecting the decoder, putting a blanking plug in the socket and using a basic DC controller for testing, if you have one available. This is because the DC controller can be set to a much smaller output than the permanent full power of a DCC system output, making it far more sensitive in detecting where the poor conductivity is located.

I feel you made an effective start: 'poor, old' never ranks very high in interest, add 'and mutilated' and that completes the sorry story.

In addition to the good advice above, check the controller too, if the rated output is less than 1A per controlled channel it will be liable to tripping out. A great many had this trouble when Heljan's class 47 emerged in 2001, and the CoCo mechanismn of your Kestrel has the same design layout.

On the theme of undervaluing kit builds, today's purchase of an immaculately constructed and finished DJH S&DJR small boiler 7F 2-8-0 in LMS livery. Under £50 for a subject not available from RTR! Although sold as a non-runner, I was confident that it would work due to the wear on the wheels and its immaculate tidiness. And it does run - only very sweetly - perfect.

The pacifics required a 70 foot turntable, thus a through train might have a pacific in regions where these were available, but it would come off to avoid going much distance into a region without 70 foot turntables. Pre WWII from the LNER Southern area Ivatt atlantics, B17 and B12/3 4-6-0's were used for through workings off the LNER to the South and West, with photos of such locos at Oxford, and post war the B1 4-6-0 was the usual traction.

Once a country or region has the majority of its population educated in school to age 18, with a competent technical management team, light industry can be introduced and brought up to full output in three years is the established rule. (This will even work in the UK once the global economy is uniform, but that's several lifetimes away... )

I am pretty certain that this will be achieved with an ultrasonic nebuliser, widely applied to make mist and fog effects for a range of purposes.

I am likely not the only one redistributing the bogies on the recent Thompson coaches around the inherited LNER stock working on my version of BR(ER) to this end. And there will be more of the same around my BR mk1s with the most welcome range expansion there.

Definitely so! All previous versions have been significantly lacking in the vital matter of being an overall convincing model. This new introduction 'gets it' sufficiently well to be worth purchasing and going to work on it, for an ordinary filthy LMR workhorse.

Thus it isn't going to happen any time in my lifetime, was the conclusion I reached in 1999. Up to that time I had been planning my 'last grand project' using HO, North American flavour, for the reasons you describe, enabled by crossing the pond very regularly. But I really wanted BR(ER) in the final decade of steam. And then Bachmann started with scale models of two absolute essentials, the WD 2-8-0 and BR 16T minerals, produced to the standard of a competent kit builder. Not as sophisticated as RTR HO, but good enough for me, since it it integrated well with my DIY UK models various. And the situation has been generally rosy since, but quite often two steps forward, one step back occurs... Those retrograde moves have to be corrected and/or campaigned against.

Properly engineered isn't present in respect of these devices in RTR OO, on the evidence to date. Now, by your own admission you are not interested in RTR OO; but I am and thus feel quite justified in twaddling on. You can probably avoid seeing my future wastes of words by a user selectable setting. 😎

A reverend gent came up with the DUFA corporation, whose product was the holes for toothbrushes; seems as good an option as any...

That's very mild, coming from one of us, what was the charge 'Internet Taliban' 😉