martin_wynne

Hi Lee, It is difficult to answer these questions without having the kit in front of me. It is very difficult to find specific information on the C&L web site as to what these kits actually contain. But as far as I can see: 1. The only ready-made crossings on the web site are marked for 00/EM and must therefore have 1.0mm flangeway gaps (otherwise they wouldn't work for EM). See: http://www.finescale.org.uk/index.php?route=product/product&path=346_370_371_372&product_id=3221 2. The only 4-slot 00 track gauges on the web site are for DOGA-Fine (16.5mm track gauge, 1.0mm flangeways). See: http://www.finescale.org.uk/index.php?route=product/product&path=346_375_376&product_id=3346 IF (maybe it's a big if) both of these items are supplied in your kit, then NO, it is not suitable for standard out-of-the-box RTR 00 gauge models. But only you know if that is what the kit actually contained. The reason it is difficult to be sure is that C&L change things from time to time. For example they seem to have changed their 00 back-to-back gauge recently -- see: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/94567-oo-sf-and-oo-bf-can-you-mix/&do=findComment&comment=1736088 What you haven't said is whether you want to use DOGA-Fine or not? If you have already widened some of your wheels to 14.8mm then you have to carry on and widen them all -- you can't mix them up on the same layout. If you don't want to widen your wheels then you can't use DOGA-Fine. In that case the way to proceed would be either: 1. obtain a full set of 16.2mm 00-SF gauges and print a new template for 00-SF from Templot, or 2. continue with that 16.5mm template and crossings, but use only the outer slots on those roller gauges. Ignore the inner slots. Obtain a pair of 00-SF 15.2mm check gauges from C&L and use them to set the check rails. regards, Martin.

Hi Lee, Sorry to hear that. I hope it doesn't cause too much damage putting it right. Are those C&L track gauges in the photo? If so did you intend using those -- they are for the DOGA-Fine standard (16.5mm track gauge with 1.0mm flangeways). Which would mean widening all your wheels to 14.7mm back-to-back (for RTR wheels) or 14.8mm back-to-back (for kit wheels). RTR wheels won't run as supplied over DOGA-Fine tracks, they will jam across the check rails. There are other options which don't require RTR wheels to be modified. I don't want to repeat it all again here because I seem to be writing this stuff over and over again on RMweb. If they are not C&L gauges, apologies, please ignore the above. regards, Martin.

Hi Paul, You didn't need to do that. Templot can do all that and more. Click the sketchboard button, top left: Also, the platform can be included as part of the track template and doesn't need to be added afterwards. Like so many others, you have tried to start by designing your actual layout, instead of learning the software first on some scrap track plans. Knowing all the things Templot can do makes it much easier to create what you finally want. The double-slip could easily have been made to fit, if that's what you wanted. regards, Martin.

That crossing vee is the wrong angle and doesn't match the template. It should be 1:6 and looks more like 1:5. Either 1. C&L have supplied the wrong one, or 2. You have mixed them up. The 1:5 vee is intended for the middle vee (the first one starting from the blades). From the blades the order is 1:5, 1:8, 1:6. regards, Martin.

The last time I went in for a bottle of milk I came out with a Wall Map of the World for £1.99.

It doesn't actually say "temperature-controlled", i.e. thermostatic. The control knob may be just a triac power control, similar to a lamp dimmer.

Hi Paul, I doubt that you have really lost it. By default Templot doesn't overwrite old files. Try main > file viewer to find it. If you didn't save any files, try main > storage box, then files > restore previous or restore prior-previous. regards, Martin.

Hi Paul, See this video: http://templot.com/companion/index.html?add_slip_roads.htm Or alternatively to play it in the Templot video player you can download it from: http://templot.com/fbr/ladder_single_slip_v2.fbr If you get stuck, please post the elapsed time or a screenshot of the video frame which is a stumbling block. edit: p.s. I should warn you that a 1:6 slip in 00-SF is going to be quite tight and will require significant shortening of the K-crossing check rails. Be sure to select the 1:24 (A size) slip switch for a 1:6 slip. p.p.s. Thanks for posting the screenshot as it's showing some bugs in the toolbutton icons under Wine. I will get that fixed. regards, Martin.

Hi, I can't be sure from your screenshot, but I think you have the Y-turnout in the yard with a regular-type V-crossing. It needs changing to a curviform V-crossing for best results. This is often the case for turnouts with negative curving (contraflexure) when they are not part of a crossover. For more explanation see this page of the old tutorial: http://templot.com/martweb/tut5e.htm Note that's a very old page, for "curved" now read "curviform". The setting is at real > V-crossing options > curviform V-crossing. Martin.

Hi, Click help > watch a video > single slip. Adding a second slip road to make a double slip should then be easy to work out. If the menu item is blank, first click help > obtain video list. If still no joy, go to: http://templot.com/companion/index.html?add_slip_roads.htm Martin.

What are you trying to do here? The Templot .box file can be attached to posts on RMweb if required. Martin.

Hi Martyn, There are several options, but the quickest is: 1. adjust your screen to show what you want. 2. click the output > make a trackpad screenshot... menu item: 3. you will then see this: 4. click make screenshot image. 5. you can then choose where to save it in the usual way. The default location will be the C:\TEMPLOT_DEV\IMAGE-FILES\ folder. 6. upload it from there to RMweb. regards, Martin.

Hi Larry, Your own version is the better one there, so whatever you did -- carry on. The RMweb Image Editor has got it to 237KB, your version is 277KB. The advantage of lower compression over your previous post is very evident. The RMweb Image Editor is using a softer resizing function than the uploader, and ideally needs some sharpening after resizing. But they are both showing far less compression effects. regards, Martin.

Hi Jeff, Yes. Don't lay any track until it is the right size to fit. However, if you must cut it in situ, break off a short bit of junior hacksaw blade, say about 3/4" long. Hold it firmly in a pair of pliers -- ideally parallel-action pliers or maybe small Mole-type grips. Work it against the side of the rail until you are through. Hold a bit of scrap wood against the other side of the rail to support it. It's not instant, but doesn't take too long. There will be some damage to the ballast, but easily repaired. edit: p.s. If it is steel rail, be sure to vacuum up the metal dust -- otherwise it will end up attached to motor magnets in your locos and generally cause problems. Ditto for nickel-silver rail ideally, otherwise you may get strange shorts. The same applies if using a slitting disc. regards, Martin.

Hi Gordon, Model rail section is not prototypical -- the rail web is far too thick. Your track gauge is not prototypical -- it is significantly underscale. Your flangeway gaps are not prototypical -- they are significantly overscale. Using copper-clad construction your rail is flush to the timbers -- prototypically it should be 1.75" above them. Having accepted all the above, having the rail the unprototypical way up is a small extra thing to accept. The reason it matters for others is that if you are wanting to use plastic chairs, they won't fit on the rail upside down. But you aren't using them. By the way, in the early days of UK railways bullhead rail was symmetrical. The idea was that after it was worn on top it could be turned over and used again. The idea failed because the worn head didn't fit the chairs properly and the chair indentations on the top caused rough running. If you were modelling in P4 there might be an additional problem. The corner radius on the rail top is 1/2" and on the bottom is only 5/16", so it might run a bit tight to gauge on exact-scale wheel profiles. However, most model rail section is not very accurate, and in even in 00-SF there is still plenty of side freedom with 00 wheels. If it was me I would want to get the layout up and running first, and come back and rebuild them later. Maybe. regards, Martin.

The reason for that has little to do with the image size in pixels, it is caused because Larry (coachmann) has set rather too high a level of file compression. That image is only 93KB in file size, whereas for good viewing on RMweb images typically need to be in the 200KB - 300KB file size range to contain sufficient detail. Likewise the smaller image is only 73KB. Larry, try setting a lower compression level. Your fine models will then look much better without the effects which Anglian mentions. I don't know what software you use, but if you can't see a compression slider directly, try selecting "print" rather than "web" as the compression intent. Alternatively, use RMeb's own image editor which makes it easy to set the compression level -- see: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/86885-putting-a-photo-on-rmweb/&do=findComment&comment=1482354 edit. p.s. the Image Editor is now listed under the Apps & Content tab at the top of every RMweb page. regards, Martin.

Hi John, I agree, it's not a very clear analogy. Perhaps we should look at other meanings of the words. For example the dictionary gives one meaning of "toe" as: "The lower end, tip, or point of something". Martin.

Hi Mike, The problem is this post from grandadbob: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/93768-kenton/page-11&do=findComment&comment=1725461 It is linking to this animated gif from: http://www.sevenoaksart.co.uk/special/wotnoemails.gif If you click that link to see it, and then go back to page 11, it may work (cached). If not, try changing to Firefox. edit: that image server is badly configured, hence the problem. Martin.

Hi John, Think of the side view of a foot, not a plan view. . The toe is the thin/narrow end. The heel is the thick/wide end: From: http://www.doctorsecrets.com/ Martin.

It seems clear enough: http://lwmrs.co.uk/CMS/index.php/exhibition-layouts-63/96-sutton-folly-oo-1960s-ish-british-railways although none of the layout URLs make sense. Martin.

A tip for ERs on the radio this morning. When asked your age, quote it exclusive of VAT. 55 plus vat sounds much better than 66. Martin.

Hi Jock, It's a scam. Some of us get a dozen similar emails every day. The best advice is "delete and forget", it only takes one click and half a second. Trying to do anything about it will drive you mad. Two rules: 1. A genuine email will always be addressed to you by name "Dear Jock", not "Dear valued customer" or similar. 2. Even if it's genuine, if you are not 100% sure just delete it. If they really need to tell you anything they will do so the next time you log in on their web site. If you paid for the computer it now belongs to you, not the people who supplied it. You don't have to do anything, install anything, create an account, tell them anything, if you don't want to. regards, Martin.

Anyone seen the drawing? Who had it last?

It was featured in a series of articles in "Model Railway Constructor" in the 1960s. I re-read them several times.

Ed, just to "keep" a car you don't need any of those. Just SORN (free) on the web site once a year. Actually, my post was in jest. Martin.