Vonzack

Are the DB Red versions here to be sent out? 

I'd love to see a class 91 and Mk4's done with modern tooling, such a shame that the Cavalex project didn't go ahead.

Another vote for the 325s too, would definitely have some of those.

Not sure the advice to go directly to Gaugemaster for the replacement interiors still applies, I approached them today and was told to speak to the retailer themselves (Rails).

Just info for anybody reading the thread and going straight to Gaugemaster as others have.

Edit

Just an update, I had a message from Gaugemaster today saying people who need interiors are OK to go to them directly if they wish.

Wow, been after one of these for so long, thanks all involved.

Waiting for my FNA Wagon Kit to arrive now for something to haul 

Tracking says mine is out for delivery 

I think this is a great choice of wagon, one I'm definitely interested in getting a few of for Heworth.

A question to @Ben A / @red death, given a full rake of these is likely to be 20+ wagons. If the design has ballast weights, would it be possible to make them removable if not required?

Cheers, Mark.

15 minutes ago, Steven B said:

Ben, next time you're chatting to Draw could you ask why they went for a hopper rather than a tippler?

I think hopper discharge is generally faster than tippler. As the biomass needs to be kept dry, would you get covered tippler wagons?

If you look at a Satellite view of Drax, you can see a rake of these wagons just prior to being unloaded. The 4 large domes are where the biomass is stored.

I bought a few of these to run as a modern charter train with 68s, but the bogey mounted couplings seem a retrograde step. I'd expected them to be similar in design to the Mk2a's but it looks like it's been a fresh start from the design team.

Yup paid for mine yesterday too. Looking forward to these.

I made a similar request on the Dapol Digest for the NMT coaches, but with the Gaugemaster announcement, I would say the prospect of Dapol doing them may be further away.

Hi @Peter J,

I have had exactly the same experience with the wagons, it's really disappointing.

I want to run a rake of 21 wagons, but I can't seem to run more than 6 or 7 without the coupling being unreliable. @gedlee's post is interesting, but we shouldn't really have to be doing things like this to get them running well out of the box. I've swapped the Rapido couplings on mine for the Dapol dummy knuckles to close the gaps between the wagons and these usually sort some of the traditional coupling issues out. However it looks to be the design at fault in this case, the NEM pocket drops down on a small angled arm and I think this deflects upwards under tension and the wagons just uncouple. If the wagons were lighter this might not happen, but even a small rake quickly seems to overwhelm the coupler arms. Dapol do seem to prefer using a kinematic coupler, but I wonder if these would have been better with a more traditional NEM pocket attached to the wagon bogies.

I posted an exploded view of the wagons on the N Gauge Forum, so you can see how they are put together here - https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=43805.msg588274#msg588274

Hope you get your issues sorted.

Cheers, Mark.

Shown out of stock at the moment though. Try an ebay Search for the above NEMCOUP

Hi,

I think @ChrisJM reached out to me via the YouTube video, so I hadn't seen this thread until now, but I'll copy my response in case it's of help to anybody.

Quote

Nothing special at all Chris but I tend to use a Farish 60 as in the video. They are a bit heavier than a 66 or 57, so you get slightly better traction.

 

Also those end curves have a very generous 3ft6 radius. If you are struggling, check the wagons roll freely, on the TEAs there's a small piece of the underbody that can foul the wheel flanges if it isn't clicked home securely, one of mine had this.

 

You could also look at removing or reducing the weights they have in the tank of the wagon, if you're careful the end without the ladders will unclip easily to allow access.

 

Hop you get it sorted.

Cheers, Mark.

17 hours ago, Roy Langridge said:

 

But sometimes people think a big white duck is a goose...

 

Yes it resembles a 142, but to some of us it looks like a bad 142. I think the point is, we had generally gone beyond the point where basic shape errors in models was acceptable.

Roy

Are they basic shape errors, or are they design/cost limitations. I think what we see with the 142 is the later and maybe Dapol should have been upfront with people about what they were getting. Certainly seeing all the PCB through the windows didn't go down well either, but where else is it going to go in that model?

Well, I couldn't resist another Northern Rail one at £60 and as far as I can tell, nothing at all wrong with it apart from the outer Dapol card sleeve was missing.

I ran one at the Lincoln show and there were allot of people pointing and saying oooh look a 142, I didn't hear anybody complain about the Tumblehome or windows. if it looks and quacks like a duck, well it's a duck.

Another vote for the 'shrink ray'.

There is a thread in the Rapido section for these. Ben said on the 15th March that these were in production currently. Shouldn't be too long now.

Cheers.

My Northern 142 runs very well and has already had it's first Exhibition outing for the Lincoln & District MRE.

I can see me having a few of these to go in my RevolutioN TEAs.

This is fantastic news, been hoping somebody would announce this in 2mm for years now. Where do I click?

Would like to see a GNER liveried version, as it stayed on them for a long time.

@bridgiesimon - Sorry no real update on the PXAs at the moment. I should have some time to pick all this stuff up now. I'll produce some of the brake gear, but will probably print it inside the wagon to keep the volume to a minimum.

@Marbelup - I thought the ripples were support residue too when I got the print as I'd seen something similar on the FUD Binliner containers, but it can't be removed and it is the actual surface. Weirdly and I think you can see this from the pictures, the insides of the wagon are smooth as are the buffer details and the top lip of the wagon side. I think on the 4th picture down, you can see where I've attacked part of the side to see if it would rub off. It's the only print to date that I've received like this and allot of my models have large flat sides, so I think it's just a printing glitch. When I order the next test print, hopefully it will be correct.

@Snowwolflair - I will have to give Heptane a go, is there one in particular you use?

Cheers, Mark.

Oooh, sound fitted 60's I will be looking forward to, as long as they are still hefty, got to pull those Revolution TEAs.

HKA's, visually for me, the main difference is the brake wheel is on the wagon side on the HHA model rather than the bogie as in the EP image. Looking at images on the web though, the majority of HHAs seem to have the brake wheels on the bogies. I guess the new tooling is to allow the fitment of buffers for the outer ends more that anything else.

Not sure about the re-run of the Voyager without it being re-tooled. No NEM pockets on the ends, fiddly couplings between the coaches of the set and it wasn't really geared well for me.

One of the easiest ways I've found to run our Exhibition Layout is to use a laptop and the free JMRI Software to talk to our Digitrax Command Station.

Setting routes on JMRI is very simple and you can then either action them from the defined list, or create a Panel with appropriate buttons.

The main benefit of us using JMRI though, is that we can pre-allocate throttles for all of the loco's in the Fiddle Yard at the start of the day, so there's no Acquiring and Despatching of loco addresses to be done for your operators. They just run through the list of loco's until they find the one they are wanting to run and open the throttle, it may take a few attempts to get used to the JMRI Throttle, but it really is quite handy for shows where you need to keep things moving.

Any shunting at the front is then done on a Digitrax hand throttle.

Cheers, Mark.

Finally got round to fitting my DR4088LN-CS detection modules and have to say they work every bit as well as the BDLs from Digitrax do. Simpler wiring as they do not need a separate power supply or the connection back to the Command Station Ground that the BDLs need. Also having screw terminals really helps and they are quite compact compared to the BDLs too.

Programming was easy, just a button press with the track power on, then set the base address, then another button press and set the number of sensors. In operation on LocoNet, they respond in exactly the same way as BDLs do, so Board X Sensor Y High/Low etc. I guess if the base address doesn't align with a BDL Board, then the unit may report the sensors as different BDLs, but there is no information in the manual covering that.

The only real difference is that the BDLs support 4 power zones of 4 sensors each and the Digikeijs have 2 power zones of 8 sensors.

Cheers, Mark.