Derekl

I have a new system (installed 15/06/3023) with 2.5kW panels and a 4.5 kW battery. I have noticed, if the monitoring is correct, that the panels can generate a little more than 2.5 kW. Mostly, much less. The battery runs down to about 75% overnight and recharges in a few hours in the morning. That "run-down" includes cooking which is usually later than any significant charge. My hob and oven are electric, so there is some evening use. I have taken to using washing machine and dishwasher latish morning or afternoon when the solar is generating, although I am not sure whether it has any effect one way or the other - if charged, the battery "pays" for it. For some reason the system imports small amounts of grid electricity - I am not sure why, so while the solar generation and battery seem to cover my use, the imports amount to about 0.5 kWh per day. It is exporting quite generously, but I am not getting any advantage (yet) as the system is not registered. That should be sorted in the next week or so. So, in summer, and with the battery, it seems to cover use. I will have to see what happens in winter.

This is my submission to Transport Focus as part of the "consultation". I hope it is of some interest: The proposal is to close ticket offices and redeploy ticket office staff to concourse and platforms. The ticket offices will be repurposed for retail or staff use. I primarily use Wivelsfield station and my observations are associated with use of that station and the other destination stations I use. The purpose of the exercise is said to be to save money. 1. The practicality seems to me poor. The idea that a person roving the platforms and concourse (where there is one) is easily accessible because they are on a platform or concourse rather than a ticket office seems to me misplaced. How is a person wandering around the station easier to locate that a person based in a ticket office, where all know that advice is available? Specifically at Wivelsfield station, the chances are that the assistance would have to be supplied at the ticket machine, which is unpleasantly located and exposed. Far better to get the advice in the booking hall from a person comfortably seated in a warm office. Roaming the platforms at Wivelsfield would simply be a waste of time and reduce accessibility as there are two separated platforms – you need the advice before you get to the platform. That observation will apply to many smaller stations. 2. I use the machine to buy tickets when I know what I am getting – that is for a routine trip. Otherwise, I get advice from the ticket office. This can be worthwhile as the ticket office often is aware of cheaper fares not readily available on the machines or internet. For instance, on a recent trip from Wivelsfield to Heathrow, the internet and machine offered a fare in excess of £20, whereas the ticket office proffered a Wivelsfield to London Travelcard at £10.80. The reason “only” 12% of people use the ticket office is likely to be that others are undertaking routine journeys and now know what ticket to buy having had advice previously – the ticket office may have queues (or partial closure) encouraging use of the machines, which at some stations are more prominent than the booking office. 3. The above is exacerbated by the excessively complex fare structure which requires a substantial knowledge of its vagaries to obtain the optimum fare. 4. A further problem is the prospects of existing well informed staff finding the new arrangements unsatisfactory, possibly because they will be unable to provide a decent level of service (see 1 above) or because they find the new working arrangements less than congenial. How will they be replaced? 5. A large problem which will need to be addressed if this proposal is to go ahead is how to deal with those who currently use ticket offices as a result of disability or inability to use the machines (or internet). These proposal seem simply to abandon those (a substantial element of the passenger traffic). There may also be discrimination issues for those with disabilities. 6. The proposals are said to save money. It is unclear how. All the stations in Sussex that I have checked propose to have staffing at the same hours as present. That will thus require the same level of staffing as at present, so it is difficult to see any saving, although the cynic might think that existing staff will not accept the new conditions and can thus be replaced with cheaper. In addition, some traffic is likely to be lost (as 5 above) reducing fare income. Overall, it does not seem to me that this proposal has been thought through or the consequences fully appreciated. It is not a good idea as currently constituted.

Yes, fumes, and see above about decanting into smaller bottles. The idea of around a litre of MEK floating around the floor doesn't appeal!!

Yes, I decant from the larger bottles to small bottles (taking care) and I stand the bottle in one of those foam supports used to support paint tins.

I bought 1 litre of MEK from Shiny Hardware Limited (SHL). I don't remember what I paid for it, but I see it is now listed at £7.80. In use, it is much as the Slater product, perhaps a little stronger, but precautions should be taken. The sell larger quantities as well. The also sell IPA at reasonable prices.

I watched and was surprised at the overall quality of the programme. There were detailed interviews with people who seemed well informed. I could not see that it was "full of" factual errors. It is always easy to nitpick with one or two fairly minor errors in the overall scheme of things. Whatever GWR did pre-pandemic, it would be naive to argue that TOCs (in the period prior to the pandemic) were not profit motivated. That is their function and that was the intention of privatisation. Overall, the point was that we have a largely inefficient railway at great expense, which is the effect of the ill-conceived privatisation. I thought it well made.

Currently slow progress - it is my first effort using a Silhouette cutter, but has sort of got sidelined by various other projects. I will try to remember to post when I do get around to them.

I am building those as well (although progress is slow). The picture (b&w) in Bill Hudson's "Through Limestone Hills" suggests a uniform dirty stone colour. The woodwork, such of it as is visible, looks similarly uniform (the wooden doors all look similar). Hope that helps.

I have just joined this select club through Solar Together. Once the installer (Infinity Renewables) contacted me, it was surveyed and installed within a week. There are 6 panels totaling 2.5 kW with a 4.5 kW battery. Been running since around 2pm last Thursday, so it is a bit early to make many useful observations. I do not yet have a feed in tariff (there is a registration process, apparently). Despite that, it looks like the system is uploading excess (as I can't see where else it is going), just I don't get paid. So far, I have used 2 units of grid electricity since the Friday, the rest being from the panels and the battery. Yesterday was a bright warm day and it generated just over 16kW, today not doing so well - quite heavily overcast here. The battery seems to retain most of its charge - it was down to 77% this morning, but I think when I made supper last night it was still generating sufficiently, so the battery use was running incidentals, the fridge and the TV for a period. Charged up to 100% by about 10:30 am, even at the low rate today. So far very encouraging. It seems quite clear that it will cover what I need and more during the summer period. I should mention that my use is fairly low at about 1550 kW annually. It did occur to me that it could be used in winter to run a heater in the train shed for a period each day, which might be useful. Comments above about the use of air conditioning prompted a similar thought for summer.....

I had a look on the John Lewis web-site. The expensive AEG says it is 3000 Watts, but whether that is continuous is not clear. The cheaper Meaco is just over 1 kW, again, possibly not continuous.

I have used PVA which seems to work.

Yes, and then try a rail replacement bus service using city style single deckers. Aisle full of cases in no time flat with the driver saying that's it, no more for safety reasons. Left about 1/3rd full. Clearly whoever arranged the replacement buses thought that through.

I am not sure that most appreciate what the creature comforts are likely to be on the various classes of train when they buy a ticket. Once on board, I guess they pick these details up....

How can you tell from the handset (or elsewhere) what firmware version you have?

Peco makes it now - I have only seen it described as the curve radius.

I have noticed that Wi-Fi on Thameslink (on the Brighton line) is variable - it tends to slow down as the train gets busier, presumably because there is a limit to what the system can cop with. On fairly empty trains it is fine. But when you consider that most buses in this area are Wi-Fi equipped, you would expect trains to meet that standard.

Mine was installed professionally about a year ago - the distance is about 1.5m and it is 2.1m above ground level. That may be of assistance. It is overhead supported by catenary.

At present, the owner is liable. That is why all the automated programs require the driver to pay attention and be ready to intervene. Of course, if the thing does something it really ought not to (that is, malfunctions and renders intervention difficult or impossible), then the driver's insurance may want to investigate taking the liability back. The issue will have to be addressed when we do eventually get fully driverless vehicles - probably some arrangement will have to be made probably to render the suppliers liable, but there are complexities here, as I think you are pointing out.

Thanks, Spamcan - I will have a look and see if that works, although I ma not sure how easy it is to r4emove the coupler bracket.

Hi Redgate, thank you for your help. It is part no 350-138, but it can't go in from the top. There is no access from the top and in any event it is obstructed by the coupler bracket (350-129). Onbe way of doing it would be to glue it in, but that doesn't seem right to me.

And the top of the bogie - this sits under the bolster.

Here is the bolt and the "nut". It will go into the slotted hole, but sits loose.

Looks like photos may help, after all. This is the bolster onto which the bogie should be affixed. The slot is clearly visible. It is only open at the bottom, not the top or sides. The "T" bolt, pictured next below, will go in, but sits loose - there is insufficient clearance to turn it.

Thank you - I think that is right - the problem I have is that the nut into which the screw is fixed is loose - it is an odd "T" shape. There is a slot in the chassis into which it fits sideways, but then it can't hold there. If it could be turned, the long arms of the "T" would hold it in place, but it won't turn. I wonder if it has broken off. The Bachmann diagrams aren't sufficiently detailed to help. But thank you for responding.

I acquired one of these - 32-359A - from Hattons as "Used". In fact, it hadn't been and was new. I foolishly (and unnecessarily) removed the rear bogie in order to remove the body and fit a chip, which I have done successfully and re-assembled the body and chassis. The problem is I can't work out how to re-fit the rear bogie assembly. There is a small coil spring, plus a screw, odd shaped nut and washer. Does anybody now how these go together, because I can't work it out. Pics won't help, it needs somebody who is reasonably familiar with the assembly. I need an idea of what goes where in what order. Many thanks in advance for any help