Izzy

Perhaps the first awkward task, if you're not familier with either machine, is sorting out the tooling and bits that are appropriate to each. Some will be easy, others perhaps not so. There does seem to be a wide selection of extras for the Unimat. As you say the Hobbymat is quite heavy. For those who don't know, the lathe is quoted as being 45Kg. The Mill head is slightly lighter at around 30Kg. Izzy

I believe the first Deltic shot is basically correct as regards depicted colours, there is no obvious colour cast cause by the film stock or lighting conditions, and the leading coaches teak/brown in tone. The second shot has a noticeable majenta cast, indicating that perhaps this was taken on Kodachrome, of which this was a feature. Remove this in a photo editor and the blue of the Deltic becomes the kind of faded blue often seen after a period of use and exposure to sunlight/weather, but the coaches are obviously maroon/crimson&cream. I would thus surmise the first was taken early in it's life, hence the mating with the Gresley's, the second much later. Izzy

I'm not sure what you are intending to do about the front carry wheels/axle, but might I advise against making it spring/rock/move if the front drivers are fixed. There is no point in having it rock alone if this is fixed, and if you spring it then unless you get the rate just right, which can be tricky (but not impossible), then the tendency can be for the loco to become a 'nodding donkey' and lifting the rear drivers. This is especially so in 7mm where in general more weight is involved than in the smaller scales and particularly so in this case where the overall wheelbase is short, and the distance between the front axle and carry axle is minimal. Personally I'd either leave it fixed solid, or use twin beam compensation allied to the front axle, as has already been illustrated. You don't have to use drilled axle beams though. Stiff beams resting on top of the axle bearings are quite good enough and all made simply from rod/tube. Izzy

For cutting the sleeper gaps in 2mm I just use a new/sharp scalpel. My standard 3 handle/11 blade combo. Easy to get into the smaller spaces as well. Use two cuts side by side and the copper between will come away. As the cuts aren't generally so deep, just the copper depth on average, it's easier to hide them. Often a coat of paint is enough. Izzy

Should mention my remarks concerned etched kits in the main. I rarely build whitemetal bodies and - forgive me - tend to glue them together (cryno) when I do. I also glue w/m amd brass Chimmnys and domes in place. Terrible I know....but I have never had an issue. If you want to solder then I tnink this is another case where a 25/40 watt with a small tip would be used. Izzy

Even with kits (especially with kits!?) I tend to try and do a dry run basic assembley of the chassis and body parts to ensure there are no nasty surprises waiting to catch me out, such as areas where things don't mate together well. It can occasionally happen with the best of kits and be overcome if you know about them beforehand, but be difficult if bits are already assembled. As far as soldering irons go, for 7mm I have always used a simple/crude Weller 75watt with fairly large tips - of 1/2" dia - since even thin brass in 7mm can become a bit of an heatsink and it's the resoviour of heat that you need as much as the actual temperature. Only with small detail parts are 25/40 watt irons with small tips of much use. Izzy

Great display and presentation. A wonderful advert for 2mm. You must be very pleased with what you have achieved, I know I would be. Izzy

Seeing as how you're fitting compensating beams to the driving axles, and I apologise if this has been covered somewhere and I've missed it, but have you considered going one step further and using split axle current collection on the bogie (and using it's outside frames as compensating beams)? I have always found that with 0-4-4T's it makes one heck of a difference to reliable running and goes hand-in-hand with compensation. Just a thought ....you know....... Izzy

I have to say I have found no noticeable advantage with regard to pick-up with DCC over DC. You still need clean wheels/track. The benefit as I see it, at some cost, as others have said, is the ability to tune each decoder to the motor used, since each one is of course a separate controller. The 9v DC battery controllers seem to give quite good control of all motor types from what I have seen. Keep meaning to get one myself for evaluation, ( I like the option for alternative power source), but I am not sure whether to try a DCC version instead/as well. Izzy

With regard to using foamboard for baseboards, I have been experimenting with a sandwiched construction of foamboard layered with artists mount board as a harder skin. This seems to work okay and as well as giving a bit of extra strength means small screws/pins can be driven into it. Although a single foam layer is fairly firm, two is much better - with a mount board layer between to maintain the sandwich construction. To protect the edges though, which can easily be bashed in, thin strips of mount board are also glued on. What I like about this is the lack of mess. Just a craft knife, cutting board, straight edge, and PVA. Izzy

In my experience Evostick is the only glue I have found to hold them long term, that can absorb the shocks when they bang against each other, since it's a bit rubbery when set. With other glues that set hard, cryno, epoxy, etc, the glue joint tends to fracture. If you solder them in place before painting just remember not to get paint anywhere near them. I just use Birchwood Casey blackening on them. Izzy

Even though I had one on order with Hattons I was unsure whether to get it, especially when the price rose (although Hattons kept to the pre-order price) and having had issues with the previous versions I bought. I am glad I did though. The improvements are substantial, but subtle in some areas. The new chassis, correct cab handrails, better fuel tank, more detail on the bogies, correct size wheels with the proper A1A configuration. The only area where I feel it is worse is the fan. The etched version isn't nearly as good as that on the old one, far too coarse and hiding what may be underneath - I can't see any detail below it at all. Izzy

With all the changes and modifications that are being carried out on these, as several said they might try it, has anyone attempted to correct the boiler handrails yet? Or is it considered a step too far, that it would look worse than leaving alone. Izzy

Hacking servos by removing the electronics and using them as simple stall motor devices has been done quite a lot. Look for the threads here. Although the current draw is high compared to a commercial stall type, at around the 1.5-3v mark it's workable and reliable if momentary power is used. I've done it with digital servos using centre-off switches and gear jamming to set the rotational arc limits. Izzy

Ah. I thought it was a footplate inspector in a hi-vis just making sure all the work was in order.........but of course such vests weren't around in those days, silly me..... Izzy

Probably got a few spare with all the pre-orders that have apparently been cancelled! Izzy

Sounds rather like my new Farish 4F................ Izzy

I'm afaid it is a joint line between the body and chassis. The basic design is very similar to the new Farish 4F I have just obtained, which has the same issue, and is very noticeable, well to me anyway. It rather spoils all the effort that goes into models like this with masses of detail when something basic such as this is so prominent. I am not sure what the answer is in regard to hiding it. Perhaps some soft filler like plasticscene which once painted/weathered won't show too much, but won't damage the body/chassis or prevent them being parted should it become neccesary at any time, and can be re-done fairly easily. Izzy

In 'Branchlines to Clacton/Walton' there is a shot of it at Walton in April 1957 and although the number and shedplate are clear to see it certainly looks as if it could benefit from an 'oily rag' at the very least. Izzy

I thought it looked a mite odd, then realised that the frame design is quite old, and the rear is cut away for fitment of a X04/MW 5 pole motor, the standard used for many a year. How times change. Izzy

Hi All There is a chapter on Leighton Buzzard mk1 in the first WS book I referred to in an earlier post. As originally built the station was on two boards of the size Tony states with the goods shed on the platform headshunt. There was no engine shed. It appeared at the 1958 MRC show where the folding nature of the design was demonstrated. Later on, when Buckingham was installed in it's railway room another board was added on the fiddle yard end to facilitate connection to the rest of the layout, and the engine shed was placed on this board at the end of the other siding off the run-round. A version of Tingewick looks very similar, but with the goods shed on the road off the run-round and not the headshunt and might be being confused with LB Mk1. The folding design is one I copied for my minimum space P4 layout All Saints back in the 1980's, and which I find a very clever design concept which I continue to use today, currently with circular layouts in 2mm. Re-reading the LBmk1 chapter now has reminded me of the neat and simple method used to transfer point control movement between boards, a pushrods with return spring at the point tie-bar - using rubber bands. Apparently this was also used quite a bit on Buckingham itself. The wonderful KISS principle at which he excelled, and which neatly solves a design issue with my current 2mm circular layout build for point control. Izzy

I was pleased to have a Buckingham 'fix' recently with the update that Tony wrote for the first issue of the Finescale Railway Modeller Review. Still inspires me in ways others don't every time I see shots of it. Perhaps because it seems like keeping in touch with an old dear friend, which it is really for me since the first time I saw it in RM in the early 60's. Izzy

I've just been looking at the first WS book (Peter Denny's Buckingham Branch Lines PT1 1945-1967), and the caption on photo 81/p102 states that the new turntable installed in 1960 came from the exhibition unit, photos of which, 74/75/76, are shown on p94/95 and depict a two road shed with the turntable and coaling stage. Could this possibly have been re-vamped into the current loco shed diorama (I have no idea what this currently looks like of course) after the turntable was fitted into Buckingham? Just a thought. Izzy

Isn't it just. I never did get to see Leighton Buzzard then despite my best efforts, but I did Wallsea, and ended up in 7mm and a member of Martin's happy North Essex GOG group for some years. Taking up the challenge of 2mm in more recent times I made the trip to the Nottingham show a while back to see the group of 2mm layouts that had been assembled for that year including Fencehouses, and had the absolute bonus, and joy, of finally seeing Leighton Buzzard. Not only that but my wife and I managed to view it early on the Sunday before it got too busy, and had almost a private viewing as a result with no one else around - as well as a nice chat with t-b-g and his helpers. What more could you ask for? Happy memories, all of it. best regards Izzy

You may be thinking of the MRJ Exhibition, it was in November 1990 at Central Hall. Izzy