Izzy

Hacked servos As these posts are being made in near real time, a day or so after the actual construction, comments made don’t always reflect what actually happens next, but in the case of the servos did reflect reality. When it came to making the servos up, (they had already been ‘hacked’ previously and just needed fitting into a unit with the DPDT switch), I discovered that it would be possible to make them so the servo (horn) arms – the double arm type - would sit in the hole cut for the slider switches and so could then drive brass wire/rods connected to the tie-bars in a similar manner to how I intended to do with the slider switches. Instead of ply I used thick plasticard as the unit basis. The brass wire used was 0.7mm. This I felt was small enough to be bent to give the V shaped spring form to absorb the excess movement over that of the tie-bar without being too thin and ‘bendy’ over the length of the runs. An area of concern was that being bent or flexed too much can cause such hard brass rod to fracture at the area of greatest stress, the tight bend for the V. Moved by hand they seem okay and I hope it stays this way over the long term because once wired up and tested they will be covered over and access will not exist unless the covering, the ballast/scenery, is ripped off…… At the moment then it’s a case of so far so good….and Tamiya tape has been placed over the channels to prevent any debris accidentality falling into them and causing problems down the line by jamming things up. Now it’s onto the wiring, a necessary job that I never find inviting. Bob

I don’t know what motor/gearbox combinations DJH make/made but Tony Wright seems to hold them in high regard on his thread and using them when he can. Perhaps you could enquire there to get a general consensus. Bob

Point Tie-bars I have read that there are probably as many tie-bar designs in 2mm as the number of those modelling in the scale. That helps to illustrate I think the difficulty many such as myself find in coming up with one that is useful with different types of track construction. My particular requirements are to have ones that aren’t too obvious and allow the blades to flex/pivot so they sit firmly up against the stock rail yet don’t put undue strain on them or the tie-bars. Mainly down the years I have used under-sleeper types rather than under-baseboard ones with tubes in which rods soldered to the blades can twist/pivot. So similar in principle to the under-baseboard designs, but closer to the blades to try and prevent the flexing of the rods and tubes that can occur. But all these types can be a hassle to make and install. Now Exchange Yard sidings is mean to be not only small but simple to construct as well as operate. So I have been trying to make some equally simple tie-bars. An alternate type of tie-bar I have used is a PCB sleeper turned on it’s edge, with two small holes drilled at the right distance to take fine wire loops that are soldered to the blades. The copper around these holes is cut away to prevent them being soldered up solid. Having the sleeper vertical reduces it’s size impact while the loops can twist to allow the blades to flex. The only downside is the sleepers are still quite thick and a slot needs to be dug to allow them to move sideways under the rail. The depth under the rail in 2mm is roughly 1.2mm while a standard sleeper is 1.8mm wide and 0.85mm thick. Having gone to the trouble of making track with individual chairs I wanted to try and keep these tie-bars from looking too obvious yet be fairly robust. What I decided I needed was thinner PCB that was just the 1.2mm depth. So I thought I would have a go at using some 0.35mm thick double-sided PCB I had for loco chassis construction which I could cut to the right depth. Would they be too thin and fragile? Only one way to find out…. My attempts used 5amp fuse wire in 0.4mm holes at 8mm centres with a total length of 14mm. I cut isolating gaps offset from the middle on each side so they wouldn’t weaken the tie-bar too much. They have now been fitted, look quite decent, and seem robust enough. The wire was looped through and trimmed off at the bottom. Because the PCB was thin I didn’t cut away the copper at the loops in case it weakened them too much. They still seem to work okay with the blades seating nicely against the stock rails. In this shot, with nothing to hold the tie-bar in position, the blades are sitting in the mid-position. Having got these fitted I decided that perhaps I would just go with using DPDT slider switches to move the blades via brass wire rods running in channels cut in the cork. Doing this would be easy and simple while the wiring needed would be minimal. I placed the switches I intended to use on the board to see if their position were feasible and then cut the holes needed to sink them into place. Fitting one in and testing it by pushing the slider back and forth I was then reminded why I had changed to using hacked servos on Priory Road and Tendring. With a very light baseboard, as my layouts are and Exchange Yard Sidings is in particular, the forces involved often tend to cause the baseboard to move, there not being the mass there is with heavier boards to resist these. So I am now thinking of using hacked servos if I can work out how to do so with this tie-bar design. It was with this in mind that I then decided that in order to fiddle about with this idea I needed the pointwork laid properly in place. Looking at it afresh I then took the plunge and laid all the track built so far. Doing so by fixing down the track, still on the paper template, with wide double-sided tape. I thought it was worth trying out this method. Normally I would use white spirit/turps to soak off the paper template and then glue the track down. But with the plastic chairs on ply sleepers this can lead to sleepers, particularly the slide chair ones, coming away and needing re-fixing which can be awkward and troublesome to do. Leaving the track on the template solved that issue. So I cut the paper around each piece of track, treating the pointwork as one unit. Then I laid each piece separately. I found it quite quick and easy to do. The result is all I could have hoped for. The track is down very firmly. Indeed so strong is the bond I doubt I could shift it even if I wanted. So I’m glad I made sure it all went down in the right place since the moment it hit the tape it was fixed in the position instantly. No messing around with pva of some kind and having weights on the track while it went off. The electrical connections have now been made through the baseboard. Droppers added to the feeds provided with the pointwork. All these will get hidden/covered when the ballasting is done. The rest of the plain track can be added when I have more chairs to hand but for now I can try and work on fitting the hacked servos and getting them moving the point blades. I have no idea how to do this at present. I’m sure a plan will emerge as I make up the hacked units….. Bob

Looking through from the beginning it’s interesting to see how the plans are now totally different from how they started out and all the better for that. With regard to the points on the girder bridge how are they to be operated? You may need to move them off it towards the fiddle yard to be able to do so either manually or using point motors etc. Bob

As may be seen I've now changed the layout's name. Since there won't be anywhere on the layout that it features it's probably a moot point, but it's helpful in referring to it. Having finished the pointwork as far as I can take it at the moment I decided to make all the plain track. This started off well until I discovered I'd miscalculated how many chairs I had against how many I needed and this all hit the buffers. So a small order to shop1 has been made and in the meantime I will get on with trying to sort out the fiddle board/sector plate. This is going to use Easitrac bases, some of which I have left in stock. The very ends will use pcb sleepers and etched chairplates to ensure strength and height matching with the exit tracks, which will also use the same. In fact all the sleepers from the end of the bridge will be these, so the short lengths of track on the start of the fiddle board as well. These will also be used for the electrical connections. For the plain tracks in the sidings the connections will be made under the buffer stops, when they are fitted, so nothing hopefully shows. At this stage I am still totally unsure as to what method of tie-bar and point control will be used. I keep thinking through the basic options. 1. Totally mechanical using DPDT slider switches at the baseboard edge with a bit of brass wire rodding let into the cork and a visible tie-bar - I have used in the past sleepers turned vertically on their side fitted with soft-iron wire loops. I worry there isn't really the spare space for the switches. This would though all be quick and easy to install and simple to use. 2. My under-baseboard tie-bar system, which I have spares of, along with hacked servos, again which I have plenty of spare. A small panel with four switches would need to be fitted. Three for the points, one to turn off track power in the event of a short - running against a point! - which needs the power from the DCC system to change and can't be achieved with the track power on and a short cutting it all off. Have I explained that well enough? The concern with this is whether the pointwork could take the tie-bar system. The pcb sleepers being soldered to the rail gives all the strength needed, but the plastic slide-chairs probably don't. 3. The hacked servos with the pcb sleeper tie-bars. Not used these two in combination before. This might be a good compromise if I can work it out. and the prime candidate at present. However nothing can be tried until the rest of the plain track has been made. So time to think it all through. Here's the complete layout sat on the place it is primarily meant to be used on, the portable workbench. When in use I will remove the cutting mat/s so it has as wide a base support as possible. Bob

There is no ready-to-lay 2mm 2FS track, I think there might be quite a few people using it if there were! Peco track is 9mm N gauge, either code 55 or code 80. Both are flatbottom. Code 55 is 'finer' than code 80. British Finescale produce N gauge Bullhead in both N gauge and 2FS which looks far better, but these are kits not RTL.

Could I ask if this is for a pair of gates, and whether you already have a design to work them. It’s just that I think you will need cranks with a large throw to get reasonable speed movement, not too fast, and especially if they are to be worked mechanically and/or by hand rather than servos. The late John Watson’s design is a good one to use, which I have in 2mm. Just involves a fair bit of DIY. Bob

Is that the sound of experience I hear Ian ? Too solid even when not wanted 😁 The only problem is I prefer not to ballast until it’s all been up and running for a while and thus fully tested. I also use Woodland Scenics ballast and scenic cement which while it does hold it in place allows it to be scrapped away fairly easily. I am thinking that if I lay the track/paper combo using pva then this may soak through the paper and grab the ply sleepers. There are already a few lifting and not being firmly held in place on the paper so plenty of weights to hold it all down evenly in the correct places will be key. I already have one rail joint where the rails don’t line up vertically since the pointwork was originally finished yesterday. As yet I don’t know why this is so as this isn’t due to lifting sleepers. Investigations are ongoing ….. Bob

Building the track Well the pointwork has been basically completed and appears to be satisfactory. Much better than my previous attempt so far, although there is along way to go till the track can be properly tested under working conditions. For my second attempt at using the Easitrac plastic chairs on ply sleepers I thought that I’d follow the general principles that I have used in the larger scales. Use a few key attachment points to which the rails could be soldered to give strength and location combined with supplying the power. When finished half chairs are fitted to cosmetically disguise/hide them. I think following a method I am familiar with has helped to get a better result. Previously I struggled to get the track to hold gauge and consistent flangeways with checkrails that worked as they should. The locations I use are the first past the last slide chair, so the two rails, the stock and closure, are bonded together electrically and this also gives strength to the closure against the twisting forces involved when the blades are moved back and forth. The others are under the crossing nose and the sleeper behind it where the wing rails end. These again both support the crossing nose and bond the whole lot electrically which of course changes polarity depending on the throw of the points. All the turnouts are A6’s, but only one is straight, the other two being contraflexed to differing degrees to fit the track design. An aspect to note is that while it is often stated that an ‘A’ switch has 5 slide chairs, a ‘B’ 6, and a ‘C’ 7 and so forth, there are actually another two slide chairs of a different type fitted before the first fixed chairs. So using ‘A’s the location I bond them at is sleeper 8 from the point tips. Now of course you can’t solder to ply, plus the rail needs to be held above the sleepers by the same amount as the chairs do. In 4mm I used copper rivets to do both, provide a solder point and raise the rail away from the sleeper. For 2mm I decided to try and use the Versaline etched chairplates normally used with the pcb sleepers, but drilling them 0.3mm in their centre to take soft iron wire soldered into place. With a matching hole drilled in the ply sleeper the wire is threaded through so the plate sits on the top and the wire then bent over and pressed (squeezed with pliers) into the underside and run to the edge and beyond. This then retains the plate on the sleeper at a fixed point and provides the means for electrical connection. The sleepers themselves are cut from 1/32 ply which is just about the same thickness as the pcb type. It was a slow process using butanone to glue the chairs in place. You can see I marked the template with different coloured dots to remind me where the different chairs went. This helps when threading them on the rail. This construction was done on the workbench on a printout from Templot with the sleepers held in place on the plan with two thin strips of d/s tape under the rail line. A digital multimeter was used to keep checking the electrical connections remained good as the soldered track joints were made. A bespoke roller gauge was used, one made on the lathe some years back. This differs in that it has two square flanges at flangeway width (0.5mm) and wheel flange depth (again 0.5mm) set at the track gauge. The resulting look of the trackwork is pleasing even in it's raw state. As the three turnouts were together in a line I decided to try and make them as one conjoined unit for ease of laying on the baseboard. They will be laid first, and all the plain track fitted after as it's easier I find to 'adjust' plain track for alignment if any small errors creep in. This is my standard method of laying such track. The plain line track will also be produced using the chairs on ply sleepers to keep the look consistent. How all this will actually be done is still being worked out. This is because aspects like tie-bars and how they will be operated is still to be decided. There are a few options and I am unsure as to whether I will remove the trackwork from the paper template or glue it down as it is. I have read of others doing it this way, or even building trackwork directly onto the baseboard, but up until now I have always removed the track from the template and then laid it onto the cork. This can make it tricky as sometimes the slide chair timbers come loose. Leaving the paper in place seems easier, and especially in 2mm but I only tacked the sleepers down with the two thin d/s strips so I'm wary as to whether this may cause issues. Bob

If you are prepared to stick to Farish bogie diesels and DMU's then quite easy and simple using those parts produced by the association. They suit any Farish from the Poole era up to the latest spec to arrive. If you are not sure which to use then just ask on the VAG, ZAG, or here. There aren't drop-in sets for Dapol diesels at present, but I have read that some individuals are working towards producing these for the future. Bob

Not so far as I know Rich. I have just got around to reading the last Magazine newsletter where it is listed as one of those at the Derby 2mm Expo. For a brief second I wondered how the heck they knew I was going to build another layout and it's name before I did! 😀 Bob

I have just discovered that Alan Whitehouse has a 2FS layout call Exchange Sidings. I don't know how I missed this. Mine will never leave home but I think I will have to devise a new name so as not to cause any confusion via this thread. For the present I will simply add 'East' in brackets on to the end until I can come up with something else. Bob

Forgive me but I'm afraid I believe the 19.75mm figure is wrong. I have always generally gone with the minimum 22mm needed clearance figure. This is based around the 17.67mm btb plus 4mm i.e. two nominal wheel widths at 2mm, which AGW/Sharman/Ultrascale usually are, so 21.67mm. You can reduce wheel width to 1.8mm according to the published standards and I had to do this with my Hornby J15 conversion, which then gives 21.27mm, but again you need a lathe to do this...... and it would still be a very tight fit ....... It seems you can move the sideframes out to overcome this issue, but I'm wondering how this would impact the outside crank clearance. Move the cranks out and you could have platform clouting issues ....... it's all good fun.... Bob

Both sound and non-sound decoders can have various numbers of functions which can usually be assigned to whatever function is required. As RTR locos have become more complex in this regard the number of functions on sound decoders has steadily risen, over 30 in a few cases, but no two locos may use them in the same way. As a result a lot of DCC systems are unable to work with these, some older ones limited to 12 or 20 functions (a few basic ones even less), and the complexity’s of trying to remember each locos individual functions means many users are now favouring glass screen systems of some kind, computer screen, phone, tablet, where the complete number of functions can be displayed at once if desired along with a description of what each one is/does. Not only that but with those such as the Z21 I have recently switched to you can also choose in which order to display them, arrange them to your taste. So it doesn’t matter what Fn number they are, you don’t have to try and remember them or work off a crib sheet, nor messing around re-mapping them to a different order. So enter them once in the order desired and it’s job done. Then just use them. Oh, and with the best systems you can also set each Fn to be latching or non-latching I.e. switch on/off or momentary push button. Bob

The Track Plan As the idea was just to use three points the basic track plan didn’t take too long to generate. There has to be, or I want there to be, a run around loop so I can use it with just one loco if I choose. So that means it’s that plus two sidings. But the actual formation has only just been decided after trying a few different designs in Templot. Printing them out, testing with rolling stock etc. It was only three sheets of A4 a time, so it wasn’t too onerous. In order to help decide the basic way it would all work I have drawn up a full plan of how I imagined the sidings would exist alongside the main line both sides of the bridge. I also imagined there was a low bank between the running lines and the exchange sidings after the overbridge. All rather contrived but it all helped to set the scene in my mind. I made the assumption all points would be trailing. There would be a fairly long headshunt along the running line, and the line to the cement works would come off the loop. This then bought up an interesting revelation as regards the operation of how trains arrive and depart the sidings. Which would depend on the direction they arrived from, and departed too. In the down they would be propelled backwards both in and out, while in the up they would be as you normally see, loco first. Two basic designs have been drawn up. One uses a twin arch bridge with the tracks thus well spaced and the other a single arch with the tracks in a pair. I placed stock on both in turn and couldn’t decide which was best, would be more likely to have existed in real life. The reason for the twin arch was the idea this might hide the fiddle yard better, make it not quite so obvious. With this plan I also spaced the sidings out at the minimum distance used for sidings of 15’2” (so 31mm) rather than the minimum standard 11’2” used for plain line tracks. After some consideration I’ve decided to go with this design. I like the twin/multiple arch approach which I have seen used to really good effect on other small layouts when used for the same purpose, as the scenic break. As this is meant to be something to play around with in terms of trying out odd new ideas, for the track I have toyed with using the new British Finescale 3D printed base turnouts alongside Easitrac for the plain line. However, historically plastic based track and I have not generally got along. Indeed it was struggling with plastic based OO RTL track in the late ‘60’s that first pushed me to try making my own track. At this time soldered construction using rail on pcb sleepers was the latest thing to arrive. I never looked back. In later times I switched to using functional chairs on ply sleepers. At first this was with whitemetal chairs but when plastic moulded ones arrived in the 1980’s I changed to using them. This has been in several different scales, all somewhat larger than 2mm. I have in the past tried using Easitrac chairs on ply sleepers for pointwork combined with plain line Easitrac but the smaller size meant it was a struggle for me at the time, the pointwork, and so I reverted to soldered construction using etched chairplates on pcb sleepers. I did that for all the track to keep it looking consistent and matching. I have kept meaning to give it another go, chairs on ply sleepers, and so I have decided this is the time to do just that. To see if I can find a way to make it work. Whether I can or not it will be good to give it a try. So it may be a while before there is another post dealing with the track construction….. Bob

The baseboard. This has been constructed from my now normal materials of mountboard and 5mm foamcore board but in a sandwich formation. It’s a new method of construction instead of multiple layers of mountboard. A layer of 5mm foamcore covered both sides and around the edges in mountboard. This produces a lighter but still firm baseboard and as usual is covered in a layer of cork. Since this was to be another single baseboard design I thought a cantilever style plug-in sector plate fiddle board could be tried. As this would also be serving as the run around I have made it with the idea all the tracks will be live and it will just be lined up by eye. I don’t want to have to faff around continually sliding locking bolts in/out for alignment and electrical connection when it’s part of the general action rather than just for train entry and exit from the scene. All the tracks being live isn’t an issue with DCC. I suppose a rotary control switch could choose a particular track but again it’s extra faff and I want to keep the sector plate as flat and simple as possible for storage. Just sit in or on top of the layout cover – more foamcore. That’s the idea anyway. The size is 30” to the rear of the bridge while the sector plate is now 20” in total length with the sector being 18”. Width is still 7”. The total baseboard depth is 2" with another 2" to the top of the pillars. Internal depth is 40mm, just enough to take my hacked servos This just pushes into place and will also make the electrical connections for the track feed. The main board is now 36” in total length to give a 6” bed for the sector plate to sit on. So this section is lower by the depth of the fiddle board. This is again a mountboard and foamcore sandwich, but the sector plate is 4-layer deep mountboard as is it’s mating section which butts up to the main board. The front edges overlap each other, the sector plate undercuting the mating over-cut, to keep the sector plate down i.e. to prevent it rising up and loosing vertical track/rail alignment. Both these are of course radiused to that for the 18” radius curvature. I marked and cut one layer, then used that to ensure the rest matched up. The over/under cut is 7mm with a 1-2mm clearance between them. The pivot is just a round headed brass wood screw. After initial cutting and fitting the lips were both sanded down a bit with aluminium oxide sandpaper to get a nice jerk free running fit that wasn’t loose. That would stay where put given the set-by-eye track alignment to be used. All seems well so far….the proof of the pudding will be......as they say The total length of the layout with fiddle fitted is 50" A bridge? Well what else to hide the exits. Contrived. Oh yes. But it will also help hide the pillars needed for the cantilever part. These hold down the sector plate so need to have enough strength to take the strain of the weight imposed. It is hoped the sector board can also cope with this aspect and not bend and sag past that 6” support base. As said this is all experimental. To see how it all works and copes given the lightweight nature of the construction. The pillars were of course set so the sector board just slides in between them. To keep both horizontal and vertical alignment. Made and fitted after the making of the sector plate as this seemed the easier approach. Done in two stages. The sides first, and allowed to harden off/set properly and then checked, followed by the parts that make the cantilever, that hold the board down. Again glued into place and given plenty of time to set fully. The board was pushed in/out every few hours during the day to make sure it stayed the same, that nothing shifted. My experience with this type of baseboard construction using these materials is that over time the glue joints and the materials themselves become stonger/harder/stiffer as the moisture lessens. As with any paper/wood based material. But working with mountboard and foamcore like this can allow easy construction given it’s done just using scalpels and rulers on a cutting board. Nice and easy indoors with little or no mess of any kind. Just a bit of patience on occasion while the glue fully cures off with some joints, so overnight with things like the cantilever supports. As ever a glue like Anita’s Tacky PVA has been found to be best. The Range now do their own version which seems the same. Ordinary wood glue type PVA is too slow and too wet/runny to work I have found. Allows parts to move out of alignment and so ruins whatever has been done, which then needs re-moving/re-doing and can wreck things altogether. Although it was used to stick the cork down. This is used because it makes a good top surface on which to lay the track I have found but also acts as a barrier to prevent any liquid such as the Woodland Scenics scenic cement used to fix the ballast in place affect the mountboard. Track design next time. Bob

Thanks Mark, although I do think 2mm wheels would look better. I may try them in the longer term, but this conversion is economic to get it up and running and sidesteps the gear clearance issue. Extending the axles would only be needed for cosmetic looks really. The wheel hubs extend a way back giving good support. Plus they are an odd size, around 1.2-1.25mm ** if I remember. Once I discovered that I didn’t bother going any further with that aspect. I could have turned some up, but I am very lazy sometimes when there isn’t an imperative to do something. But do note the bearings as below. ** just remembered why there was axle size differences. The middle axle -with the gear wheel - was the 1.25mm one. No doubt to ensure a good tight fit of the gear. Made shifting the wheels on it much more difficult too. They both had to come off to alter the bearings…. Yes, after I had turned and fitted the 0.2mm flanges to the bearings and then turned them inside out to extend them further out from the chassis, so the new flanges sit in the slots, I did wonder if just reversing the bearings would have been sufficient on their own. Not sure. But you do need something extra on the outside, just using them in the right way around isn’t enough as you so rightly point out. The hubs fall out of the bearings then at maximum sideplay. There is no doubt these are lovely designed and made models that run so nicely. There is one in the classifieds at the moment for £65. What a bargain! Bob

Exchange Yard Sidings It’s strange sometimes how the acquisition of an odd loco or piece of rolling stock can start the development of a layout. Having obtained an NGS Hunslet industrial shunter my thoughts have naturally turned to what to do with it. I have long thought about making a small/micro layout to replace Odds End, (the test layout built around various bits and pieces I made when first starting in 2FS), that could be placed on my workbench. Something to do the odd bit of shunting on, test locos or stock when other layouts are not available and so on. And just have a bit of enjoyment making it. I then thought I would share details of it’s construction in case it encouraged others to consider trying their hand at making a small and simple, and not too expensive, 2FS layout. That the Hunslet body was blue started a line of thought about Blue Circle Cement locos and exchange sidings for cement works. I dug around for photos/info and read about the workings at the Blue Circle works at Claydon near Ipswich, the nearest location to me and one I had past many times during it’s working life. It was served by sidings off the main line north to Stowmarket and beyond, trip workings from Ipswich with coal for power and cement wagons and vans for the cement products produced. Needing to keep things small I decided that I could build an exchange sidings design based around the idea a resident Blue Circle shunter was used to transfer the wagons to the works, these being located a bit further away from the main line than was actually the case at Claydon. BR locos would of course bring and take them away, my thoughts revolving around the fact I had plenty of cement wagons, mineral wagons, and vans to use, along with a variety of green and blue era diesels. So the Hunslet has now been finished in erstwhile Blue Circle livery. I say this because details of their locos seem scarce, it seems they didn’t have many, and images are thus few in number. Of those found the liveries varied and so I finished it in a manner I thought it might have been had such a loco existed in the timescale covered, the ‘60’s to ‘80’s. When it came to having a name for the layout I decided that it had set that for itself. So it’s Exchange Sidings. As it had to sit on the portable workbench the overall length needed to reflect that. This had to include whatever fiddle arrangement was used. It couldn’t be very long so it balanced properly i.e. wouldn’t tip up when working the fiddle yard. Now I have long been an admirer of Ian Futers 3 point layouts and so wanted to try this with the concept of the fiddle yard sector plate acting as the ‘unseen’ half of the run around loop as is now quite common with small layouts. These ideas and requirements basically set the size of what the layout could be. To have a bogie diesel loco with around half a dozen wagons needs around 16-17”, so this set the sector plate length at 18” for a bit of wriggle room. I did consider using the diamond jubilee layout challenge size for the layout itself, roughly 9”x 24”, having played around designing the odd one or two in Templot, but it felt too short with perhaps more width than needed when it was just going to be a few lengths of roughly parallel track. So I set the desired width at 7” and the length at 30”. Apart from the width all these sizes altered during the construction of the baseboard and sector plate to make allowance for the actual design finally used. I’ll detail this next post. Bob

Z21 throttle app Having now used the throttle slider with a tweaked response curve I feel that using the phone is all I need. Just in case it might prove useful info for others here are a few details. This is the main throttle setting screen. If you set it to Normal then below is a edit curve option. This brings up this screen with four pre-set options of different curves at the bottom. With each one the individual dots can be moved, pulled around, to produce a bespoke version. I chose the second curve and then just altered the first two dots a bit. To use this edited version you just exit the screen using the 'return' arrow button top left. This 'saves' what you have set. If you click on any of the other curve options they all return to default. There is no way, well that I can see so far, to add an edited one as another saved version. This is the visible result. Using 28 SS - it's all I ever use, the first portion is just the initial few steps. So you get fine control of finger movement. 1SS 5SS This is set at 14 SS. It's 2/3rds of the slider movement. So the 14-28 steps have smaller movement where mostly it's not needed. With small layouts I rarely get above this anyway. I guess you could set a curve where the movement for the 14-28 is even less. So even more distinction for the lower ones. Whatever this seems a good setting option to have. Bob

Agree. Not so much discuss but sit back and enjoy for me. With them I did scrunch up my eyes and try and imagine it with the scenery completed. Looks wonderful….! Bob

Thanks, that’s useful to know. Until/if I manage to handle one I think I’ll probably hang fire on getting one so I don’t regret the purchase. Bob

I have just discovered the speed curves option in the normal slider position. A similar option to that of speed curves for motor control. That as well as the pre-set ones you can adjust any of them to suit. Stretching the lower values for finer control/ larger movement between speed steps is helpful I have found. I don’t want a tethered handset of any type but I have no idea how responsive the WlanMaus is with its rotary knob. Or even whether it’s a potentiometer or encoder one. It looks like it’s centre off so most probably the former. Bob

NGS Hunslet industrial conversion to 2FS Having acquired a NGS Hunslet and converted it to 2FS I thought I’d detail the basics for anyone tempted to do the same. It was an unexpected purchase but one that has proved worthwhile. A very nice loco for extremely reasonable cost at today's prices. The basics are that it shares many general design features with the other Farish locos featured in this thread, a coreless motor, split chassis current collection with pickup through the axle bearings, but also has a dedicated DCC decoder with stay-alive fitted and is able to run on both DC and DCC to choice. Here's the loco split down into it's main parts. You'll have to accept I only took this shot part way through the conversion. The axle bearings are the same size as those used in the Farish locos, so replacing the wheels with 2mm SA 2FS wheels/bearings/muffs produced for them is possible. The only drawback here is that due to the chassis design there is minimal clearance on the rear axle for the gear train, and thinning the muff is required. Coupling rods would need making up somehow if not reusing the originals, which it has to be said are chunky depth wise but very thin. I might try a ‘proper’ 2FS conversion this way at some stage in the future. However to keep things simple for now I have chosen instead to re-machine the wheels, thin the flanges to 0.3mm so they pass through 2FS flangeways. Because of the particular design of the wheels, different to the Farish which are mazak castings but similar to those used with the Sonic J50, it has been found that reducing them in overall width is not really feasible. As a result I used a small round nosed tool to just thin the flanges inwards towards the hub. A result of using the wheels at a wider b-t-b has been that the axle bearings need widening/moving outwards so the wheel stubs don’t fall out of them in any sideways movement. This has been achieved as I originally undertook with the Jinty by producing 0.2mm brass washers which were soldered onto the outer faces of the bearings, and then the bearings fitted into the chassis slots reversed, so the inside faces then become the outside. Re-machining the wheels also meant there was no cost to this 2FS conversion. Besides this I also made some changes to the loco body livery, and replaced the N couplings with DG’s. Cosmetically I decided to finish the loco as one owned by Blue Circle Cement. This was prompted by the blue finish of the body as bought. As the body is plastic and could be separated from the cast metal footplate, and the cab is a separate painted clear moulding, I took them apart and sprayed the footplate black all over. The nice handrails are easily pushed out of true with handling, so care must be taken when holding the loco. Mine came loose and careless attempts to secure them with runny cryno left blobs on the cab. So I removed them completely before spraying the footplate, stripped them of paint – they are N/S etchings – and painted and re-fitted them later. I then cleaned up the cab before putting all the bits back together. The Blue Circle logos on the cab side were printed onto white inkjet transfer paper sealed with ‘Ghost’ matt spray varnish. The yellow warning stripes on the buffer beams were more transfer paper, but given a coat of Revell enamel paint before cutting into strips and applying. Trying to inkjet print yellow just didn’t work. It was far too pale, just no colour depth, and almost unseen. A wash of dirty black was applied over the body to highlight the panel details etc. and further weathering with Rowney pastels to represent a coat of cement dust which it would undoubtedly have will be done when I get around to it. Bob

Yes, you can. Just press and hold down the Red 'stop' loco button. This will engage the circuit breaker/ short circuit as with a normal detected short. It will stay like this until you re-press/hold down this button which will then re-set the base/command station and return it all to normal.

Thanks Nigel, that sounds interesting, I did wonder if the handsets alone could connect this way rather than the whole system, which would mean yet another mains plug/supply which I wouldn't want. But the long term intention is probably to sell off all the PA2 bits anyway, the basic system, the wi-fi handset, the wi-fi adapter for tablet/phone, if there are any takers. At the moment I have just discovered the speed curve adjustment response for the throttle slider in the Z21 app which is proving interesting to use. Bob