Dungrange

Some photographs of the remains of a wagon that caught fire in 2003 on the Washwood Heath to Bathgate service - https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-burnt-out-cars-are-inspected-in-the-sidings-of-oxenholme-station-near-107332857.html I'm not very up on wagon types, but these look like the IPA wagons Bachmann produced. That livery unfortunately was only available as a collectors club release. I'm also not sure if the entire train was made up of these wagons. I'm not sure precisely which year you're most interested in, but Network Rail have made historic Working Timetables available on-line at https://history.networkrail.co.uk/uncategorized/SO_4b13306b-816a-4d77-89ec-630d6beb2680/ Select the timetable period that you're interested in and then it gives access to the full archive of Working Timetables for that date. The Scottish Freight timetable is GF. That should give the pathing details for every Scottish Freight train at that time, which includes the traction type and assumed tonnage used to derive the path timings. However, it's no help with regards wagon types, numbers or lengths - I think you are reliant on photographs for these. I think the problem with finding photographs on-line is that digital photography wasn't as common in the mid-2000's so there are fewer pictures on-line for this period than say post-2010 or post-2020.

I can't answer your question directly, but I do have a copy of the Freightmaster book for Spring 2004. Bathgate - Washwood Heath service ran with Headcode 6M85 TWFO - the train is described as EWS 66 with empty cartics/flats Washwood Heath - Bathgate service ran with Headcode 6X38 SO - the train is described as EWS 66 with French cars Lackenby - Dalzell service ran with Headcode 6S58 SX - the train is described as EWS 60 with loaded steel (slab) Dalzell - Lackenby service ran with Headcode 6E30 SX - the train is described as EWS 60 empty steel Dalzell - Lackenby service ran with Headcode 6E28 SO - the train is described as EWS 60 empty steel There are no details of a Hartlepool - Leith service in the Spring 2004 book - just a Hartlepool to Inverness service, which was 6X88 TThO described as EWS 60 with loaded pipes. Not sure if the headcodes will help you find suitable pictures.

Details about the ESU lighting sets are available at https://www.esu.eu/en/products/interior-lighting-sets/ntt-h0-digital/, which indicates that the decoder can be read from a programming track. The ESU manuals for their coach lighting strips are online at https://www.esu.eu/en/downloads/instruction-manuals/interiour-lighting-sets/. Of course it's possible that as an after market product, whoever fitted it didn't retain the default values.

If they are Electrofrog points, have you used insulated rail joiners on both rails that form the common crossing (the frog) as per the instructions for Electrofrog points? You need to ensure that you are always feeding points from the 'toe' or switch end, which means an additional set of feeds in your loop, which is the reason for needing to separate that loop from the 'main line' through the use of insulated rail joiners. Assuming that is the finished track plan, then you would actually only need four insulated joiners (ie the ones in the centre of each crossover). Edit: As @Jeremy Cumberland points out below, you also need an insulated joiner on the outer rail of the inner loop to avoid the short circuit that would result if only one of the mainline points is set to the loop, which makes the minimum number of insulated joiners five not four.

I was just looking at the same document (https://www.gersociety.org.uk/images/stories/documents/Modelling_the_railways_of_East_Anglia_in_4mm_Scale_Issue_8_February_2021_final.pdf) Dart Castings do buffers, but none are specifically highlighted as GER pattern - https://www.dartcastings.co.uk/mjt.php#WagonComponents-Buffers The only other suggestion from the GER Society is Model Railway Developments. I can only see a Facebook page for them, but you could enquire by either e-mail or through Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/people/Model-Railway-Developments/100064054482394/

I think you're looking for a needle in a haystack. This website (https://wrennmodelrailways.com/product/engine-outlet-store/l-n-e-r-locomotives-1/Bachmann-a4-pacific-2510-quick-silver-lner-black-model-31-962-78/) states that R3308 was a Limited Edition of 1,000 models. That means 1,000 A4 models and 1,000 certificates were produced. Most of the 1,000 certificates produced are probably in the hands of people who own one of the 1,000 A4 models produced. There are obviously a few models without a certificate (ie you own one) and therefore there may well be a few people who have a certificate but no longer have the model (presumably the same number), but that might be a very small number (possibly a single digit number). There won't be a website with certificates for all models in stock. Presumably the site that you highlight has the certificates that they do from buying a job lot from a now deceased railway modeller. Into their possession comes a number of certificates with no matching locomotive and they are therefore sold on without the locomotive, as someone may want them. Finding a certificate for R3308 will therefore just be luck. The certificates matter to some people, so I understand why those you have contacted have not been willing to separate the model and the certificate. I guess the question is how much is the model worth with the certificate and how much is the model worth without the certificate? The difference is the value of the certificate and for most people looking to sell the model, they won't know how much less it is worth if they sell the certificate to you. It may be that the only way for you to get a certificate is to buy a model with a certificate and then sell the model without the certificate. Whatever loss you make on these two transactions is the price you pay for the certificate.

If you have a DCC programming track, then I'd say the best way to test for a decoder is to actually try reading CVs when they are on the programming track. That will not only confirm which ones have decoders but also which ones have working decoders.

No. A locomotive with a DCC chip fitted should run on DC provided DC running has been enabled in CV29. It will just need a higher starting voltage. It is the opposite that is the problem, you shouldn't be running a DC (unfitted) locomotive on a DCC layout.

Looking at https://revolutiontrains.com/projects/wagons/borail-mullet-parr-super-tench-masterclass/ all the photographs seem to state 'photo courtesy of XXX'. The only exception is the last one, which was obviously taken by a member of Revolution Trains staff of one of their employees. Where are the images that don't respect copyright?

What period do these liveries represent? I'm assuming that the 'London Transport' livery is post 1933 and the 'MET' branding is earlier.

It's not just fares - look at all the threads announcing price rises from model railway manufacturers (or even just the 'ridiculous' cost of new models). That's not unsurprising, as the cost of motoring has fallen and so has the cost of flying. Indeed a lot is cheaper now than it was in the past. As you rightly highlight, a century ago a very high proportion of people spent most of what they earned on rent, heating and food (ie the basic essentials) and an annual trip by train to a coastal town would have been a luxury (even in third class). Many of the equivalent people nowadays don't want to work any harder (ie they want more leisure time) but they also want a bigger house, to run a car, go on a foreign holiday, buy the latest smartphone or games console, and still have money left to afford the latest high-spec locomotive for their model railway. If the dastardly rail companies put up train fares (to cover increases in fuel costs and demands from rail workers for higher salaries or better conditions) then that is just seen as an obstacle in pursuit of their aspirations to afford everything that they want - hence the complaints.

I'm not sure that there was more choice or a better quality of service in the past. There may have been more destinations that could be reached by rail, but often with a much lower service frequency. There are lots of places that I could travel to now with an hourly service (or better) that may just have been two or three trains per day a century ago. I think it's just that people are more vocal nowadays and often have a more entitled attitude. Back in the pre-grouping era there was no car or bus alternative, so people either got the train or they walked. Simple. If you couldn't afford to travel by train then that meant taking a job within walking distance of where you lived (or living within walking distance of where you worked). By the 1920s, bus was a viable alternative to rail and hence some passengers switched to buses as they became more widespread, as they were generally cheaper, but many still walked. By the 1950s, private cars were becoming more common and many people switched from public transport to private vehicle. Improvements in train services, bus services and cars have all resulted in people travelling further than they did a century ago. For many years the average person has spent about one hour commuting to and from work (ie 30 minutes in the morning and 30 minutes in the evening). Initially, that means that people chose to live within a 30 minute walk, then within a 30 minute journey by public transport and now it's often a 30 minute drive in a car (or on a high speed train). That therefore means that people who do take the train to work are often living further from their work than they would have a century ago because train speeds are faster and there are usually fewer stops. As such, this means people should expect to pay more than in the past. If you want to look at specific examples, the Bank of England have an inflation calculator that lets you see how much prices have changed over the period since before the dawn of railways. https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetary-policy/inflation/inflation-calculator - For example, £1 in 1930 would be equivalent to £53.72 today (or to put it another way £1 was 53.72 times more valuable back in 1930 than it is today (May 2023). However, that would only really let you see fares relative to other prices, which is probably not what you are really interested in. However, there is also a purchasing power calculator on the National Archives website - https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/currency-converter/#currency-result. £121 in 1930 was apparently a years wages for a skilled tradesman. By 2017, that would have had the purchasing power of approximately £5,540, but that is considerably less than the minimum wage is now. Much of what is considered 'poverty' nowadays would have been the norm back in the past, yet many whinge and moan now as though they are hard done by and society accepts that we all have a right to complain and grumble at costs.

I depends on who's product you want to use. If we go with Yamorc (http://yamorc.de/products/?categories=130) then a basic current sensing unit is €87.50 for occupancy detecting in 17 sections (the YD6016LN-CS). The Railcom equivalent (the YD6016LN-RC) will be €129.50, so that equates to about an extra £2 per section to allow the command station to read the address of locos in hidden sections. It also means that you need to use Railcom enabled decoders, which means the better featured European decoders such as Zimo and ESU. Basic decodes such as those from Hornby and Lais don't, as far as I'm aware, support Railcom. If you have two locomotives in the same section, then they will either have to be allocated the same DCC locomotive address, or they will have to be Consisted, so that they operate as one unit. That means both locomotives are driven simultaneously by entering the consist address rather than calling up each locomotive separately and trying to drive them independently at the same speed at the same time. I think if you're using Consisting, then Railcom will report the consist address.

Or you could just use a Railcom enabled detector to tell you what is in each block. It reads the DCC address and relays it to the command station, mimic panel or track diagram.

What is causing your couplings to break? I've broken a couple of NEM pockets in the past (though not Oxford Rail) when trying to remove the tension lock coupling to fit a Kadee replacement, but I think that can just be put down to my carelessness. If they are a tight fit, there is a need to squeeze the tails on the couplings to get them out rather than just pulling. If the broken coupling is in the box, was it okay before being put away? When in its box, the tension lock coupling on GER van doesn't appear to touch the plastic packaging, so I'm not sure how it would break in the box (unless you choose to play football with it). If it broke before putting it in the box, that would point to how you separate the wagons in your trains when you put them away. I'd say the Oxford Rail coupling on the GER van perhaps has a little less plastic (to make the pocket less visually obtrusive) and the pocket seems to be a non-standard NEM style, so it's possible that a little more care is required than for a more chunky coupling. I've not had any issues with mine, but they are relatively new and not been used much, as they are intended for a future project.

Based on that, it appears that in 2007 all wagons were in 'British Alcan Faded' livery, but by 2010 they were a mix of 'Unbranded' and some with Rio Tinto branding. Do the packs labelled on the Revolution website as 'Debranded Alcan' represent the 'British Alcan Faded' or the 'Unbranded' style in these sample consists (or are these all effectively one and the same)? Does anyone know when the last of the fleet received the Rio Tinto branding? (ie until what date might the faded / debranded / unbranded livery have lasted)? Similarly, I understand the Liberty branding was introduced in 2016, but when would the Rio Tinto branding have survived until and did this rebranding occur before or after the switch to the longer 18-24 wagon trains? I note that Revolution are not producing enough packs in Liberty livery to represent the 2020 consist shown (although it doesn't matter to me, as that's not what I'm most interested in).

They are shown on the website as still available to order - https://realtrackmodels.co.uk/index.php?route=product/product&path=59_70&product_id=155

You're not, but most people will just buy something like - https://www.railtec-models.com/showitem.php?id=3651, which gives a selection of brake van numbers to renumber a model, but I'm not sufficiently knowledgeable about your brake van to know which of these transfers you need. It's possible that none of these numbers align with your chosen prototype. https://www.railtec-models.com/showitem.php?id=2435 - gives you Railfreight Distribution logos. I can't see construction logos for wagons from Railtec (or Fox transfers for that matter), but the loco ones in TT might be the right size - https://www.railtec-models.com/showitem.php?id=5728, but again, I'm not sure how big these are relative to the ones on the locomotives. However, the bottom line is you'll need to know what numbers, logos etc you're looking for and then look for the appropriate products that are already available and used by everyone else that resprays a brake van. Ideally if you have photographs that show what you want, then it should be easier to identify suitable products.

How many hours do you think it will take someone to find appropriate images for your project and do enough research to design from (ie square on images to give you size, lettering, numbers, logos etc)? How many hours will it then take to prepare the artwork? What hourly rate do you intend to pay that person? Presumably more than the minimum wage. You may well be willing to pay, but are you willing to pay a significant three figure sum for this commission? If you're looking to pay less, then it would have to be a commission for which Railtec, or someone else, sees significant demand for (so that the research and development costs can be spread over multiple sales), or you'll need to present a research package or better still a vector image of the details that you require created by yourself. Railtec do produce custom transfers, but if you look at their FAQs then you'll see that they are looking for you to provide pre-prepared vector artwork - https://www.railtec-models.com/faq.php Just sending a photograph like the ones in this thread and saying you want transfers for this brake van isn't likely to get a response. The owner is too busy to think of this as anything other than one of dozens of suggestions. It's also likely that those who know about the brake van don't have the skills to prepare the artwork, so you may need to employ two people - one to do your research for you - and then someone else to prepare the artwork from that research package, so that Railtec, or another company can then prepare your transfers.

If you don't know what decals you need, how is anyone going to be able to design them for you? You'll need square on images of all the relevant data panels if you want someone to produce them for you, so that they can see what you want. Otherwise, it will just be buying whatever is already available from existing suppliers.

DB993602 has had the handrails replaced by a finer etch. It also has brake pipes at either end. DB992728 is presumably the unmodified version. First glance, the differences weren't obvious, particularly in the first photograph. I'd therefore say that DB993602 is 'best'. Is it worth the effort? It depends on how much time you have and how much pleasure you get from making improvements. If you just like operating a railway when you have some spare time, probably not.

Which of the rail companies ordered five plank wagons from private contractors (ie ones not built to their own in house designs)?

She doesn't need much teaching. I think she may have been younger still when her Irish grandmother remarked that she'd picked up quite a few coins from a shopping trip with my wife and suggested to my daughter that she might like 'one or two' of them (to save her taking a purse full of sterling back to Ireland). She was primarily thinking about the very shiny new two pence piece that she'd received in change. My daughter surveyed her pile of change, clarified that she was being offered two coins (not one), and then pointed at two very grubby pound coins and asked if she could have these. Needless to say, her grandmother was a little surprised that she'd been looking for what she thought were the most valuable coins rather than the shiniest ones! All those days where we played 'shop' meant that she knew not all coins have the same value.

I have to say I've never seen Tracksetta templates sold as anything other than the radius in inches, and has been highlighted, Peco don't claim that they match the set track geometry and I don't think ever have. I suspect that it's simply some retailer or E-bay seller that has thought it would be "helpful" to highlight that an 18" Tracksetta (radius 457 mm) is similar to a second radius set track curve (radius 438mm) and a 21" Tracksetta (radius 525 mm) is similar to third radius set track (radius 505 mm). That might be helpful if properly explained, but not when we live in a 'sound bite' world where equivalence is then implied. Others may have copied from whoever had the 'idea'. As for the terminology in relation to set track, I think 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th makes perfect sense. Hornby et al are selling this track into a child's market place and it is easier for children to know that there are four different radii known as 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th rather than track with radii of 371 mm, 438 mm, 505 mm and 572 mm. It's also easier for adults - I was able to write 1, 2, 3 and 4 with ease, but I had to look up the radius of each before posting.

No - I want it with twice as much detail and for just half the price of what a similar locomotive would have cost back in 1980 (or maybe even 1960)! Is that too much to ask? 🤣 Seriously, I think DCC has just matured over the last 30 years to become mainstream and it will take as long again for the 'next new thing' to achieve similar levels of market penetration. Only then is talk of obsolescence relevant. I don't see 'Bluetooth and wi-fi direct loco chip control' having any advantages over DCC in the world of automation (which is the direction that I see DCC progressing). I see any proprietary control system as niche / dead end path.