Dungrange

I don't suppose you know the date of that photograph? I note that there are two photographs of 70700 at Aberdeen on Paul Bartlett's website (https://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/icicausticsodatua) that are dated 13 March 2004. The ATO logo is more worn on the above image, which could mean its a more recent photograph, although it also looks like it's taken from the opposite side (ie the placement of the 'Not to be loose shunted' instruction is not in the same location as on Paul's photographs. Paul's photographs shows this in the middle of the wagon rather than to the left of the ladder. I also note that the above photograph has not been taken in the same place as Paul's photographs, so 70700 was obviously moved between the date of the above photograph and the 13 March 2004, which would imply it was still operational in 2004 (ie it wasn't photographed dumped in the end of a siding awaiting disposal).

Looking at the 'debranded' versions on your website, these look like the ones with the ATO chemicals branding, but with the ATO logo painted over. However, I note that you refer to these as in china clay use. Does that mean that these debranded wagons worked alongside the 12 in ECC blue livery in the latter years? So what livery were these last wagons carrying: ECC blue livery, the debranded ATO wagons or a mix? A little before my time, but there is always Rule 1.

Given that @Accurascale Fran stated on 30 March, that they are expecting decorated samples at the end of May, you're not going to get your 37 in Q2 (assuming you've ordered one). It was confirmed up thread that they'd be Q3 or later. It would be more realistic to think you'll get it before Christmas than within a month and a few days.

I guess the question is what do you mean by 'cheap', which is rather a rather subjective term. You might not require ten, but they are available singly - such as https://www.roads-and-rails.co.uk/products/21-pin-blanking-plug. The alternative is that I believe you can make your own if you really want to, as all they effectively do is connect the connect the track and motor wires.

I wouldn't care, as long as they leave the wagons!!

The fact that Belmond haven't replied and Hattons have a confidentiality clause that prohibits them from stating the colour suggests that Belmond don't want to be making the information publicly available. As such, it looks like it will have to be a trial and error exercise. I'd agree that based on the images that you've posted, the Vallejo Red Violet looks more promising than the Gory Red, but I'm not sure either looks right as to my eye; the Royal Scotsman livery looks a bit more brown. Looking at the Vallejo paint chart for the Model Colour range - https://acrylicosvallejo.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/CC070-Model_Color-Rev17-baja.pdf, I'd be tempted to suggest 70.982 Marron Rojo / Cavalry Brown (bottom of the ninth column), but perhaps that's a little too brown. The problem with trying to select from a paint chart is that the paint, once dry, doesn't always match the ink on the colour chart. Looking at the Game Colour chart ( https://acrylicosvallejo.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/vallejo-game-color-CC072_Rev17.pdf) it claims that 'Gory Red' in the Game Colour range is an equivalent of 'Cavalry Brown' in the Model Colour range, yet they don't really look the same to me. Interestingly 72.711 Gory Red in the Game Air range (https://acrylicosvallejo.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/vallejo-game-air-CC082-Rev02.pdf) which is also meant to be an equivalent, looks more brown than the Gory Red image that you've posted above. Therefore unless someone is able to post a picture of their model of the Royal Scotsman and state what paint they used, I think you'll just need to pick another colour and give it a try.

I've never used the measuring tool on the NLS website before, but I agree that the platform length seems to scale at somewhere between 100 and 105 feet in length.

You want to have all your feeds at the 'toe' or switch end of the points, so the two feeds on the top half of the layout need to move towards the centre otherwise you'll have no power in the loop when you drive a train in. Apart from that it should be okay.

I suspect that you may just have to try measuring the platform length off an old OS map, such as 25" series for England and Wales, which are available on the National Library of Scotland https://maps.nls.uk/view/114650259 - should be the one you are after. Obviously not particularly accurate, but I suspect as good as you'll get.

Obviously the load that was being conveyed went missing in transit. I guess that's what happens when there is no escort coaches to accompany them. :-) There will now need to be an investigation. Seriously, I'm looking forward to the call to tell me to come and pick mine up from my local retailer.

I'd say the desired length of straight is a function of the length of stock that is being operated. In the case of four wheel wagons, the desired length is the wheelbase of the longest wagon or the distance between the axle on one wagon and the nearest axle on the next. In the case of bogie stock, the desired length is the distance between bogie pivots or the distance between the bogie pivot on one wagon and the nearest bogie pivot on the next. That therefore means if most stock operated on the layout is older four wheel wagons, then three or four inches is probably adequate, but if operating longer bogie wagons, as @jools1959 is proposing, then somewhere in the region of six or seven inches may be more appropriate. In the set-track geometry, that would correspond to a single standard straight. However, if using transition curves, then I'd probably double that length and not bother with the straight - ie as long as there was a minimum circa 12" transition between two opposite curves, it should be okay for most stock.

when I look on E-bay for R094, I mainly get a Pilkington Glass wagon, but also a Thomas set - https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/114419797301?hash=item1aa3f38d35:g:-9MAAOSw2M9fZ5b7 which is listed at £250. There are a few R091 (and R094) on Worthpoint (https://www.worthpoint.com/inventory/search?categories=&query=R091) but you'd need to sign up for free subscription to see the price details - these are mainly past E-bay sales.

I think the problem is that most of us don't have experience with multiple controllers - I certainly have no experience of either an H&M Walkabout or a Morley Vector Zero Two. That therefore means that I can't comment on whether any particular Gaugemaster model is better than either of these controllers. All I can say is that the club I'm a member of uses Gaugemaster controllers for all our club layouts - generally the Model W (https://www.gaugemasterretail.com/magento/model-railways/gaugemaster-controls-brand5/gaugemaster-gmc-w.html) and these seem to provide perfectly acceptable slow speed control with most locomotives. Where that's not the case, it's as likely to be the motor or gearbox in the locomotive that is the issue, as the controller.

I can sort of see the similarity, but I don't see it as quite the same. The model railway club that I'm the secretary of tends not to build layouts that align with my interests. Our next layout will be 009, a scale / gauge that I don't model in. However, although this is being paid for from club funds, to which I contribute, I still get something out of it insofar as I can still operate the layout both in the clubroom and at exhibitions, even although it's not my stock that is running on it. My birthday and Christmas presents from my family are generally related to my hobby and will one day run on my layout, but trying to elicit contributions from strangers, which is what is being assumed here, isn't something that I'd support. That said, I have nothing against people 'chancing their arm' and seeing whether anyone will give them money. I've also nothing against those who choose to donate to such 'chancers': I just wouldn't do it myself.

It looks like it's a Fleishmann Transformator 6730, based on the photograph in your post on this thread Quite a few 'votes' for Gaugemaster in that thread, although Morley are also mentioned as worth looking at.

Just buy it from somewhere else. For example, my local retailer has them listed on their website. https://www.harburnhobbies.co.uk/acatalog/info-648.html#SID=51

It looks like most places have sold out. However, I note that Monk Bar Model Shop in York appear to still have two listed on their website, if you still want one. http://www.monkbarmodelshop.co.uk/model-railways/oo-gauge-model-railways/Bachmann-oo-locos/Bachmann-diesels/53974-35-127sf-cl-203-drs-sound.html

You might want to have a read of this thread, where there are lots of recommendations for Gaugemaster. I'm not sure why you're switching from DCC to DC if you don't like soldering droppers. The increase in reliability that you get from having a dropper to each track section is as applicable to DC as it is DCC - it's not essential in DCC, just good practise in both and there will be a lot more wiring to convert a DCC layout to DC if you need to create cab sections and isolating sections.

Link was further up the thread.

There was another thread about inlaid track here - If you were into track building, then you could always look at Proto87 - http://www.proto87.com/Paved_industrial_or_dockside_track.html

I don't see why not - you'd be converting a motorised multiple unit into a non-motorised coach. The issue would be whether your remaining unit (the Class 121 in the case) has sufficient traction to pull a rake of non-motorised coaches. It would be worthwhile doing some haulage tests with a few coaches once you get your Class 121 to see what is possible.

Most prototype railway stock can traverse a five chain curve 'dead slow' - ie at a speed of less than 5 mph. A chain is 66ft long, so a five chain curve in 4 mm scale would have a radius of about 52". However, any curve on the prototype with a radius of less than ten chains would usually have a continuous checkrail and a severe speed restriction. That means that in model form, any curves with a radius of less than about 8' 8" should have a continuous checkrail and would be considered a 'tight' radius in terms of the prototype. If you were trying to create a scale model of a small depot, with fairly tight track, you'd probably be looking at a minimum ten foot radius in model form. Of course none of us have the space to build scale curves, so it's down to what looks right in the space you have available. A radius of less than two feet definitely looks like a train set, but once you get up to radii greater than about three foot, you're into the territory of 'looking right', even if the radius is still unrealistically tight. Given how space constrained you are, I think I'd start with a minimum two foot radius curve, but try and increase that where possible. If you can work with three foot radius curves, it would be better.

There will be more CVs that can be adjusted on a sound decoder than a non-sound decoder and apart from the low numbered ones, these will also vary by decoder brand. CVs 2, 5 and 6 or the speed table if you're using one would be the start point to match the speed performance of any two units (sound or non-sound). However, you won't be able to just copy values as the motor, gearing etc will be different between the two units. Matching CVs 3 and 4 would ensure that both units accelerate / decelerate a similar rate, but you'll also need to try and find a CV to replicate the fact that a sound decoder wont move as soon as the throttle is turned up, whereas a non-sound one normally will. How you do that will depend on what decoder is fitted in the Class 108 and whether it has the necessary functionality to simulate a delayed start and try and match that to the performance of the Class 121. I'm sure it will give you endless hours of 'fun'.

Your issue is likely to be that sound and non-sound decoders tend to behave differently. Sound decoders are usually set up with a delay between when you turn up the controller and when the unit starts to move while the engine revs up. The acceleration and deceleration parameters will likely have been optimised to match the sound project. You'll therefore need to play about with various CVs on the Bachmann 108 to try and match the performance of the sound decoder in the Class 121 to achieve a satisfactory consist.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/usr/hjonesengineering The above on E-bay seems to list a back-to-back gauge for SM-45 and track gauges for both SM-32 and SM-45, so I suppose you could contact him and ask if he produces a back-to-back gauge for SM-32. They look as though they are machined in plastic, so I've no idea how good they are. I couldn't see anything else on a quick google.