Dungrange

Correct - it's not an essential modification. The theory is that the switch contacts in the Cobalt Digital iP point motor will be more reliable than relying on the contact between the switch blade and the stock rail, which may not have sufficient contact pressure to overcome the dirt that may build up on both the switch and the rail. However, that improved reliability won't materialise if you modify the point as indicated and create dry solder joints. Instead, you'll either end up with a dead section or an intermittent problem dependant on your solder joint. Therefore, if soldering isn't your thing and you don't want to adopt Nigel's suggestion of different soldering equipment, then I wouldn't bother trying to modify the point.

I don't think you are alone there - I'd tend to say the same about most of those whom I interact with as well, whether they be work colleagues or members of my model railway club. The relationship is as you say rather superficial: friendly enough, but not particularly deep and bonding. This may sound a bit like a self-help group, but 'thanks for sharing'. Out of interest, given that you have mentioned Autism, how would you prefer or have preferred others to interact with you? I ask, because the gentleman who looks like becoming our newest club member actually only has a passing interest in model railways from his youth, but it is something that his son is very, very interested in and therefore model railways is one of their father / son bonding subjects. His son has apparently been diagnosed as autistic and the father's motivation for joining us is largely to attend with his son. His son seems a nice, well behaved boy, polite and careful with things that don't belong to him and we don't have any issues with the proposed membership arrangement. However, I don't really have any experience of dealing with people with conditions on that spectrum. He seemed quite willing to talk to other members (of all ages) about railways and our layouts (presumably because that's something that he feels he knows about) but I get the impression that he could be quite focused / precise, which maybe comes from a desire to keep the conversation 'on topic'. I can imagine him being a database of facts that interest him and he seemed to be quite good at remembering names. He is about the same age as my own son, yet his behaviour seems a little different from the way my son interacts with his friends and adults. As for a lot of club life being about socialising - I agree with you. Many of our members seem to spend most of their time just chatting to others and every job that needs to be done takes rather longer than it would if everyone was focused on the task. However, I have noticed that sometimes conversation can head off in obscure directions such as discussing Wallace and Gromit or some sketch from Monty Python, the Two Ronnies or some other comedy series from days gone by. I assume it is those deviations from the 'core subject' of railway modelling that you have a 'problem' with, alongside the stories of when someone discusses something that they experienced at work 40 years ago? Am I correct in saying that when you attend a model railway club, your expectation would be that members only discuss model railways? Obviously that won't happen in the case of the club as a whole, but I guess if we know someone prefers conversation to be 'on topic' and they don't like 'off topic' chat then it is easier to try and ensure that we meet their expectations as best we can.

Thankfully we don't have either of these individuals in our club. I only became secretary because when the position became vacant (ie the previous secretary specifically said he no longer wished to continue as secretary) there was a deathly silence with no volunteers willing to join the committee. I didn't really want the position, but after an awkward few minutes I agreed to be nominated and was then unanimously elected. Every AGM is effectively the same - any nominations for Chairman / Secretary / Treasurer? Someone always nominates the incumbent, someone quickly seconds that nomination and then no-one else wants to be nominated, so we have the same one candidate elections each year. However, I can see how both 'types' would cause problems in some clubs.

The first point is just highlighting that you should ignore the myth that turnouts have to be specifically modified for DCC: they don't - wiring for DC and DCC are exactly the same. However, switching the frog independently rather than relying on contact of the switchblades should provide greater reliability under both DC and DCC operation. This is the second option. You don't need to do it, but since you are using Cobalt Digital iP point motors that have built in switching, I would make the modifications such that you are using the Cobalt Digital iP point motor to switch the frog.

I'll admit that looking at an aerial view of an exhibition hall you are likely to see more men than women, and the older demographic is likely to outweigh the younger demographic. Our club is no different - I think we have slightly more members in their 60's than any other age band. The problem is that there seems to be a perception amongst those with an apocalyptic view that the older generation (say those over 70) need to be replaced by teenagers, whereas in reality, they just need to be replaced by someone younger than them, which includes those who take up the hobby at any point in their adult life. Most of our new members tend to be middle aged, although the two who joined us last year both filled gaps in the younger demographic. I agree, although the group of people that he was referring to and the group of people that you saw may have been different. Look at the operators behind the layouts at an exhibition, and I will agree that they are often older gentlemen, but look at the people who have paid to attend the show and there are a lot of families - at least there are at the shows that I attend (though I've never been to Warley). If you define the hobby only as those operating the exhibition layouts, then you are ignoring the next generation of prospective railway modellers, who are pestering their parents to go to the model railway exhibition, because that's what they aspire to. My parents used to take me to the local model railway exhibition each year when I was a teenager. That highlights the imprecise definition of 'old'. To some of us 'old' people are those who are retired from the workforce, but to others 'old' might just mean anyone who isn't a teenager / student. If you take the latter definition, then the hobby is certainly full of 'old' men, but if you take the former view, then there are loads of people in the hobby who are not 'reaching for the summer wine', which includes me.

This reminds me of the fact that sometimes the 'grumpy old git' isn't that old. I recall speaking to a member of another club several years ago (we'd both been members of another club several years before that) about the recent (at that time) death of their club Secretary / Chairman, who was one of their club's founding members: I think he was in his early 50's at the time of his passing. The deceased had been instrumental in setting up the club and saw it very much as 'his club': model railways was his life. Having been in his home on several occasions, it was one of these houses where there were boxes of locomotives and rolling stock in every room: lounge, kitchen, bedroom as well as in his attic. He was a very good modeller, but a bit of a perfectionist but a pretty poor communicator. Anyway, far from the club suffering from the loss of such a central character and skilled modeller, I was informed that the atmosphere in the club had actually improved with his passing. The problem was that the deceased had no dependent family and lived on benefits for a lot of his life. He had all day to sit and cut out individual roof tiles to make the 'perfect' building. However, some of the other members, who had lots of family and work commitments preferred a much less time intensive technique, but were usually told rather bluntly that their efforts weren't up to his standards and such 'crap' wouldn't be going on 'his' club layout. I think many members had found his attitude to their efforts rather demoralising. However, without him, they found the rest of the club more willing to accept the compromises that they had made. Perhaps the standards of their exhibition layouts fell, but everyone within the club seemed to be happier. Maybe 'grumpy old git' should just be 'grumpy git'.

Thankfully your apocalyptic vision of the future is nothing like reality. My club currently has about 25 to 30 members; the youngest is 17 and the oldest is, I think, just turned 80. We have members in their 20's, 30's, 40's, 50's, 60's and 70's. In fact, if I were to line our members up in age order, I don't think there would be any gaps of more than about six or seven years. One woman who visited our club with her son just before Christmas to ask for some advice on building a layout, commented on the great spread of ages in the club (and our 17 year old wasn't there that night). The notion that the hobby is exclusively for old men isn't really true - as our membership demographics show. Our membership has been growing in recent years (albeit very slowly), but new members don't have to be teenagers. Some enter the hobby in middle age and our latest potential member falls into that category: in the older half of those of us who still go out to work - he'd got his first train set for Christmas. That sparked the desire to seek out and engage with like minded people who can help and provide encouragement, which is what model railway clubs should be all about. The reality is that there will be a continuing place for physical model railway clubs for that reason for many years to come.

Starting with the original post, I think expelling someone from a club for being 'grumpy' is a rather dictatorial attitude. As far as I am concerned, those with the 'sling him out' attitude are every bit as much a part of the problem as the 'grumpy old git'. Whilst it's easy to seek to 'blame' the 'grumpy old git', if prospective members don't join, then the issue lies with the other members not being welcoming enough. I suspect that as a hobby we have more than our fair share of what I could consider socially backwards people, and I'll include myself in that category. No-one would describe me as 'the life and soul of the party' and when faced with work events or conferences, I tend to chat mainly to my team and those I already know (to some extent). I don't actively seek to introduce myself to a group of complete strangers - I'm what you could probably call a poor 'networker'. As such, it's all too easy to just ignore the visitor who has walked in the door and keep doing whatever I am doing or continue speaking to whoever I am speaking to - I'd say that's naturally who I am. However, the problem is that if everyone in the club adopts that behaviour, it's not very welcoming and doesn't present a good image. At our club, this was raised by a past secretary several years ago and since becoming club secretary myself, I now make it 'part of the job' to go and introduce myself to all visitors to the club and our club Chairman does likewise. Asking what interests a visitor has - modelling scale(s), gauge(s), location(s), era(s), their level of expertise, skill sets / interests and occupation - often makes it easier to introduce them to someone else in the club. If said visitor is interested in the pre-grouping era, I'll introduce them to one member, but if they are interested in track and signalling, I'll introduce them to someone different. Depending on how friendly the member that I'm introducing them to is, will to some extent govern the extent to which I continue to be involved in the conversation - just in case they think I've dumped them with the 'grumpy old git'. However, on the whole, most of our members are reasonably friendly once 'the ice is broken' and a several visitors over the last few years have commented to me along the lines of 'seems a friendly bunch'. Last year we recruited two new members, but we've also had three prospective members down at the club in recent weeks. One has now given me a completed application form and has been given the club bank account details to set set up a Standing Order. One has been twice in December and has indicated to me that he'll come back and a third visited for the first time on Thursday, but he also asked me about membership because he thought we were a friendly group and he has indicated that he'd like to come back. I'll have to wait and see, but I got the impression that he will. 2020 may therefore be good year with regards recruiting new members at our club. I think the important point is that there needs to be a number of members who are willing to actively make visitors feel welcome and although in our club that is perceived by some as a role for the Chairman and Secretary, everyone has a part to play. Thankfully we don't have any members who could be described as particularly 'grumpy old gits'. Some members are naturally more popular than others, but none are up for eviction and never will be whilst I am on the committee.

It's certainly possible to wire a layout for both DCC or DC operation (but not at the same time) simply plugging in the appropriate controller (DCC or DC). However, the main advantage of DCC is that the whole layout is live. Therefore if primarily wired for DCC operation, you would only be able to operate a single DC locomotive when using your DC controller as the whole layout would be live and connected to that controller. If when operating as a DC layout, you will want more than one locomotive, then you will have to take account of that in your hybrid wiring. That is, you'd either have to wire separate sections (as per DC Cab Control) or you'd have to create isolating sections within your predominantly DCC wiring. Which is the best course of action depends on whether if you are using two or more locomotives, they both need to move at the same time (DC Cab Control) or you just need to be able to isolate a locomotive at one or more discrete locations (DCC isolating sections).

Well, I don't have an e-mail either, but I'm guessing that the Accurascale lads are working through the orders one at a time in the order in which they were placed, so that probably means I'll get an e-mail at some point next week - I didn't pre-order them all that quickly. Since I don't have a layout for them to run on yet, I don't care whether I have to wait a few more days. It doesn't make any difference to my life. I'll only get concerned a few weeks after everyone has posted pictures of their models and I've still heard nothing.

I don't think there is any specific definition of 'mass production' and I think it can be taken to mean slightly different things in different contexts. The price issue is all about batch sizes and therefore the purchasing power of those placing the orders. The factories in China will have a cost associated with producing any item (labour and materials) and on top of that they will add a margin to ensure that their manufacturing facilities make a profit. Those placing an order for their services (eg Bachmann or Apple) will try to seek a discount on that margin. The low volume client (eg any model railway 'manufacturer'), when looking for a discount on a production run of say 2,000 units, will likely be told to 'get lost' or be given a nominal discount for their continued custom. Without a high volume discount, the cost of models will therefore rise in line with Chinese production costs, which are largely governed by rising labour costs, which have been increasing by double digit percentage increases in recent years. That is what we have tended to see in the pricing of model railway items over the last decade. However, the high volume client such as Apple, who may be placing an order for 750,000 units or more, will be able to extract a higher discount from the production facilities and if they are able to increase their production runs from say 750,000 to 1,000,000 units, then they may also be able to negotiate a larger discount. Any increase in the discount that they are able to negotiate through increased production volumes will tend to negate an increase in labour and materials cost and therefore there will be less price inflation for a product where batch sizes are increasing. The opposite has been happening in the model railway world where increased choice has led to falling batch volumes, thereby eroding the power of model railway 'manufacturers' to negotiate volume discounts. In the context of quality control, virtually all model railway items are 'mass produced', which is simply a term for not being 'hand made'. That it the models are being produced in batches and a sample of these are 'checked' and if these are considered okay, then the whole batch is considered to be 'okay'. Remember also that those who are doing the 'checking' are probably not interested in the model that they are checking (ie it's a toy train that represents a foreign locomotive that they have never seen in reality), so they are looking at it with a less critical eye than some of the end purchasers in the UK who are going to moan about the shade of paint being 'wrong' or not wrapping round the body like the prototype. They have images of what they are supposed to be producing - do they think it looks like the images that they have been given? Yes - then it's time to ship them to the UK.

That depends on your definition of 'mass produced'. Model railway items are 'mass produced' in the context that they are not bespoke custom products where every item is a hand finished work of art. Each production run will be several hundred or even several thousand items for which only a small proportion will be checked for quality control purposes. However, they are not mass produced to the same extent as say an i-phone, for which there will be hundreds of thousands of each model produced and sold worldwide. Therefore model railways don't benefit from the same economies of scale as some other goods and a model railway manufacturer is unlikely to be able to exercise the same pricing pressure for what in global terms are relatively small production runs.

Your link takes me to a completed survey. Try http://oakhamwarp.dinksurveys.com/Transport-Survey for anyone who wants to start at the beginning. Extension of the existing system may be a great idea, but since I don't live in the area and know nothing about local transport options, there's not a lot of point in me completing the survey. I would only buy one of the Parry People Movers for a freelance type micro layout, being shorter than the average DMU.

The explanation would seem to be that you need better laid track and not to buy something based on a picture of a box. :-) Why does your question not bear any resemblance to the title of the thread and why have you posted in the Model Shop Guide rather that in the Hornby section, which would surely have been more appropriate. Do you have an explanation? If you're not happy with your purchase then you either have to return it for a refund, sell it on or weather it to suit your taste. Is the colour really that bad if you weather it to the sort of in traffic look that many steam locomotives carried in BR days?

I think you're thinking of the IZA Cargowaggon. This thread is about the IPA car carriers, which I don't think is a Kernow product but one that I understand Revolution will be delivering themselves. I'd also be interested in timescales, so I know when to commit to this project.

Happy New Year Simon, A supplementary book of worked examples would be good, although as you say, it would be a million page book if you were to cover every conceivable arrangement. However, I usually find a few good worked examples aid understanding. I guess you just need to wait and see how well the first edition has sold before thinking about the future. Thanks, but that now gives me a follow on question. Is there an operational or design benefit in operating pairs of points as a crossover (ie as 303A / 303B rather than 303 and 304)? My rational for labelling 303 and 304 separately was that I'd only need to reverse points 304 to access the oil sidings, whereas I'd need to reverse points 303 for any train arriving in the Down Loop. This would include loaded fuel for the oil siding, but would also include Down trains destined for the Yard on the Up side and some Down trains heading for the Branch. Therefore to avoid unnecessarily throwing points, I'd assumed that these would not be a crossover (ie I assumed that keeping them separate would reduce wear in the point motor for 304 in real life). However, having given this some thought, I think I can see a benefit in changing the natural lie of point 304 and making it 303B as this would allow it to perform a trap function to stop a rake of wagons in the loop rolling back onto the Down Main during a run-round operation. I assume that Railway Group Standards GK/RT0064 Provision of Overlaps and Trapping Protection (Railtrack PLC, 2000) (https://catalogues.rssb.co.uk/rgs/standards/GKRT0064 Iss 1.pdf) is the suitable further reading on this subject, which seems to distinguish between "Reduced Overlaps" and "Restricted Overlaps". I assume that you are referring to Reduced Overlaps when you state in your book that "Under some circumstances this can be further reduced, to provide operational flexibility down to an absolute limit based on the approach speed of the signal" (page 91) - ie the figures in Table 2 of the above standard would apply, so if the line speed were reduced to say 50 mph, then the 180 m full Overlap can be reduced to 105 m subject to a Risk Assessment. I'll give this some more thought as the left side of my track plan is a bit more fluid than the right. I can see merit in simply removing crossover 305 and routing all branch trains along the line of the Down Loop to use crossovers 301 and 303 (ie fewer points). It would also get rid of the differential braking issue that you highlighted. The downside of that layout would of course be that Down trains heading for the Branch would have to wait on the Down Main if there was an Up train still on the Branch, whereas the layout I've shown would permit these to clear to Down Main whilst waiting for a Up train on the Branch. Deciding on the best track layout and signal plan is not a straight forward task. Anyway, thanks for writing the book. I hope it sells well.

Did these wagons ever get to Scotland? The first post mentions Enterprise services to Mossend from Warrington Arpley, but the 'Map' and 'Formations Guide' above seem to imply that they never got across the border.

Great to see the only two items that I voted (Rocket and the Parry People Mover) appearing near the top of this poll. In the main poll each year, I tend to just vote for the items that few others want (mainly on-track plant and the like). Anyway, there were quite a few strange options available in this poll, although I'd be surprised if any of them were ever deemed commercially viable.

If flat bottom rail on plain line and bullhead rail in point-work is correct for your location and era, I'd do the same. I have a couple of Code 75 bullhead turnout kits from C&L which I will be using in my yard (where I can assume they've never been replaced in years), but unfortunately, I don't think there are many bullhead turnouts left on the mainline, which is why the loss of the Colin Craig range is disappointing.

I agree that reducing the 'six foot' down to a scale centre to centre distance would reduce the end throw slightly, and therefore improve aesthetics, but the best way to reduce the 'excessive' end throw would be to use scale length point-work, with scale radii in the closure rails. Peco would have to introduce an XXXL radius point, which they couldn't do without switching to prototype geometry and selling us something like a D12, or E18 rather than the B6 sized points we insist on using. Happy New Year

I can't see a service sheet for a mark 3 coach on Hornby's website, but there is one for a mark 1 coach. Unfortunately, this doesn't indicate that the weight is available as a spare part - just the lighting board, the bogies, wheel, couplings and gangways. You may therefore just have to make your own weights or fill the void with 'liquid lead'. hss_403b_mk1_light_coaches.pdf

I also received a copy of your book for Christmas from my son (my seven year old daughter thought it was too boring a present for her to hand over when my wife showed her it), but I'm not as quick a reader as Jack. My overall impression is that it seems to be fairly comprehensive (which is good) but in trying to cover everything, some areas of more interest are perhaps not covered in as much detail as I may have liked and a few more signalled junction examples (like Figure 126) would have been welcome. Obviously it's always difficult trying to convey terminology heavy text in a form that a lay person can understand and I may need to read the book twice (or more) to fully understand it. Just to check that I've understood what I've read so far, can you confirm that the A and B point numbers at the trailing crossings (301 and 305) are the right way round in the figure below? I struggled a bit with the text that states "the 'A' end is where a train running in the Down direction (regardless of signalling arrangements) would travel over a point in the facing direction, that is at the end nearest low mileage." How do you run over a trailing crossover in the facing direction? It took me a while to realise that I think the "regardless of signalling arrangements" actually means by wrong direction running on the Up line in the example below. Also, going by the principle that you should have as few signals as possible, would it be correct for the Junction Indicators on signal LP 101 to cover diverging routes at both points 303 (to the down loop) and 306 (to a branch) as long as the switch of point 306 is within 800 m of signal LP 101? I had originally assumed that I'd need a junction indicator three aspect signal where I have the text 'Down Main', but now don't think that's necessary (and LP 101 would actually be off stage, which would simplify the number of main aspect signals required). Finally, as I understand it, there would be no operational restrictions due to a Down train approaching signal LP 101 because the overlap is at the clearance point of trailing crossover 301. However, in the opposite direction, before the signal in rear of LP 104 can be cleared to allow a train to run up to LP 104, I understand that crossover 305 would have to be locked in the normal position, which means that it would not be possible to drive a train from the Branch to the Up Main whilst also driving a train up to signal LP 104. However, since I'm happy to forego that combination of moves, it would allow me to place LP 104 at the minimum distance from the clearance point of point 305B - ie 15 m. If that's correct, then I'll have a think about the various position light signals that I will need and how workable the track plan below actually is.

Ideally you would have installed isolated sections in the places that you want to park trains and feed these through on-off switch. I guess the question is how easy it would be to add a few insulated rail joiners at this point in time?

Yes, the 00 Exactoscale Fast Track bases were once sold through through C&L before the last change of ownership and were then available exclusively either through the 'Scale' societies or by direct mail order, but the mail order route was closed last month (30 November 2019) because it was costing more to pay someone to handle orders than the value of said orders - most sales were via the scale societies. I put in an order last month to stock up on the 00 Fast Track bases so I don't have your problem. As others have said, I understand that attendance at one of the 'Scale' shows makes you a member for the day and therefore able to purchase that way. I guess the alternative is asking whether a fellow club member who models in either EM or P4 would be willing to order for you through whichever society they are a member of. If that's not an option, then I'd look at the Peco Individulay range, which includes concrete sleepers, pandrol clips and code 82 rail. I don't think the concrete sleepers in the Individulay range are the same as the H0/00 ones on the code 75 flexi-track: I think they are to 4 mm scale width rather than 3.5 mm scale width. However, assembly of the Individulay components will likely take more time than re-spacing the sleepers on the code 75 flexi-track. The issue that i have is the accompanying Code 82/83 Flat-bottom point work - or lack of. Colin Craig used to sell copper-clad turnout kits, but sadly these are no longer available.

Pete, If I search for your site on Google, I'm also redirected to a pharmacy website, but if I click on the link that Redgate Models posted above, then I get to your website, so I agree that its conditional on the way in which your customers try to find you. Nevertheless, there is definitely something that isn't right.