JDW

Just seen this thread and had a look - the Crossley & Evans Sentinel at £57.75 is pretty tempting!

In a slight diversion, today I 'found' a 153. I have a few, and of course used two as the basis for the 155. I bought one second hand and damaged as a source of extra windows for the 155, but have somehow ended up with two damaged chassis and three bodies. A little while ago, I stripped and primed one of the good bodies with a view to repainting it in Arriva Trains Northern livery. Looking through the box of bits I wondered how much of a second complete unit I could get. One chassis will need new air tanks, but runs fine, so that's the Arriva one sorted. Which leaves a good East Midlands Trains body and a non-working chassis with air tanks and a few other bits missing. The main issue for both is missing radio pods on the roof, but apart from that I managed to find enough complete glazing. I'll have a look for some suitable plastic rod for the air tanks. In the mean time, I now have an almost complete second EMT 153 that I never knew I had. Body-mounted snowploughs have been added since I took the picture. Just need to find some suitable transfers now to renumber it. I've had an FNW blue/gold one since they came out, and never really liked it, it never looked right and the all-yellow ends look odd to me, although they did on the real thing too. I got it out today, and after studying some pictures, there didn't seem quite enough yellow on the ends. I masked it and added about 1mm of yellow on either side of the 'narrow' cab, down the corner of the cabs. It's not much, but I think it makes a difference. Still far from my favourite unit, but looks a bit better.

This thread kicked off way back in 2013 with an unusual DMU formation: Here's another one that would raise eyebrows at a show if you modelled it: Five FGW 153s - the front three have lights on and appear to have a few passengers on, the rear two are in darkness. I'm sure there was a discussion not long ago about how many units you can run together but can't find it.

Yep, with all this social distancing, everyone is getting desperate for a bit of social contact now...

I'm looking for a Hornby class 156 in Northern white/lilac livery, they don't seem to come up on Ebay very often. If anyone has one they're wanting to part with for a reasonable price, please get in touch. Thanks

And thanks to a small Ebay purchase arriving, the BSI couplings were added. Time to get on with the last two units now...

I think when talking about equalisation it is the rocking motion from side to side that is being discussed. If a wagon with four wheels is sitting on a flat surface, then all four wheels will touch the surface, but if that surface (the rails in this case) is twisted, one wheel will lose contact with it. Giving one of the 'bogies' some ability to rock left to right. That is to say, the left wheel on an axle can be higher than the right one, and this can be done by re-shaping the flat top of one of the two bogies to a curved profile, so the bogie can rock. Probably really simple to see, but I'm making it sound much more complicated trying to describe. Obviously, only do it to one bogie, otherwise there will be nothing to keep the wagon sitting level.

Are you thinking of a different type of unit altogether? Class 153s have very visible gangway connections (shown on the BBC illustration cited above) on each end the same as most second generation DMUs (155s 156s and 158s and some 150s) Maybe I'm wrong but I find it hard to believe that they will go to the trouble of splitting a 156, putting a 153 in the middle, and then of that 156 is needed elsewhere or not available, splitting it, moving the 153 to the middle of a different set... It would make a lot more sense and be a lot simpler to have the 153 between the two 156s, which keeps the luggage/cycle area in the centre of the train no matter what units are used in what order and still avoids the need to fit RETB if that is the case. It also retains the ability for the 156s to be used as 'normal', and allows units to be swapped around as and when needed.

That's the way I'd look at doing it too, but can't say how easy it would be as I've only seen pics of the new version. From what I remember the chassis is essentially the same, apart from the cab end, so it should be possible. Not a cheap option but probably the easiest.

Today's good weather meant a chance to do some painting. I only have three things to hold the shell while I spray, so did the Central unit and half the Regional Railways one today. Gave them a coat of black first, then a coat of Railmatch frame dirt, possibly a bit heavy handed in hindsight but it looks better than plain black, and highlights the detail more. Can't say as I've ever been a fan of painting, it's probably as close to weathering as I'll get any time soon. I know the BSI coupling is missing, I bought the chassis with the Hurst snowploghs already attached. I have a set of Hurst BSIs I was planning to use but the ploughs are so firmly glued on, removing them to fit the BSIs would probably have taken half the chassis with it! I've ordered a pair of Hornby class 153 mouldings instead. I thought for a quick job I'd replace the Lima couplings on my pair of BRT 20s with smaller ones. I forgot what Lima plastic is like, took an age to cut them off and glue wouldn't take at all to attach the Bachmann ones. So plan B - a set of wire loops. Apart from the chassis is metal. Ended up glueing them to the bottom of the chassis, time will tell if they're strong enough. Took longer to do that job than the 156 kits!

Haha twice? Three times! I've used the Report Post button to ask the mods to remove two of them. Thanks for posting, looking at them means I feel I should give a bit more thought to weathering them properly now though! The downside of the way the 3D-printed kit fits is that I can't just take off the body and weather the underframe, so might need to stock up on masking tape!

Just in time, you'll have to get your Intercity stripey paint out in the near future by the looks of it... https://www.flickr.com/photos/justinfoulger/49995571147

I can't take much of the credit really, the kit is a doddle, from picking up each coach to sticking on the last piece takes about half an hour, if that. Zip around with a Dremel, clean up with a file, stick pieces on, NEXT! The Hurst kit wasn't exacty difficult, but had a few fiddly little etched parts. This one is even easier. I'm already onto number three, a Regional Railways unit. I figured that the Dremel creates such a mess (I'm surrounded by bits of black plastic swarf!) I might as well do some more while I'm at it! I think I'll just do these three for today, and the four car Super Sprinter set can wait for another day. I also found some plastic rod of suitable diameter for the driveshaft, much easier to fit now than try and fit it afterwards.

I mentioned on @Eddie R v2.0's workbench thread that I have a few 3D printed detailing kits for the Hornby/Lima class 156 on their way. They arrived this morning, excellently packaged in two separate boxes (one with 4, one with one). I had planned to start with a Strathclyde unit, which is more of a display model than a layout one, just because I like the colour scheme. But Eddie is doing one already so I went with a Central Trains unit instead. Out came the Dremel with a cutting disc, and after dismantling it was a quick but messy job to slice off the underframe moulding. It's been a while since I did the Hurst ones, I'd forgotten what a mess the plastic Lima/Hornby use makes! Still, it was an easy job, and after running a file around the opening I carried out a dry run. Unlike the Hurst kit, these parts fit into the hole left by removing the 'box', which means no replacement floor needs to be cut. It also means once attached, the chassis and body cannot be separated, but the roof comes off for access inside so it's not really an issue. I started with the unpiwered car, for no other reason than it was the first I picked up. There are slightly different parts representing the air tanks and brake control unit/air suspension isolating cock, to fit around the power bogie, as the chassis is slightly different on the powered car. Everything fitted well, with no more than the occasional few strokes of a file to remove the remains of any pips. So much so in fact that within the space of a few hours, I'm already on unit number 2! The snowplogh and BSI coupling are not included, but all of my units have had them fitted from Hurst or Hornby parts anyway. The Hornby class 153 ones are often available on Ebay or from Peter's Spares. The only onther thing to add is the driveshaft from the gearbox to the bogie, but I don't think I have any suitable plastic rod to hand. It's not very visible though, and would be pretty fragile, so I'm not too worried. Overall, very pleased with progress so far. Sadly it's raining heavily so I can't go outside and spray them just yet, so I'll carry on building and paint them all in one go.

Neither. It depends on context. My own layout is end to end, because that's what suited the available space and budget. I find it more satisfying to operate than I think a roundy-roundy would be. But at the same time I enjoy watching trains running past on some of the big exhibition layouts in a way that an end-to-end can't achieve.

Did you get any further with this project Stu? I just stumbled back upon the thread while searching Google for images to try and see if any of the original GMPTE orange units had twin-leaf doors fitted!

As someone who isn't an expert on ships, I'd like to say: Oops.

I can't help but think if I'd spent all that money and time on building it, I'd have maybe spend a few quid and few minutes and installed some kind of net (something like net curtain material on elastic supports) across the centre of the helix, maybe at the bottom and half way up, to catch anything that tried to escape! Of course, hindsight and experience are wonderful, and no one ever thinks (or admits!) that it might happen to them.

Don't really want to wade in on other people's fun, but come on, really? Seriously? Its a simple difference. I don't know any of the posters above other than from what they post on RMWeb, but it seems pretty clear that @chris p bacon is saying that he has dealt with the factory for other reasons, not that he has phoned to ask about someone else's model (which he'd be unlikely to get an answer to!). Factories produce all sorts of things for all sorts of people. All sorts of people commission things from factories with the neccessary capabilities. It's not inconceiveable that one person has dealt with the same factory as someone else, there's a finite number of them. Whether he actually has, or whether he thinks he has but is mistaken and its actually made elsewhere, and even whether someone believes him or not, it doesn't really matter. I would imagine that a factory which produces models is either capable of doing it or able to say they can't based on experience, and people who use that factory will know roughly what it is and isn't capable of. Whether a manufacturer choses to put X or Y on a model comes down to their decision and judgement of what is practical, what it will cost and what people will pay. Judgements are made, people don't have to like or agree. And whatever solution is found, people won't like it. Some will say they should be fixed to the crankpins, others will deride that and say they should be attached to the rods for accuracy. Someone else will come along and say that it makes it impossible to remove the rods to convert to P4. Look at the whole debate over Hatton's rotating axle boxes on their class 66s... Aaaaaanyway, what I came here to say was that it looks great. The colours look good, and it's very odd to see and hear something that looks like it should be goinf chuff-chuff making space-age sounds, and coupling rods going around without valve gear...! I'd actually be tempted with one, but have to draw the line somewhere, and it's just too far out of my era to justify the outlay I'm afraid.

Maybe you could explain what the best radiuses or radii are to use on helixes or helii then

I find this fascinating and yet at the same time it looks like my idea of model railway hell! I love the fact that it's a proper long run, that trains go somewhere and do something, and that it's complicated enough to need thinking about. But it looks so complicated there's no way I could just sit and enjoy it, run a few trains, because its so intense you'd have to focus 100% on your own 'little' bit, and you'd only be able to use it when everyone is free to come over and help you. Of course, the hobby can be all things to all men, and each will get their own form of enjoyment from different aspects of it.

In terms of it being an idea from America, some mentioned that US models tend to be heavier and more powerful, but I would imagine that it also helps that many US trains are headed by two, three, four locos, which would massively increase the power available for climbing. Personally it's something I'd avoid on a personal layout, as it feels like the trains would spend more time going round and round in circles and getting to/through/from the fiddle yard than actually on the layout. I can see the advantage at places like Miniatur Wunderland, though, where it's more a "show" than something to be played with. It does seem like a lot of extra expense and effort is required, adding various solutions to stock and track to get them up and down but as ever, its horses for courses. What works for one won't work for another.

If it were me, I'd be tempted to use thr two sidings top right for the loco shed - or more likely reduce it to a single track shed and just one siding, so it's not too squashed, which would provide a view blocker for trains entering/leaving. Alternatively, as others have said, putting the station where you have the loco shed I'd then have a single-road shed (maybe just a few inches of it against the backscene) on what is your "two-car DMU platform", which would then leave the bottom platform as a headhunt for the four (possibly overgrown) sidings on the right. Again the part loco shed would form part of the view blocker for things departing to the left.

I'm always right* *except when I'm wrong

Track is overrated. Don't you know it's the number one cause of trackwork-related issues on model railways. Much fewer problems without it.