petertg

Good eveninng all. I think (i.e. hope) that the end of ballasting is reasonably near. There are only a few metres lest to be done. The downside is that, no matter how hard I try, I cannot do a neat job. On the other hand, one of the two signal boxes (Metcalfe) kits was a bit decrepit and damaged, namely, it had lost its steps (kept safe in another place) and the top storey had become separated from the ground floor on three sides, whereby it could be opened like a box. Its chimney also fouled the overhead viaduct. According to the representation of this layout on the front cover of the Hornby 1975 Track plan catalogue, this box was at the foot of an embankment, but I replaced the embankment with a viaduct and just above the chimney there was a curve, whereby the chimney was half under the viaduct. I toyed with the idea of buying a new one and then thought that this one could be restored, since it had become weathered with time and more in keeping with the layout, which is also showing signs of the ten years I have been at it. So, I carved it away from the baseboard, inflicting some more damage, removed the original chimney and covered the hole with a Metcalfe paving slab, stuck the top storey back in place and mounted a new chimney at the other end of the box, made from a plastic straw and held in place with a wire bracket. To fit the bracket, I had to prise the rear half of the roof from the walls, to bend the ends of the wire back against the inside of the wall. I also stuck a piece of balsa between the chimney and the wall to keep it from being squeezed. I than stuck the whole box on a piece of cardboard and restuck the stairs in place, hoping they will stay there this time. Finally, I touched up some surface imperfections with grey acrylic paint ass though it had been patched up with mortar. Here are a couple of photos of the finished job.

Some months ago I put all my rolling stock back into their boxes to try and dedicate myself to ballasting and other scenic work. After reorganising the engine shed area I wanted to see if the locos entered and left o.k. The first to be tried was the Bachmann Class 150 DMU which worked well at very slow speeds. I than got out my Stanier tank and it hit the edge of the shed floor and when I tried it again I found tht the piston had come out of place. I tried an old Lima fitted with a Zimo MX632 decoder and found that the runaway syndrome had reappeared (two years back I had returned this chip to Austria for correction of this very fault. I than got out my Wrenn City of Glasgow, also with a Zimo MX632 chip and at first it would not respond to orders. I then reprogrammed the address and it would not respond to the controller, there was only a buzzing sound from the motor area. How can this happen if the locos were working well before being boxed? Another problem I have had is with the ballasting. I found a long stretch of track (Peco flexitrack purchased way back in 1981) had blackened to the extent that no current was passing and it is not easy to get it clean.

I live in Spain where many services have been single class for years. There was never more than one class on the double deckers which came into service around 1993. Many classes of single deckers are single class, even on what Renfe calls medium distance services (100 miles or more). Preferential and Tourist classes exist on the AVes (HST) and on Talgos and, possibly, on certain other trains, but since I practically never use the train nowadays and even then it is a local service (Rodalies R2 Barcelona-Sant Vicenç de Calders), I am a bit out of touch with the current situation.

I live in Spain and, so, I cannot comment on UK problems. However I found this topic interesting and have spent several days reading through all the posts and annexed articles. Here in Spain, the problem is the culpable lack of investment in improvements in Catalonia and the construction of the Mediterranean corridor. In fact, J.M. Aznar, when prime minister, actually tried to block European funds for the corridor since, for him,and others of like thinking, everything had to pass through Madrid. For some years now, I have been tinking of hydrogen (obrtained from sea water) as a fuel, i.e. instead of diesel-electric locomotives, why not hydrogen-electric locomotives, but I was completely ignorant of the concommitant problems (I am a translator, not a scientist). I apologise if I am off-theme, but felt I should make a comment on the amount of opinion this topic has raised.

Thanks for this information and photo. Placing it on the end of a platform could complicate my layout, so I think I will place where it is in the photograph.

Helo again. My layout is based on a track plan from the 1975 Hornby catalogue and does not contain a water tower and, from the range of accessories illustrated in the catalogue, it does not appear that any was available. The front cover of te catalogue, which is a colour photograph of this same plan, shows an engine shed and steam locomotives, so water would have been required. Some time back, I purchased a Peco Water tower and, when placed on the baseboard, it seemed very low. So, I made a base for it as per the following photos. There is also a photo where I think it should go for space reasons, unless I place it at the far end of the end-to-end middle road opposite to the shed. I would like to receive opinions on the following points: 1. Is the base and tower on it prototypical (or almost) of any period of the history of railways in Britain up to about 1960? 2. Would the tower have been painted or left black (I suppose it should be weathered but I do not possess those skills)? 3. Is the place I have chosen O.K?

Hi again! Just a bit more information relating to my previous post. T.O.T. Hobby's (the correct spelling of the name) has e-mail address tothobbys@yahoo.es and a web page www.tot-hobbys.com (note that one has no hyphen and the other does) However he does not offer on-line sales. El Taller del Modelista S.L. has an e-mail address: contacto@eltallerdelmodelista.com and offer on-line service. Zaratren have a webpage www.zaratren.com and also offer on-line service These two companies also admit PayPal as payment means, although El Taller charges a small supplement for this service. Rocafort Modelisme in Barcelona have a web page www.rocafort.com, offer on-line service but payment is by credit card. I was going to check on Palau in Barcelona, but it slipped my mind. Hope all the above is of use. Regards.

Hi! My local shop is TOT Hobbys in Vilanova i la Geltru (Province of Barcelona) bordering on the Provincve of Tarragona. As can be imagined he deals with Continental HO stuff, but has a large selection of both HO and N rolling stock also in other than Spanish liveries. He also stocks radio controlled cars and has a good collection of kits (mainly ships). He holds a limited range of decoders, including Hornby., but has a wide range of scenic accessory stuff and, in fact, I have a mixture of HO and OO material on the layout. He has an e-mail address, but I am unaware as to whether he sells on-line. In Barcelona citty there are Palau and Rocafort which are large and seem to be well stocked (HO of course). I have purchased on-line from ZaraTrens in Zaragoza (decoders) and from El taller del Modelista in Torrelavega (decoder tester and Kadee couplings) I don't know whether this information will be of much use, but I offer it for what it ia worth.

I can now update on this subject. In the last entry, I placed several photos and will repeat one, namely, the shed in the wrong place In the end, I decided to chop the shed down to its original height by removing the supplements I added several years ago. The photo also shows the door posts I had to remove. When I relaid all the track early last year to improve the dcc feeds I did not take into account the track centre-to-centre distances nor was I too careful in seeing that the straight sections were really straight. This meant that the shed entrance was not wide enough and the locomotives were either colliding with the posts or rubbing against them, contrary to what I said in the previous post. I first removed 2 mms from each side, which was fairly easy since it meant slicing through 4 layers of glued card, but when I placed the shed on the new floor, the entrance was still too narrow. This now meant slicing through 6 layers of glued card and this was just too much so I removed the whole post on each side and made new narrower ones from balsa wood, covered with brick paper. When I placed the remodeled shed on the floor I found it was off-centre relative to the tracks, i.e. the locomotive went in with a large clearance on the north side and was rubbing on the south side. This meant slicing 2 mm off the north side of the floor and adding them to the south side, which finally settled things more or less satisfactorily. Finally, like mentioned in another post some days back by another contributor, I do not want the shed to be a permanent fixture and since the floor was made practically to the same dimensions as the shed's footprint, I added a skirt to each side which fits down the side of the floor, preventing the shed from being accidentally displaced but making it easy to lift off as and when required. I now have the problem of making a signal box which does appear on the original track plan compatible with a water tower which does not, because the available space is limited and the tower could limit the view of the yard from the box. Finally the installation of an additional platform as mentioned last time will require a serious rethink. A front view of shed. Side view with skirt Pieces removed

Hi again: I have been back once and have seen the changes. I have also sent material for the Control Tower Museum, but have not been able to visit it. I live in Catalunya, on the border between the provinces of Barcelona and Tarragona. I am building an 8x4 ft model which, more by chance than design, is UK oriented (1938-1950 period more or less) and I have purchased a good amount of trackside material, cars, commercial vehicles, buses, etc related with the Leeds area, i.e. with old Leeds or West Riding registration numbers.

Hi! Welcome. I also live in Spain (been here for 57 years) but before emigrating from the U.K. I lived in Leeds. However, what attracted my attention was the reference to Ipswich station. I did my National Service at R.A.F. Martlesham Heath and used Ipswich Station often to get the Ipswich-Ely-Peterborough line to connect with the northbound lines, The return trip from Peterborough to Ipswich on a Sundaay afternoon was a real bind - 5 hours. Part of my rolling stock is a Derby lightweight DMU with Ipswich-Felixstowe destination boards. I wish you success.

When I started placing scenic elements on the layout, I discarded resin made items because of their weight (to avoid overloading the electric motor raising and lowering the baseboard) and price and opted for a Metcalfe Card Kit. I then decided to place it in a different site from the one shown on the layout. It was not fixed in place because, at that time, I had Hornby buffer stops which clip onto the rails and any slight blow from a locomotive can dislodge them and it would have been very difficult to replace then at the closed bottom end of the shed. Then I decided that the opening was too low to allow electric locomotives through with the current collector raised and I added some 3 cms to the height. The increase wasn't too obvious at first because the shed rested directly on the baseboard and the track occupied some of the height. However, last week when looking at the photograph of the layout which graces the front cover of the catalogue from which it is taken, the idea hit me that the shed was in the wrong place (as though some subconscious overseer said "you can't put it there") and when I looked at the layout itself I finally realized the logic of the layout, something that had escaped me for ten years. Below are some photographs of what I had wanted to do and what I have had to do. In these photos it can be seen thatthe shed on on the second and third lanes, with the water tower at the other ind of the tird lane. Here the shed can be seen in the right place on the first and second lanes and the problem now is where to put the water tower. It then occurred to me that the shed needed a decent floor at rail height level for the personnel to move about easily and I set about laying one. I have tested it with two different locomotives, an Electrotren Renfe electric loco and a Bachmann Class 150 DMU and both went in and out of both lanes smoothly at speed levels 1, 2 and 3. It has subsequently been painted, so I will probably have to clean the track again. Since the shed will no longer be resting on the baseboard, but on the pavement, the height now seems to be excessive and out of proportion and I am toying with the idea of removing the supplement I added years back (as mentioned above). The first view is of the semi-finished floor with cork underlay. The second one shows the floorwith a balsa wood top cover in place and painted. I now plan to at another platform to the unfinished stattion on the same side as the shed.

As mentioned in a previous post, around July last year i came to the conclusion that my UK 00 fleet was very poor in comparison with my continental H0 fleet. Namely, I had two DMUs, three steam locomotives and only four passenger coaches. So, I lashed out and purchased four passenger coaches (Dapol) and seven goods vehicles, all Bachmann. I had the idea of fitting them all with Kadee couplers. I managed to fit them to the passenger coaches with some trouble, since these did not have the NEM pockets, something of which I was aware before purchasing them. When I looked at the goods wagons, however, I found that only two had pockets and the rest did not, something that was not clear from the catalogue images, and I thought that I was in for a lot of work, possibly outside my capabilities. Anyway, last week when browsing through my modelling folder, I found an article published in 1999 by Chris Ellis entitled "Magnetic Couplings for British 4mm" explaining how to fit Kadees precisely to Bachmann material, among others. This encouraged me to have a go. However, possibly owing to the time that has passed since the article was written, I found some variations from the details given. A 1.5 mm drill bit was suggested, but I found that the mounting screw was almost 1.9 mm, which required drilling a larger hole in the coupling. It was also stated that the height of the coupling once fitted was just right. I found that the fitted couplings were too low when applied to the Kadee height gauge, so I have had to file down the mounting column, which was a trial and error method, requiring me to fit and remove the coupling four or five times before achieving the correct height. I have managed to get the four wagons fitted with the screw mounted tension lock coupling done. I than had a look at the two fitted with NEM pockets and both were low. In this case it was more complicated, since the NEM mount has to be removed and its height reduced in one truck and both the NEM mount and a screw spigot have to be reduced in the other case. I got one of them done, but the FINA Spirit tanker, apart from being delicate, is the more complicated one and I have left it for another day. After that, I still have to tackle the Queen Mary brake van which has the coupling integrally moulded with the bogie, the same as all my old Lima stock, which I would also like to modify or at least the goods stock. The reason for fitting Kadees is that I have come to the conclusion that, with nine sidings, my layout would be more ideal for shunting exercises, rather than see trains just running around in circles (as shown in my very first post, the layout only measures 8x4 ft).

I have been at for ten years now and not finished yet. I doubt that many have made so many mistakes as I have. But you can find tons of helpful advice here so, rather than shoot first and ask questions afterwards, it is better to work the other way round. Good luck.

In the first place, I would say that I have obtained locally an adhesive which sticks with no problem to the plastic of the Dapol bogies. The manufacturer is Ceys. and is predicated for "difficult plastics". It comes with a tube of primer liquid which is rubbed on both parts and then the adhesive is applied to one part only. I am unaware as to whether it is available in the U.K. I made several attempts to fit the couplers, but none was satisfactory. They were misfitted and hung too low, except for one which I fitted on top of the bogie arm and then it was far too high. Yesterday I came to the conclusion that the only solution was to manufacture an adhoc pocket in the bogie arm itself. To do this, I ground away the cenetre pin and the side walls and cut a groove the width of the coupler shank in the bogie arm. I then stuck a small piece of styrene strip on the top side of the groove, turned the coach upside down and stuck the coupler to the styrene showing through the groove and finally stuck another small piece of styrene strip on the under side of the arm. Since I wasn't too exact with the size of the styrene pieces, I then had to fettle away a small excess amount to be able to refit the wheels. This time the height was just right. So I now have to remove the misfitted couplers and refit them as above.

In October, my wife and I had a holiday in Geneva with a daughter who was working there with the WTO. On the Saturday, she took us to the flea market where there was a lot of rubbish on offer, but one lady had 3 or 4 of the Lima Tram collection. I didn't buy then, because I wasn't quite convinced of its suitability for my layout. Nevertheless, a few weeks later another daughter went to see her sister in Geneva and I asked them to buy one for me, It is the Düwag Partywagen, nº 208041 as shown below. I have been searching for information on the Internet but the only concrete information I have located is on a Dutch language page. As far as I have been able see, these models are not brilliant runners and would seem to be best in the show cabinet. I have tried it out on my layout and, while needing a finger from the sky now and again, it did manage to negotiate the complete circuit, points included. These models are not DCC ready, but I couldn't quite understand whether it was possible to fit DCC or not. Has any member had any experience of these models and can enlighten me more fully? I have searched the Forum and have not been capable of finding anything on the subject, so I am raising the matter here.

I am back here because, after months of hesitation, I decided to have a go at the Dapol coaches. In the first place, I found that both bogies were the wrong way round, with the couplings pointing inwards and not outwards (this was the case with three of the four coaches I purchased) and to avoid forcing things, I removed the wheels (it took me a lot of fiddling about to get them back again). I removed the clip and the original coupling. I then tried drilling a hole through the legs of the Kadee coupling but couldn't do it properly, so I decided to stick the coupling to a strip of styrene and then drill a hole through the styrene right at the end of the legs. This fitted over the pin on the bogie and I held it in place with the clip. This fitting is obviously provisional, since the coupling projects out much farther than suggested by 66C above but is just at the right height as shown by the Kadee gauge. This leads me to ask two questions, namely: 1. If I move the coupling back in to the level suggested, it seems that two coaches would have the buffers almost touching and I am wondering whether, in this situation, the coaches would be able to follow the 1st radius curves I have on my layout. What is the opinion on this? 2. 66C also suggested changing the wheels. The current wheels measure 16.51 mm across the flanges and 14.51 mm across the treads. The Hornby wheels I have located are 12.6 mm spoked wheels, which I assume are for goods vehicles or 14.1 mm wheels. Are these measurements across the flange or across the tread? If the 14.1 mm is across the tread, these wheels would reduce the ride height by 0.4 mm and also the coupling height and, since the couplings have to be at a precise height, this difference might cause problems. What is the opinion on this?

While I am still pondering on the best way to set about finishing the ballasting, as a diversion it occurred to me that I should protect the last unprotected side of the layout, where the track hovers over a precipice and, fortunately, in nine years only one locomotive has fallen to the floor. For a time, I had a programming track fixed along the edge but I decided to remove this and set up a portable programming track so I could work on the dining room or kitchen table when it was cold in the garage. A first idea was to acquire a strip of plywood or hardboard and nail it on to the edge of the baseboard, then I thought it was more scenic to build a brick wall and fix it all along the curve. So, I set about making a wall from a cardboard shoe box, using two thicknesses and overlapping 24 cm long strips half by half to make one 140-odd cm strip as per the photograph. I then prepared a brick pattern downloaded some time ago on glossy photographic paper but it didn't look right, so I acquired some matte paper. Although the pattern was to scale, the bricks looked too small against other brick papers I had bought locally in the past, so I increased the size by 70% with Photoshop. However, when I printed it out I made the mistake of using Windows Live Photographic Gallery and the bricks came out even larger, about twice the scale size. When I realized, this I had already printed the three sheets I needed, so I let it be. Here is a photo of the brick paper. I then covered the whole strip on both sides with this paper and added columns every 12 cms using Metcalfe paving slabs. I started attaching this wall to the edge of the track when I had done about half, I felt I should have tested first to see whether the rolling stock could pass freely. Out came my Lima HO scale wagon lits coach and it did pass, but at a distance leaving room for only a fag paper. I tried with a DMU, a steam loco and a passenger coach, all OO scale. They also passed but I felt that the space represented only 2 or 3 scale inches and that more space was need to make it more realistic, so I unglued half of what was already done and widened the space and it now represents slightly more than one scale foot. I then finished off fixing the wall in place, installed the capping using the Metcalfe material and filled in the gap caused between the base of the wall and the edge of the track board by widening the curve. And here is the final result.

I think the idea is good, but I also think that the system would better inside one of your model vehicles. They look much more authentic and, of course, would be more Leeds-like.

That was the first thing I tried, but I couldn't do it properly and discarded the idea. I tried both sanding it away and cutting it away, but it didn't work, and I ended up by trimming all the cork away to the edge of the sleepers.

Since I relaid the whole track using cork underlay instead of the previous foam underlay I have been faced with the problem of decent ballasting. Since, for reasons explained in previous posts, I used a 5 mm thick cork, I now have the problem of how to disguise this steep step. I tried gluing 7 mm wide cardboard strips at an angle to form a hypotenuse and, in some places it seems o.k. but in others not because I did not get the ballast to stick properly. Finally, I decided to glue a twine in the angle between the upright cork wall and the base and then apply the ballast and a small test piece turned out alright, but when I have applied it to the layout, I find it hard to get the same results and it doesn't seem to look quite right to me, but I haven’t seen close up shots of other modellers' ballasting to compare. I enclose some photos and would like to see photos of others. A further point, is the water tower o.k. in its present colour as supplied, or should it have a different colour and is it right planted directly on the floor or should it have a pedestal? The photos are not particularly good, but I used a tablet with a low powered camera.

Since I relaid the whole track using cork underlay instead of the previous foam underlay I have been faced with the problem of decent ballasting. Since, for reasons explained in previous posts, I used a 5 mm thick cork, I now have the problem of how to disguise this steep step. I tried gluing 7 mm wide cardboard strips at an angle to form a hypotenuse and, in some places it seems o.k. but in others not because I did not get the ballast to stick properly. Finally, I decided to glue a twine in the angle between the upright cork wall and the base and then apply the ballast and a small test piece turned out alright, but when I have applied it to the layout, I find it hard to get the same results and it doesn't seem to look quite right to me, but I haven’t seen close up shots of other modellers' ballasting to compare. I enclose some photos and would like to see photos of others. A further point, is the water tower o.k. in its present colour as supplied, or should it have a different colour and is it right planted directly on the floor or should it have a pedestal? The photos are not particularly good, but I used a tablet with a low powered camera.

As mentioned in the last but one post, it is now nine years since I started out on this adventure and I think I can now say that we are in in a position to play trains. The layout is far from finished scenically, as ripping up and relaying the track caused a lot of damage. but no dead spots appear on the track. It seems, however, that some vehicles do not like the track, as mentioned in a previous post, and one of my best runners, the Class 150 DMU, started playing up again. When travelling forward at speed step 2, it consistently derailed at one spot, a turnout leading to the yard and engine shed. Close observation revealed no obvious reason, since this derailing did not occur when running in reverse over the same spot or in the opposite direction. In the end, I came to the conclusion that one wheel was hitting a rail joiner, causing it to lift and derail. So A 'it it wi' me 'ammer. A few taps on the end of a screwdriver with a rubber mallet worked wonders. I enclose some photos of the layout, before: and as it now is: The part with the buildings did not suffer much, mainly benches missing from the small park and the road had to be relaid, A bit each day and I might get finished by the end of the year. Finally, to make mouths water, a picture of this year's Christmas cake. We do not ice it or cover with marzapan.

As Leeds born, this layout interests me a lot and I would very much like to see it live. However, I have no idea when we will be able to make a trip to the U.K. One thing I would like to see, albeit in photograph on the web, is a tram with 18 on the destination board. Would it be too much to have a bus, a back loader with half cab (JUB 727 for example) with destination 40?

Hi all! Between my last post and this there have been five heart blocks and a pace maker. Fortunately for me, the last block, which lasted nine seconds, occurred when I was in bed in hospital, being monitored. Eight hours later, the pace maker was installed. Apart from this, I am struggling along with the ballasting of the track. I try to do a bit each day, but 20+ metres of track is a lot of track. Also, since I had ripped up the foam underlay and used cork, since the cork portions were hand crafted (?) from sheets, when I laid the track again, it did not coincide exactly with the centre of the cork bits. So, to make things look decent, I have to trim the cork. As commented before, I had three OO gauge steam locomotives, but only four passenger coaches and no goods stock. So I purchased four coaches in LMS livery to go behind my LMS locomotive, a rake of seven goods wagons, including a brake van and a particular Derby lightweight DMU (second hand) that I had wanted for some time now. In the past Hattons had reduced, from time to time, the price of various Bachmann DMUs, but not this one and, finally, the price went up substantially. So, in the end, I have had to pay for a second hand DMU the same price for which I could have had it new two or three years ago.