Michael Edge

Why does the driver always have to have his hand on the regulator? Why have his hands on anything at all - the driver is doing nothing most of the time and the brake handle is much more likely.

Not really but we do have etched n/s swords and "Sentinel" for £3 a set. We don't do the full brake linkage even in our kit since it was designed to use a motor bogie - the Sentinel brake linkage is actually rather complicated. Open handrails would only be wire and the various boxes you mention differ greatly from one to loco to another. The Hornby model is not really a suitable base for the rod drive version as I have explained earlier.

Boiler dimensions are just that, the boiler itself which we don't see or model. What we see is the cladding and there's usually 2-3 inches of insulation underneath so these dimensions can only ever be a rough guide.

I've not found this one but it's probably a lot cheaper direct from China.

It works very well - it does need a reversing module as well of course, the Upperby one uses the same one that switches the Maryport & Carlisle return loops on the layout. It's very unlikely that both would be required to operate simultaneously.

Different wheelbase, wheel diameter and platform/ buffer beam width. The buffer beams are an entirely different shape as well. Cab and casings are the same.

Why not use the loco controller for the turntable? There's one of these tables at Garsdale on the Carlisle layout which has the DCC address 50 (Upperby shed table is 70), on my own Herculaneum Dock the Brunswick shed table has its own section. In all cases the loco controller is used to drive the table round, the 60ft table at Brunswick has to be aligned by eye ( easy because the operator is looking down on it), the others have stops fitted. They only serve one through track and can only rotate through 180 degrees, with DCC they have two fixed wires for the track, no wipers or contacts of any sort.

It should be quite safe to short circuit the layout if the cut out operates properly. With a big layout, such as Carlisle I usually carry something metal with me to drop on the track in case of emergency - I might be the best part of 30m away from whatever is happening but a coin on the track stops everything quite safely, a bit like emergency track circuit clips on the full size railway.

The four main engines (500 hp Paxman) fed into a central gearbox via differentials, the loco could run on one, two, three or four depending on power required. There were also two 150hp railcar engines, these drove the superchargers for the main engines. It should be noted that at the time this was the most powerful single unit diesel in Britain, not bettered until the prototype Deltic a few years later. It was withdrawn in August 1958, not because it didn't work and not as a result of an engine fire as usually reported - the reason was given as too high maintenance costs.

The centre sections of the rods were removed quite early in 10100's career - presumably because of stresses induced by two methods of coupling together. Don't forget that this was a very experimental loco and this was one of the first lessons learned.

Yes but I was assuming that it was the UK classification we were discussing.

NER No.13 was a 2-Co-2, each axle individually motored - 2-D-2 implies rod drive coupling the axles.

I will, might even get some more work done on it when we get back from France.

Thanks, I've used plenty of these motors but the final drive is the difficult bit. I've mostly used the plastic bevel gears but they are a bit big in 00 locos.

Where did you get the skew gears for the final drive in that lorry? I've been looking for some to fit to these gearboxes for some time.

You might have some problems with the 9F drivers, they have much too long a crankthrow for an inside cylinder loco.

C8809 has a YE Janus, not a Sentinel.

The K's tyres are not plated, they are machined steel, should clean up quite easily but the D location might not survive.

BR chimney on the left - L&Y shaped rim.

Not exactly, this is the side of the coal space, attached to the the top of the tank which is a few inches above the plate join. They evolved over years from open coal rails, later plated over and finally solid plates. Other railways, notably the LMS, simply extended the tank sides upwards.

I don't know what that one is but some of the Carr's fluxes are extremely corrosive - especially on steel - and should be washed off immediately. i won't have them in my workshop, phosphoric acid does everything and is completely safe on steel - it's the basis of rust proofers actually.

The lamp brackets look a bit too long but otherwise OK.

The cranks should be a press fit on the axle supplied, depends to some extent on how well aligned they are before soldering up. They may need reaming slightly but shouldn't be loose, if they are soldering or Loctite should be OK. The axles are usually made from stainless steel but some are from unused Gibson axles and I don't know what sort of steel these are, other than that they are extremely free cutting. If only one is a bit loose, solder that one up first and adjust with the other one. I don't know what you use as flux, phosphoric acid is what I use but the 9% stuff isn't strong enough for steel.

I built one once, can't locate a photo of it at the moment. I did throw away the boiler as I recall...

Herculaneum Dock uses DC for the BR (CLC) part and DCC for the Mersey Docks system, taking advantage of the operation not involving any locomotive movements between the two. In three places around the layout wagons are pushed up to or through the dock gates, a section of track is completely dead to both systems at these points. The overhead railway is also DCC but that is completely separate. Incidentally the dock system wasn't rewired for DCC, we just use it with all the section switches on.