steveNCB7754

7 minutes ago, Phil Parker said:

It's part of their Thomas range, so a simplified moulding. I'd not expected it to have any scale credentials.

 

The moulding will be new, not based on anything else, and if the mechanism is as good as the rest of the range, quite impressive. I know the Sterling Single has been converted to a more scale model in the past, so I'm sure people will fiddle with this one and remove the face.

 

Hi, thanks Phil,

Your last point, was along the lines of my thinking.  My early career was in engineering, where I worked at a company which was part of the PD (Powell Duffryn) group.  They used to operate 08's at the Gwaun-Cae-Gurwen Disposal Point near Ammanford (Swansea) and I quite fancy the notion of one (even just as a static model) in their 'Powell Duffryn Coal Preparation' scheme of white and blue, with 'wasp stripes' on the buffer beam.  Yet another potential distraction, from what I should be concentrating on (LOL).

Steve

Hi All,

So, I've done a quick search of RMWeb and cannot find a dedicated Gauge 1 forum, or any info on this item, but I've just seen in a Kernow Model's emailing, that Bachmann are producing a Gauge 1 'Thomas The Tank Engine & Friends' version of the BR Class 08 shunter (due November 2021).  Not strictly of any particular interest to me, but at 'only' £195 each, I wondered if anybody knows how 'to scale' this product is going to be (for instance, is it a new tooling, or based on a previous 'toy' scale item)?

TIA

Steve N

21 hours ago, Ruston said:

It was good to see the old layout again, at the Middleton Railway, today.

 

Charlie Strong has sold the former Grimethorpe No1 to the British Steel Corporation.

Also looks like someone's been a bit over-enthusiastic with the overhead crane! Guess the maintenance guys will have to come and re-rail the hoist carriage.

Steve N

1 hour ago, TEAMYAKIMA said:

Steve

 

Apologies for not replying sooner. There will be changes to the operating pattern - we will be running less trains!

 

There has always been banking on the industrial. It's unique, in the sense that it is authentic to have just 11 coal cars with TWO bankers, it is based on the system at Chengde - but in all the videos of the layout I've seen on YOUTUBE it has never featured.

 

CONCLUSION - the viewer's attention is taken away when a diesel powered mixed freight (or similar) passes under his/her nose and they video that instead. So, from now on we will halt the China Rail lines when banking moves happen at the back of the layout on the industrial.

 

I realise that your question was more targeted at the China Rail lines and the QJ's. Since our move to 2001 rather than 2004 there will be more steam powered trains and most/many will be double-headed.

 

In the past, all of these moves have been two QJ's conventionally set up but I am tempted now to set one up tender to tender like this train I photographed in 1997

 

 

Why? Because once again it would be very different and eye-catching and yet authentic.

 

As regards QJ banked trains on China Rail, it's not something I've ever considered (until now). My operating team want simple, reliable operation and so I think it's a case of getting the first exhibition out of the way (after all the changes I've made) and then consider other options.

 

 

Thanks for the reply and the tender-to-tender haulage would be unusual (at least to the general public).  Also, I think I've seen a shot (or maybe video) of even the banking QJ being tender-first, but don't quote me. Presumably, having two QJ's banking, might just be a way of moving an engine to another task/location, rather than necessarily needing its tractive effort on that load (and so avoiding a 'Light Engine' move)?  Look forward to seeing this layout again, once its possible.

Steve N

2 hours ago, TEAMYAKIMA said:

Since the weekend I have been dealing with some of the (minor) issues which came to light during our recent running session.

 

 

All Bachmann QJ's which will be consisted as a pair now have designated leading and trailing locos. We had problems because the kadee at the front of Bachmann QJ's tend to be a little high and the Kadees on Bachmann QJ tenders tenders tend to be a bit low and consequently the consisted two locos often broke apart. The trailing locos now all have dropped front Kadees in order to better match the slightly low Kadees on the Bachmann QJ tenders.

Looks much better.  Have asked/mentioned this as a possibility before, but are you going to demonstrate banking in future shows (i.e. a QJ banking a QJ, or QJ double-headed train)?

Steve N

1 hour ago, 88C said:

You don't always get it right first time.

Ist attempt.

 

2nd attempt

Can you spot the difference?

 

It just didn't look right first time so the only thing to do is try again. Still a lot of detailing to do but the basics are there now.

 

Brian

Err, smaller chimneys?

Steve N

10 hours ago, TEAMYAKIMA said:

This morning's upgrade. Our new tagline, "Industrial China in the 21st century" 

Looking good -  the 'glow' from the backscene really stands out now under that lighting.  BTW, given the density of housing on both sides of the line, do the railways there ever provide a means for pedestrians at least, to cross the tracks (directly or via an bridge)?

Steve N

9 hours ago, 009 micro modeller said:

 

Was this for weight distribution or other reasons?

The source I have doesn’t say why, but we can reasonably speculate. Needless to say, removing the tanks from the loco, reduces potential tractive effort. On the other hand, by the time this was done, these ‘veterans’ would have been used for less onerous duties anyway, having been supplanted by newer machines sourced secondhand from the ‘main line’ system. Probably just expedient to remove them once the tanks required extensive repairs or replacement, especially if you have access to surplus tenders from scrapped or surplus engines. Other advantages I suppose are; easier access for maintenance, and improved forward visibility whilst shunting (with no side tanks in the way).

HTH

Steve

On 31/07/2021 at 16:44, Train Thing said:

I have always liked the idea of a large tender engine, say a WD 2-8-0, being sold in to industry after use on BR to some large colliery system. Did this ever happen? It seems unlikely any small industrial railway would need something that extreme but I’m not the industrial expert. Here is mining company’s 4-8-2 that shows this practice in Australia.

 

Hi.

As others have hinted, this is actually a South African locomotive.  This was one of four standard tank locomotives operated by the Springbok Colliery at Vandyksdrif near Witbank. Built by North British Locomotive Company, two locomotives (#2 and (here) #4), later had their original side tanks removed and the water carried in an auxiliary water carrier (making them tank-tender locomotives).  All the coal was still carried in the original bunker behind the cab.

Steve N

On 07/08/2021 at 17:56, TEAMYAKIMA said:

 

Luke,

 

I suggest you read the menu which is now in plain sight.

 

 

TBH it's a bit worrying that the #1 seller in the truck stop cafe seems to be beer!

Perhaps for the truckers, its an essential apéritif, so that when your order eventually arrives you will be too far gone to worry about how bad the food is! 

Hi,

Apologies; a) if you have answered this elsewhere and b) for my ignorance, but what is the 'fit' between your wheel centres and the society's tyres?  In other words, what holds them together - press-fit or glue?

TIA

Steve

3 hours ago, TEAMYAKIMA said:

                                             

 

 

 

Wait, that guy in white on the right -  is that Al from ‘Quantum Leap’?
 

;-)

6 hours ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

One thing to be aware of when it comes to layout planning is that short wheelbase locomotives and crossings don’t always mix well.

 

To get from one side of a crossing to the other involves passing through two pairs of frogs - unlike traversing a point where there is just one single one.  If you are using Insulfrog or dead frog track pieces (eg: Peco N Gauge Setrack for 009), you could find the distance between the frogs is the same as the distance between the wheels of a small 0-4-0.  Given NG trains tend to run at slower speeds as well, this can lead to a locomotive becoming grounded and stopping.  Just a thought, Keith.

Useful advice, I hadn’t considered that aspect, thanks.

On 18/07/2021 at 23:00, BernardTPM said:

For a sector plate you could modify a Peco turntable, cutting off just past the pivot and utilising a segment of the well. Without the need to revolve 180 degrees it makes wiring a lot easier.

That’s a good idea and would look suitably ‘crude’ (no criticism), more in keeping with narrow gauge (rather than standard gauge) operations.
 

On 18/07/2021 at 21:53, Hobby said:

1. They are very rare, so no "generally" they did not use diamond crossings though no doubt there would be a few around. Bear in mind that NG companies tended to be short of cash so kept everything as simple as possible.

 

2. Sector plates - there are quite a few NG ones on mainland Europe but I am not sure of any over here. If you are a member of NGRM you'll find a couple of threads on NG sector plates.

1. That’s what I was thinking and, as you say, keep it simple -  I can imagine such a crossing would be expensive and difficult to repair if it got abused.

2. Thanks for the information.

Hi again all, its me again and I have a couple more questions, this time related to track layout/design features (009/NG).  First though, a disclaimer.  Please do not assume that because I am asking further questions, that this means that I have actually made any progress on this fantasy (LOL).

So, Q1: Concerns 'Diamond Crossings' (and their use in UK narrow gauge).  There is an 009 layout (an iteration of 'Dinas Junction'), for which I have a plan (the same location was also rendered in 16.5 I think as well) and I might be tempted to use it (modified/flipped) for the design I have in mind. In it, for space-saving reasons, the builder utilises a Diamond Crossing.  Now, from the OS mapping, I cannot be sure whether the real location used such a thing, but it does save valuable space (but is a complicated and costly thing  to produce). So; a) Did UK narrow gauge lines generally, make use of such crossings (I have not found any photos, but then my NG resources are not extensive) AND; b) Does anyone make a RTR or kit for such a crossing in 009?

Q2: Concerns 'Sector Plates' on the (real) NG and in model form -  by which I mean, a single-tracked 'device' that a locomotive ran onto, to be redirected to another, adjacent track. This is obviously similar to what a set of points does (or even a turntable), just in a much shorter space (especially if there is more than one alternative 'route').  The Corris (I think) intend to use such a system at Corris station, due to space restrictions that did not exist historically.  So; a) Did any UK narrow gauge lines use such a Sector Plate? AND b) Does anyone offer such a thing in 009?  I have seen something by Noch for HO (called a 'Segment Turntable'), but it appears to cost around £175(!!) and Faller appear to do one at around 95EUR, though I suppose you could scratchbuild one at a push.

TIA

Steve

43 minutes ago, TEAMYAKIMA said:

8.30 this morning 

 

Er, I’m no expert, but I think that white building in the middle is slightly over-scale! 

On 28/06/2021 at 16:42, TEAMYAKIMA said:

 

... Maybe the simplest way for the operators would be having the bankers always in road #2 and all uphill trains always go into the platform road.

Playing (or maybe, drinking?) Devil's Advocaat here; if a particular track (in the real world/China) is actually restricted to (say) banker engines only, would/should the signalling reflect that (even if only a sign on the pole)?

Steve

On 14/06/2021 at 11:55, TEAMYAKIMA said:

 

That is so in line with my experience over the last 40 odd years and I know other layouts which have come to similar conclusions.

 

As I have said before we are going to re-think our operation to maximise interest for the viewers. Two examples....................

 

1.  Our biggest USP is the DOUBLE banked coal trains at the back of the layout which is very impressive with all three locos being sound equipped. But if a non-sound diesel hauled train runs through the layout on the China Rail lines closer to the audience then the viewer's attention is completely drawn to that rather mundane experience because it's right in front of them.

 

CONCLUSION - we will attempt to co-ordinate things so a train on China Rail does not run through when a banked train departs.

 

2.  One of our operators in particular has always thought that two trains passing each other on the China Rail double track main line is very impressive - and it is! But the consequence is that there is then a long delay with nothing appearing on the  China Rail double track main line until both trains are safely back in their respective fiddle yard roads.

 

CONCLUSION - whilst the two trains passing each other is a  very positive feature the negative consequences make it better (in general) to have trains sequencing in quick succession, clockwise then anti-clockwise, then clockwise etc. Maybe a double passing as a special request for some impressive video, but in general not.

On example 2, I've always found a slightly faster (longer) freight/passenger working, gradually passing a slower ('wheezing') freight (on a 'slow' line) much more 'evocative', than the 'two fast trains rushing passed each other' norm on a lot of layouts.  Just my 2 cents worth. :-)

Steve

On 13/06/2021 at 18:43, TEAMYAKIMA said:

 

Hmmmmmm??

 

All I would say is that a lot of what I'm doing is to try to make life easier for my operators. No-one appreciates their efforts more that me. My two main concerns are

 

1. To make the operation as stress-free as possible - which means making the layout work reliably. This is not easy to achieve when we can't test the layout except at a show.

2. To minimise the set-up and take-down time. (The former so as to maximise the time in the pub)

 

I am trying to get 'everything done' because I have plenty of other hobby related things I want to get on with - I want to get this layout to the stage where it is reliable and finished so that between shows I get get on with other things.

In doing a bit of a catch-up on this thread, I think I can see a pattern emerging which might  suggest a reason why the layout operation is sometimes not 'optimal'.  The word 'Pub' seems to crop up a lot in exchanges between yourself and other operators - maybe the state of intoxication is having something to do with it (LOL)?  

Steve

4 hours ago, Al. said:

We've been looking at adding signals to the layout. With the standard of China Rail light signals models on the market being very poor quality, we've drawn our own up in CAD and ran a test print.

 

The ladder is a bit on the fragile side, but the rest look ok. Trail fit due in a couple days to assess it for final adjustments.

   

That is, as with all design decisions, the difficulty with 3D printing; which parts are best suited to what production process and/or materials. Probably better to make the ladder (or use a commercially available item if possible) in etched brass as a separate item, especially for an exhibition layout (can’t imagine a ‘plastic’ one lasting very long).

Steve

12 hours ago, corneliuslundie said:

Before the pandemic my wife and I were thinking of taking a day to visit Llangurig. Of course it has not happened yet. Maybe later in the summer. But it will be constrained by the limited number of buses as we shall  be reliant on the X75 - neither of us drives. Perhaps we can even meet up when that eventually happens.

 

Have just got back from a very pleasant 'stroll' up the hill above Llangurig.  Thrushes are singing and the boughs of (I assume) either plums or Damsons, are heavy with blossom. Last year of course, all were burnt off by an earlier frost, so we might see some fruits this year.  Get in touch if you are coming for a visit, it would be good to meet up.

On 12/03/2021 at 09:44, TEAMYAKIMA said:

 

....  The BIG issue was how to prevent something similar happening again.

 

 

 

 

One of the design ‘Tenets’  I remember from my early career went something like, ‘If someone can do it the wrong way, someone will’.  Hind sight is a wonderful thing of course, but even the development of the steam locomotive was predicated on mistakes (sometimes even fatal ones).

Now I realise this may not be physically possible, but one way around this would be to NOT have these sockets near each other AND then have each lead plug only capable of reaching its designated socket. Obvious I know this is easy for me to say, sat at my kitchen table, but maybe next time.

Not withstanding all this, the layout is looking great and I look forward to seeing it in action again :-)
 

4 hours ago, TEAMYAKIMA said:

 

   '... being manhandled in tight spaces has resulted in some problems - PECO code 100 is not as indestructible as I once thought!'

 

 

China does experience earthquake damage of course, so any repairs you make are entirely prototypical.

14 hours ago, TEAMYAKIMA said:

 .... I only hope my operating team don't see this photo - they like to keep things nice and simple and I want to keep these new more complex moves up my sleeve until the morning of our next show

 

Operating Team member, at first exhibition after rules are relaxed: "Really looking forward to a trouble-free weekend, of simple movements, now all those bugs have been fixed".

[Gets handed the 100-page, 'New Operating Rules', resulting from all the bug fixes]

Operating Team member: "AAARRRRRRRHHHHHHH!!!!!"

;-)