Froxfield2012

Cobalts are supplied with this small screw (It is the one with a small flange/washer built in). The wire goes in the top hole on the motor arm and the screw in the lower hole. The screw is just to retain the wire so don't over tighten. You will find this is covered in the instructions on DCC Concepts website and that came with the motors. Whereas the polarity of the track wires I had to work out for myself by trial and error rather! Richard.

On the basis that a picture is worth a thousand words, I just nipped out to the shed and took this of two Cobalts installed the opposite way round. Despite my nightmare spaghetti wiring, they work! Note that the two track wires (Yellow and Green) are reversed. Richard

In your photograph, the green wire to point two seems to be in a different connector from the other two motors. The frog wire should always be in the third connector, next to the track power wires. I have just wired up about a dozen Cobalt digitals and the frog switch has worked reliably. I have had issues making sure the track feed wires went to the correct connectors: it seems that one needs to maintain the overall polarity and I THINK I did this by making sure that the feed from the rail furthest away goes to the connector furthest away (if you understand me?). At least I think that is what I did, I will check later!! In any event, it is a simple matter to reverse the track connections on a trial and error basis. The main point I would make is to check that you have the frog wire in the correct connector. If you don't then there is simply no polarity switch in place. Richard

I am really looking forward to progress in 2014! But for now Happy Christmas and a small picture to encourage you to work on 70033. Not really properly edited for blemishes I'm afraid. Richard

Iain Interesting about the speedo. All these pictures of 46256 were taken on 8 August 1956, and as you can see from the shot below, there is clearly a speedo cable to the rear driving wheel at this time. Does this imply that when the position of the speedo cable was moved they just disconnected the original and left everything in place? And for how long I wonder? The detail is quite good on this shot if you can look past the two small boys! That's me on the left, aged nearly 9 and let loose in Camden. Happy days. Richard Richard

I'm afraid I have nothing of the right hand side, although it is clear from those pictures I do have that the ducting for the electric light heads off to the right hand side at running plate level. As can be seen below. By the way, what is the cable attached to the front bogie wheel? A second speedo cable?! In point of fact pretty much all the Camden pictures I have are of the left hand side. A function of the way the light falls in the shed, I would guess. Camden was always murky at the best of times. Richard

And here is a close up of the real thing at Camden in August 1956. An unedited negative with some flaws I am afraid. Also maybe pre AWS, did they move the pipework up? Richard

bike2steam Thank you very much for this guidance! I have seen the big glass building on Google Streetview so I am all set. Richard

OK. So I am in Weymouth and travelling back home past Poole tomorrow. How do I find the shop? I have used Streetview but the address just looks like a single office unit. Is the shop round the back? I would be very happy if a response is forthcoming today......otherwise I guess I will have to try and find it myself! Richard

gwrrob Unfortunately I have very few pictures of Dainton because our Devon holidays were dogged by awful weather. One of a hydraulic is already on the website and there are a couple more to be "processed" and that's it! In any event my father was always conscious that Peter Bowles and the peerless David S FIsh were the masters of that location. David Fish was a real artist, although you wouldn't have thought so seeing him as I remember him, driving a combined harvester! Off topic, so I will close! Richard

Hello BR (W) You have a point, and are right to point out the qualifier. In fact I did notice it. However, the shot was taken just before Dainton Summit showing a westbound train which is just about to hit a pretty significant downgrade. In my initial post, I was just checking what Stationmaster meant (just in case that picture was really rare!!!) and I think his revised post clarifies things precisely. And as he further says, it doesn't affect in any way the accuracy of his comment on the Dukedog Prairie combination. I should thank the two members who have liked the post/picture. I have the original criticism sheet from the Railway Photographic Society circulating portfolio for this shot. Suffice to say that some of those comments were acidic and negative concerning its quality!! Things have changed over the last 50 years. Regards Richard

Stationmaster I am not sure I quite follow your last paragraph in italics which seems to suggest that an engine with pony truck could not go in front if the train engine was more powerful. I think that the instruction you quote means that an engine with a pony truck could go in front of a more powerful engine. I have certainly seen a fair few shots of Dainton over the years with the Prairie in front of a Castle: as shown in this one of my father's pictures. But maybe it's just me not understanding. If so I apologise. Richard

Miss Prism Thank you for that info. I suppose we should not be surprised at changes. 9017 has been "preserved" for rather longer than it ran for GWR and BR, unless, of course, one counts it as a "Duke" but even then it would be a close thing. Much the same could be said for most (if not all) other preserved steam and some diesels. In BBC's "Only Fools and Horses" road sweeper Trigger has a broom, which he claims is the only one he has ever used although it has had several new heads and new handles. I was taught as a child that steam locomotives were what I now identify as "Trigger's brooms" although clearly some classes were more variable than others. And I guess that the practicalities of keeping preserved locomotives running have led to all sorts of borrowing and "midnight raids". Given that photographs can give such partial, distorted and damaged images (and colour rendering is so variable in colour images) it must be a nightmare for manufacturers and it looks to me as though Bachmann have done a reasonable job at the probable price pint for RTR. Although I am inclined to agree Bluebell Model Railway that the best chance of accuracy would be as preserved TODAY taken from life. But that might limit other options for the majority who want to replicate locomotives in GWR or BR service. Richard

I guess it depends what you mean by "as preserved", remembering that 9017 has been at the Bluebell since at least 1962, which is some 50 odd years. I refer back to my earlier post with a picture from 1962. It seems to me that this shows painted dome and safety valve cover and a tender remarkably lacking in rivets, which would surely have shown up sharply that much "against the light". I have gone back to my original (larger) scan and examined it at higher magnification and (as Nelson might have said) "I see no rivets" except for those on the top of the side as modelled by Bachmann. Indeed, there seem to be none further down where Bachmann have a few. However, Bachmann have missed the extra line of rivets on the smokebox which are apparent in 1962 condition!! Has anyone counted the rivets yet?? :-) Richard

Well, here is the picture from the Class 40 cab, although as previously stated it is a bit far down the line to be of great use. An interesting curiosity though? Richard

Stanley, Thanks for those kind words! I am afraid I have no pictures of that side of the shed. It was the North side and therefore, I would guess, pretty much avoided by photographers. I certainly cannot recall any windows in the main shed and that seems to be borne out by the film clip posted by Iain. I DO remember (aged about eleven) crossing the tracks to the goods shed side and being more apprehensive about stepping over the electrified rails than the chance of an advancing express mowing us down. What are the chances of a young lad being allowed to do that today? I noted on the other thread that Camden was difficult to 'bunk'. All we had to do was call on former driver Whitty and it was 'open house'. The entrance to the shed was through a single personnel gate in a solid brick wall from the cul d sac: it was known as "the hole in the wall" and opened straight onto the road to the coaling tower. You could (at least from my height) just see the tops of locomotives over it. I remember on my first visit, having negotiated that hurdle we passed through the vestibule to the shed. At the end was a large double door sized opening just framing a large driving wheel. The shed foreman came out of his office to greet Harry Whitty, looked at me and said very severely, "Don't you go breaking none of our engines"! I do have one shot from the cab of a Class 40 looking towards Euston, but it shows the right side of the track much closer to the footbridge. I will post it here when I have finished cleaning it up, but it is too far down the line to show the shed itself! Richard

In the words of Blue Peter, "Here is one I prepared earlier". Much earlier. I took this picture of Llanstephan Castle and Calveley Hall at Swindon in 1960. Richard

Iain Trying again. These two images are the beginning and the end of my record of Camden. The first (very) early 1950s and the second 1960s (and to me pretty depressing!). The earlier one was clearly taken during a Railway Photographic Society visit. I suspect that the figure under the camera cloth is M W Earley? Richard

Iain Thank you. It is my own web-site and (mostly) my father's photographs. So far, I have processed about 300 negatives, with about another 600 to look at. There are some more of Camden to come. I was going to add a couple of images from prints to this email but the system won't play this morning! Richard

Iain I have read your description of resurrecting Camden with interest and admiration. Way beyond my capabilities. At the risk of wasting your time, I wonder if you might be interested in a few black and white images of the real thing: including 46256. There is a sub-gallery for Camden at this link: http://froxfield2012.smugmug.com/BRLondonMidlandRegion Richard

An interesting comparison, but am I being over cautious in suggesting there is something "not quite right" about the prototype picture itself? Perhaps a little telephoto distortion of the smokebox. My father's only picture dates from 1962 at the Bluebell and is far from ideal itself in that it is slap against the light. However, does it suggest that Bachmann have got the basic shape OK? Perhaps it is just the rivets and step a bit out on the model? I also wonder what happened to the extra line of rivets that can be seen on this side of the smokebox. Is this just on one side, or has 9012 had a new smokebox in the last 50 years? I will bow to those with greater experience and better eyesight than I. Richard

My first post! I noticed this reference back in January and couldn't help thinking of this picture from the old negatives I have been scanning and posting on-line. Any further advice on a more precise date would be appreciated! http://froxfield2012.smugmug.com/BRWesternRegion/Southcote-Junction/27465410_MT64SJ#!i=2372320137&k=P3pk5cM As a newbie, I hope this link will work. Richard