thegreenhowards

As promised here are a couple of photos of a front bogie which is typical in higher quality O gauge kits. This Schools is a recent purchase (thanks @Tony Teague). It’s built from a David Andrew’s kit - I’m not sure of the builder but probably a professional. The front bogie is pivoted at its centre point with a slot to enable side the side movement and some springing to ‘encourage’ the front of the loco to steer round any curve. It runs exceptionally well, but I don’t know how tight it will go as I only have 6ft plus curves. Andy

This kind of arrangement is common in O gauge. As I understand it, this is more like the bogie does on the prototype as it actually helps steer the loco round a curve. I’m away at the moment, but I’ll post some pictures later. Andy

I find Ellis Clarke are always very fair. Their prices are reasonable to start with and they definitely put customer service first. No connection…just a happy customer. Andy

I’m going to play devils advocate here. I accept that a well built kit stuffed with lead will massively outhaul a RTR loco with no added weight. But that’s not a fair contest. I add some weight to all my RTR locos and very few have to be limited because of lack of haulage ability. My Bachmann and Hornby LNER Pacifics will mainly haul 14 (admittedly mainly plastic) coaches OK. I say mainly because some of the earlier Bachmann A1s won’t haul so much. And my RTR 9F, O2 and WDs all manage my 46 wagon mineral rake. I have several kit built locos which won’t pull so much. Probably for one or more of the following reasons: - they’re made of brass rather than white metal; - they have an inferior motor/ gearbox combo; or - they haven’t been built very well (certainly true of one or two of my earlier efforts!). In O gauge a lot of kits are predominantly brass and therefore not so heavy. I find that they often don’t haul too much without a lot of added weight and that RTR is sometimes better. My RTR Ellis Clark Black 5 will pull anything I ask of it - but it does weigh about 3KG and has a top of the range ABC helical gearbox! Having said all this, I do accept that in the extreme situation of Tony’s rakes of 14 metal coaches, something heavier than is possible with a plastic body is probably required. All this is a rather long winded way of my saying, let’s try to be more balanced here. The difference is not between kit and RTR, but based on weight, quality of construction and power of motor. Tony’s Pacifics are built to pull and they do so very well. But a modern RTR pacific suitably weighted would not be that far behind and would be able to cope with 99%+ of model railway tasks that are thrown at it. I, for one, am very grateful that the RTR we have today is far better than it used to be in haulage terms as well as detail. I guess I should say ‘Trigger alert ‘ at this point! Andy

Maybe it’s too similar to a B17 and regarded as a mutilation of one. However that very same similarity would bring economies should Hornby decide to make one.

All this talk of class 47s makes me very uncomfortable. It’s worse than the Russian doll 4-6-0s from the ‘other railway’ which occasionally crop up. I’ve gone to great lengths to set the end date for my layout, Gresley Jn, at 27/9/62 - the day before the first ‘duff’ arrived at Finsbury Park. In O gauge, I’ve gone later, but chose Glenfinnan because no 47s were allowed there…at least in the good old days!

Tony, You missed the two most glaring (at least to me) RTR omissions off your list - a B2 and a B16. Andy

While this generation of timber may be in the atmosphere as CO2, one has to remember that, provided the trees were replanted, the next generation is soaking up an equivalent amount. That is one of the beauties of building from timber (speaks a forester). Andy

If every eBay purchase came with a free service from ‘sir’ then I’m sure they’d go for a lot more! It’s the knowledge that 90% will need significant attention - probably beyond many modellers - that puts people off.

She brings back some memories. I had 37104 on the 0800 Oban-QS on 13/7/85. Seemed pretty ‘big’ at the time! Andy

Wow, that is quite a change from what I saw just a few weeks ago. Andy

If WCRC are not providing stewards when they ought to do so, then they don’t have a leg to stand on, and I would accept that as a reason to take action against them. But not against all operators of such doors. I don’t think I’m being selfish to ask whether £10 per ticket is a reasonable price to pay for a tiny reduction in risk. I can afford it, but the Jacobite is already quite expensive and there are many who I will be put off by the price. Even worse, if the end result is the end of Mk 1s on the mainline, then I probably won’t be paying the fare in the first place. Andy

Andy, I appreciate that ‘shades of grey’ are difficult in a legal process. I was trying to make the case that the public at large make (probably sub-conscious) risk assessments with a very different weight put on the risk of an accident than safety professionals. And, as a liberal at heart, I would like to see the state allow more personal responsibility rather than less. And any laws should be in line with how society views risks rather than dictated by those who I would regard as safety zealots. As for getting discounts from someone who cuts corners, it depends on your definition of cutting corners. I wouldn’t go to someone who was clearly unsafe. But a discount from someone who doesn’t ‘gold plate’ the solution then definitely. For example, I use the local garage for my service, rather than paying extra for a Jaguar service. Regards Andy

So very few since manual bolts were put on the doors?

No, but there might be a common sense approach which applied different rules depending on speed and traffic density.