thegreenhowards

GNR Quads for me too. What a wonderfully successful design.

Today it’s the 1925 KX-Cambridge formed of a corridor 6 set and a couple of non corridor strengtheners and headed today by baby Deltic D5901. Here it has stopped in platform 2. The carriage workings say that it picked up a BG and vanfit at Hatfield, so as I’m pretending to be Hatfield that’s what I do. They are waiting in platform 1 behind the loco with a D.120 BY instead of a vanfit - anyone know if that is reasonable? The Baby Deltic uncouples and collects the vans. I’ve no idea whether that’s what would have happened or whether the station pilot would have added them to the rear of the train. Having attached the vans, the Baby Deltic is ready to leave. And here she is rounding ‘gasworks’ curve.

I rather like K3s and also have five which is far too many for the south end of the GNML in the ‘50s. So I have to use them whenever there’s an excuse. Which basically means the Hull and Grimsby fish trains and the occasional other goods. Two of them are SE Finecast with correct size wheels, but they don’t run at the same time as my stunted wheel variants! One should make an appearance shortly as it’s getting towards fish ‘O’ clock! Regards Andy

Thanks Tony, I agree. I have fitted some plasticard versions on a couple of mine and they're fine on my 36" curves. It would probably be an issue on train set curves but that's why they supply them as optional detailing for the purchaser to fit on other models. Definitely worth doing. I agree that when shown back to back the drivers are clearly far too small...even allowing for a lot of wear. However when running on the layout I don't notice this as there isn't another K3 next door to compare. It's a compromise that I'm prepared to accept for a well running running chassis. I think the footsteps is a bigger issue and luckily easier to fix. Thanks for those kind words - It's good to know that you appreciate it. Regards Andy

The 0947 Newcastle was one of the more interesting trains of the day. Great to see the full formation.

Thanks for that info. Your product sounds like a slightly less sophisticated and probably significantly better value version of this Modeltech rail aligner which has been released recently. https://www.modeltech.uk It’s £10 for a pair covering two tracks in O gauge which seems quite steep compared with a couple of bits of copper clad but I’ve ordered one packet which I intend to try on the layout as a test. I will use them for the joint between the last scenic board and the fiddle yard as that will get the most traffic at the highest speeds to alignment is the most critical. I will report back on their use in due course. Andy

...and me

More progress over the last couple of days. There may not be much visible difference, but since my last update, I’ve marked the alignments, lifted the track, laid cork, replaced the track and soldered in copper clad sleepers and screws for the baseboard joints. As before the goods yard track on the bottom right is only laid in place for an impression. I’m waiting until the club can get together again to discuss and agree the final track layout in the yard. As a reminder, there will be another 4 foot board beyond this one (far end from camera) which will contain a hidden cassette for the descending line on the left and (visible) extensions of the platforms for the other lines. Two points of interest. Firstly, after some phone discussions with fellow club member, Peter about the layout of the goods headshunt (extreme RH track) I decided to try a wye point in order to create some separation between the headshunt and platform 3 to allow for overall roof supports and to mark it our as separate from the passenger station. The wye proved too extreme, so I went back to a RH point, but did some ‘butchery’ on the point to create a sort of 1/4:3/4 wye. I hope this photo shows the result. It’s allowed the curve to continue onto the goods headshunt and thereby create some separation. Secondly, having never laid O gauge track or built a portable layout before, I was unsure about arrangements for the track passing over the baseboard join. So, I’ve rather learnt ‘on the job’! On the previous baseboard joints I did have some double sleepers (one on each board) which looked rather ugly. So I decided to try to avoid that here. The track on the left was first and here I put in a single copper clad sleeper on one side of the joint with two screws on the other side. The track was soldered down to the sleeper and the two screws. It looks better than a double sleeper but the diagonal/ offset sleeper looks strange. For the two main platforms, I used the same tactic but here the track crosses at right angles so it works well. For the track leading into platform 3 and the goods headshunt I tried an alternative approach laying two copper clad sleepers perpendicular to the track at standard sleeper spacing. This resulted in a secure joint bottom left and top right but with a track overhang bottom right and top left. In these places I used a screw and soldered down to that. Having done all this, O gauge track seems so robust compared with OO that I’m wondering whether I could just leave the plastic sleepers in place. Any comments on what I have done would be welcome. I’d be loath to rip up what I’ve done, but will incorporate any lessons for the next board. Tomorrow, I’ll start the wiring of the end of the five foot board and the whole of the four foot one. Andy,

Today it’s a Decoy to KX East Goods Class E. I’m not really sure what goods this train would have carried. It doesn’t seem to appear on PN so I suspect had disappeared by 1958 but is in my WTT from 1953 so I’m running something. I’m assuming it stopped to pick up traffic at New England, hence the brick wagons. It’s headed by K3, 61870 which is a Wills body acquired from Tony Wright on Bachmann chassis. Some might say that this is the worst of both worlds but it runs smoothly and the white metal means it pulls well so it works for me. Here’s more of the train. For its full glory you’ll have to watch the video.

I started a new project last night in front of Match of the Day. Always more fun to start a new one rather than finish anything off! This is a Kirk kit for an O gauge F-T Gresley twin. It will run with the BT and BT-T I’ve already built to make a five car non corridor set for use on out new club O gauge layout. So far, I’ve cleaned up the ‘T’ and stuck most of it together and I’m still at the jigsaw stage with the ‘F’. I do find these kits very enjoyable to build and Ian is such a nice man to do business with.

My only experience of their lining is their 0.35mm plain lining which I found robust and easy to manipulate. I used it to line my Klondike here which was very fiddly but all worked OK taken slowly. The double white lines around the boiler bands are from Modelmaster. They had a tendency to break but if treated gently were OK. The slight blemish in the front boiler band is probably due to my incompetence. I have rather given up on Modelmaster as they take so long to deliver anything and don’t reply to emails. So I’ll be using Fox boiler bands for my O gauge N1 which is next through the paint shop and will report back.

Tony, As ‘Anglian’ says provided water slide transfers are applied to a gloss surface the carrier film is not visible. For example this twin (which you’ve seen before) was numbered and lettered using Fox transfers. I went over them with ‘Klear’ but a matt varnish (I use Testors Dullcote) can be used instead for a flatter finish. Andy

Clive, I hadn’t noticed the nose problem but then, sadly, I’m not the most observant of modellers. To me it looks convincing, works very well and will pull anything asked of it, so I’m happy. I never saw the real thing - I was only three when it met its unfortunate end. While I think the two tone green suited it better, I’m pleased to have the earlier livery on mine as otherwise it’s too hard to distinguish it from a real Deltic. Andy

Tony, I’ve never really got on with Pressfix. Tony Teague gave me a sheet and I’ve used it occasionally but I find it difficult to position things accurately. I prefer the ability of water slide to move them around. The best transfers I’ve found are Fox and their customer service is fantastic. Modelmaster are pretty good too and generally cheaper, but their customer service is the polar opposite! For either applied over a gloss surface any carrier film is invisible. John Isherwood’s CVT transfers are also very good - an excellent range of ready made numbers and very fine backing film but they can be a little delicate. Andy

Thanks, most useful. It seems that I am incorrect to sound it to acknowledge the guards whistle before starting. I was following what seems to happen on the Bluebell - schoolboy error!

Good evidence Tony. Just one thing, remind me when they started painting the top of the boiler cladding black as well?!

Next through Gresley Jn is the down Master Cutler hauled by DP2. The date must be between 1963 (when the loco moved to Finsbury Park) & 1965 (when it was painted two tone green), one of my latest workings but I wanted an excuse for DP2. Here is the full formation which is short enough to be easy to photograph.

Steven, I agree that DCC would be useful for bankers (although not essential as Sharp has shown), but I have no need for them on the southern end of the GNML. I do try to use whistles correctly: - when entering a tunnel; - just before departure from a station; - before a level crossing (not that I have any!); and - sometimes when passing a signal box. The first and third on the list should presumably have associated ‘Whistle’ boards. Is this correct and can you add any others? Regards Andy

Tony, You’ll be amazed to hear that I completely agree! While I enjoy an A4 thrashing through Gresley Jn station and sounding its chime whistle (not no.13!), I think it has more value on shunting and stopping services than on expresses. I enjoy it most when operating our club BLT, Oakbourne. To retrofit your fleet would be a mammoth task, not just financially but also in hassle of hard wiring the chip and finding space for it (especially when such space may not exist). My standard chip is the LAIS DCC type you fitted to Jessie’s C2. They cost me £10 each and work very well. It’s an extra £8 for stayalive which is worthwhile on many locos. You can buy cheap sound chips but they’re not great. For a full spec one with decent speaker and stayalive it costs £120+. So to fit all your locos with sound would cost £240,000! Clearly a non starter. Regards Andy

I will go for 60038, Bidean Nam Bian which was the first Munro I climbed and its satellite peak, Stob Coire Sgreamhach was my 284th and last.

Clive, I tend to agree with you. For me the decision between the two is not about complexity of wiring (although DCC helps a little, it’s pretty second order if you’re going to wire the layout properly). Neither is it about more realistic operation. ‘Controlling the train not the track’ may be slightly more realistic but it’s not a big deal compared with running at realistic speeds and with realistic acceleration which most people don’t seem to do on either system! For me the thee clinchers are: 1. Sound. I agree with Graeme about the din from lots of locos idling at the same time, but the joy of shunting with one loco and having realistic thrash and brake sounds (amongst others) really makes a difference. 2. Momentum/ braking. I know this is/ was available on DC but I find the DCC version much better to use and again it adds to the sense of driving the engine. 3. Stayalive. This dramatically improves running on some locos. I know ‘sir’ will say that I should sort out the root cause of the problems - pick ups or dodgy track. He’s right of course, but back in the real world for mere mortals like myself, sticking a capacitor in is a lot easier. Against that is the heavy price tag which comes with DCC. I wouldn’t recommend anyone with a large stud of locos, particularly kit built ones, changing over. But if starting from scratch I think it makes sense. Regards Andy

This afternoon I’m showing the arrival of the 1854 inner suburban from KX terminating in platform 4. It’s headed by N1, 69458. Now proceeding down the platform. Here it is at rest at platform 4.

This evening I feature an arrival from Ivatt formed of a Class 105 DMU. It terminates in platform 5 This is the last working of the day for this DMU, so it will stable at Hatfield until tomorrow.

Some DCC systems allow 1 (and only 1) DC loco to be run (usually on address 0). I think as Robert says it's not advisable for long periods for fear of damaging the motor and I believe it is a definite no-no for portescaps. The NCE system which Gilbert and I use does not have this feature. However, I have my layout split into five sections, four of which can be powered by DC or DCC (the other is my DCC programming track). I just flick the DPDT switch and can run trains round on DC. I tend to use this for running locos in but it does mean lifting a few engines off the track first.

We could always ‘upgrade’ Little Bytham for a day!