Paul_sterling

The Bachmann Mavis might be a possible contender, an article was done recently in model rail (?) showing the conversion to 04.

Yes Robin, stock does turn round, as a whole, but even on the "big railway" stock within a train does not get rotated separate to its brethren, that's the point I was making. With a roundaround, all that is necessary is to ensure that the end couplings of a formation are match-able to the locomotive hauling them, whether that is the engne running around (as it does at most preserved lines), or running around and being turned (so that the loco hauls the train 'front first'. Paul.

Years ago I read an article in Railway Modeller from the Skipton and District Railway Society for their layout (Marsden), and they advocated the method for their rolling stock of having a hook on one vehicle and the bar on the other, so singling the tension lock coupler. I think the design in this thread would be a prime candidate for it, the downside is that rolling stock becomes mono directional, in that it can't be turned around within its set, but how often does that really happen? Paul.

I spoke to Morley a couple days ago, and the crawler doesn't have a reduction in top speed, so I think it may be a little more than your (very clever) mod Mike. Paul.

I did have a somewhat crude idea for converting a conventional train controller (such the the HM2000) to remote control, (in typically mechanical engineer fashion), it would have been an RC circuit, i.e. transmitter, receiver, and a couple of servos to switch the direction, and control the speed. one set for each line. It would have been crude in respect of the servos would be driving an arm in place of the pot/thumbwheel, and a solenoid switching the polarity switch on the panel, but would then mean I have made no changes to the controller. Patent in process #whistle

Hi Mike, I watched your videos in relation to the Zero Two, both very helpful. Did someone really suggest your videos resulted in Layoffs? a bit extreme. Question I was going to ask, 18 months on from that, does anyone know if the Morley Crawler does limit top speed, or have they done something clever to preserve that whilst offering crawler control? I'm guessing the former, simply because I believe if they created the latter, it would surely make the standard zero three obsolete? Cheers, Paul. EDIT - Spoke to Morley's yesterday, and I can confirm that the Crawler does not limit top speed.

It is a fair point, and one my colleague has noted to me. However, building electrical machines is not my hobby, I'm so limited for hobby time as it is, I have to consciously balance time vs spend, and simply put, the diversity of the diagrams on this thread alone, are so vast, that the time required (for me and my limited understanding) to be able to successfully build one of them, or even a copy of a GM controller, its just not worth it. GM and Morley build controllers which (by the sounds of it), meet my requirements, and are ready to go, at a cost impact yes, but not a time impact. I hope that rabble makes sense haha. Paul.

Hi Mike, Yes that is most helpful thank you. Re. the Morley units, i've not heard of them before, are they comparable in quality to the Gaugemaster Units? I must admit, the inclusion/possibility of fly-leads is profoundly helpful. which method of control does it use? as per HM2000 or the Gaugemaster D? Thanks, Paul.

Afternoon Folks, Old thread though this is, and I apologise for digging it up, but its relevant to me query. My layout currently operates from an HM2000, which is generally fine for me barring two issues. 1 is, I would prefer a quieter transformer, the buzzing noise does my head in after a while, and 2nd, but a more significant issue is the high pitch whine generated when the locos are put under power by it that tends to cause me migraines. When the layout was at our old house, I even went to the degree of putting the controller in a drawer (with tea towels haha) so I couldn’t hear it. I’m considering replacing the HM2000, and have been looking at the Gaugemaster units (I’m hoping to give them a call to discuss when the chance provides itself), but elimination of those two noise factors are important to me. So I guess for me it is understanding what it is that the HM2000 has in it which is producing the high pitch noise (the transformer one is fair enough, and making the transformer remote could be an answer), and is this a fundamental part of that particular control method? P.S. Sorry for the garbled info, I’m a mechanical engineer rather than electrical, so my electronics knowledge is limited (colour-blind, so they wouldn’t let me near it!). Thanks, Paul.

It would be good if they did. Paul.

The corner of heath Road, no.17 I think. Ronnie Metcalfe. Paul.

Tudhoe Grange for myself, it was TGCS when i started (1998), but they ditched the comprehensive part of the title 3 years later and became TGS. My Dad was born 1956 if that helps. Paul.

My Pops lived in Middlestone moor back then, probably went to that school, and did go to Rock Road for secondary. In fact my Grandparents lived in M-moor until 10 years ago. Paul.

It does surprise me that they aren't casting the (constructive) critique to a wider net than a single show. Granted, they've established (by themselves it appears) that some changes are needed, but I do wholeheartedly feel that giving the vast wealth of knowledge available in the community a chance to offer feedback on the 1st stage EP is a worthwhile gain against the inevitable media traffic that also comes with it. Yes not everything can be tooled, but Oxford know that, and can filter out the background noise of those points as such, getting to the nitty gritty of getting the detail right on a class which did have quite a lot of detail variances. They may well get it spot on (on their own), but history does generally show that the wider the net, the more info is available. The internet (and its users) is a powerful (free) tool if one is willing to filter the noise out. Paul.

Hi Richard, I'm hoping to get to Locomotion at some point over the first weekend of October, if I see someone from Shildon MRC or similar, I will ask about your friend. Thanks, Paul.

Arthur Scargill...........

Thanks Michael, I'm quite lucky in respect of my railway being in a basement, so its very temperature neutral, with little change between summer and winter. It has its own drawbacks mind, but I'll not bore people with the details, but it does at least mean I don't generally have to worry about buckling. That being said, the home I grew up in, I had the railway in the loft there, and only once did I ever have trouble with a single piece of flexitrack having shifted 1/2" to one side through expansion, the loft got heated from the house below in winter, and got heated by the sun in summer, so didn't see too much differential of temperature either. Thanks, Paul.

A friend of mine decided to weather and "decay" the mule print, to look like a partially scrapped Q1. IMG-20190721-WA0001[1] by Paul Sterling, on Flickr IMG-20190721-WA0002[1] by Paul Sterling, on Flickr I think he's done more since, but even at this stage I think he turned it out well, and the flame cut panels look about right. In the meantime, i've fitted the smokebox numbers and nameplates to No.69932 IMG_20190728_132246 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr IMG_20190728_132252 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr I need to touch up around the number plate, but otherwise its come out okay, I found fitting the smokebox number plate VERY stressful! ha Thanks, Paul.

Hi Michael, An interesting choice to use no more nails and glue the track down, I'd heard of people using PVA in the past, but i've just stuck with track pins. I'll give your method a go, so thank you for the heads up. Cheers, Paul.

Yes Mark, 825 indeed. Paul

as i keep suggesting to my wife, an extra inch makes all the difference.......... anon!

Which is one of the reasons behind my musings about the Duchesses/Princess Coronations could probably have challenged the A4's ultimately. No.s 2509 and 2512 ran around 112/113mph in single chimney form, and 4468 extended that to 126 with a double chimney. A single chimney Princess Coronation achieved 114, so I do wonder what a double chimney streamlined princess coronation would have achieved, especially with a longer, straighter route. Fascinating stuff! Paul.

In the case of the LNER Pacifics, it took a fair bit of convincing by Kings Cross shed that the double chimney cost could be justified, but ultimately it was. Rob has covered the double chimney admirably, in its simplest sense, increased fire draught for no increase in throttling of the exhaust. Improved economy, but more critically, in the case of the LNER engines, longer between services, and greater tolerance to poor fuels. Paul.

Correct, single chimney, fiercer blast, changing to double chimney and smoke drifting was an issue for many classes of locomotive. Cheers, Paul.

The Stanier 3-cylinder 2-6-4 No.2500 was there in the 1970's, but in LMS black. I've crudely had a look on google, searching LMS Bressingham, but only the Duchess, Scot and 2500 come up, that's not to say anything else didn't though. Hornby offered their LMS 'Black Five' in lined red in the 1970's/early 80's, that was not in relation to one of the preserved 'black fives' being painted that colour was it? Cheers, Paul.