teeinox

We enjoy visiting local Club exhibitions because they are so very individual, and not overcrowded. So there is plenty of opportunity to look closely at an interesting layout and maybe talk to the owner, which is really nice. Steyning is not very far from where we live, so the Wealden Railway Group show there had to be visited. It’s an 80 minute bus ride from where we live, but just one bus door-to-door, including a scenic ride in the rain between Shoreham and Steyning! There were about 10 layouts, mainly of the cameo variety. There was one trade stand, and a few bits and pieces for sale elsewhere. One of the larger layouts was “Xertigny-les-Bains”, a French-themed HO-scale layout. Here is a photo of the village square: Spot the “Deux Chevaux”, but also a Mini. And along with the traditional grey Citroen vans, a Ford Transit. What this scene shows is not just traditional French provincial life, but a world that is changing. Rolling stock reflects that too, as you will see in this photo: There is the elderly “Picasso” railcar but also a diesel locomotive push-pulling a charmless RIB (Rame Inox de Banlieue) unit (In reality, that might have been a cast-off from the Paris region, my husband cynically suggests). Still on the continental theme, here is a cameo layout based on Norwegian Railways: Beautiful detailed modelling in a very restricted space. And that is a feature of another cameo layout. Steyning being near the South coast, you would expect a South Coast theme in the layouts, and here it is with Shellsea Harbour: A lot of things to see in a very small space. Staying with the seaside, we really liked “Hanton Tarrant”, apparently based on Littlehampton in times past. Here is an overview along the length of the layout, with a 4-PUL in the platform, perhaps ready to set off for London Victoria. And unlike some other “Southern Electric” layouts we have seen, this 4-COR has juice; conductor rail is present and correct! You can just see the fiddle yard at the end of the layout, so the layout is not big. But it still has a sense of space and shows just what can be done in TT. Being TT, we guess most of the stock was scratch built. Here is another shot showing a 2H DEMU at the platform with a steam working behind. The £5 entrance fee included a complimentary cup of tea or coffee. At what other exhibitions do you get that? The Steyning Centre certainly caters for the inner person. Here is a photo of the servery. The “Brown Betty” tea pot ensured a fine cup of tea. And the chocolate cake was wicked. They weren’t short on bacon rolls, either. So, a great exhibition with great catering. teeinox

In James. R Snowdon’s book “Metropolitan Railway Rolling Stock”, there is a photograph of a 7-coach train of 1929 T (then MW in Metropolitan parlance) stock in Neasden shed, in what is described as “pristine fully lined crimson livery”. And on page 128, there are 2 photographs of the 1931 MW stock. These are said to be painted in “maroon” livery. They certainly look mighty fine, and certainly better than the faux-teak these steel-panelled coaches probably got later, let alone the drab brown of LT years. Unfortunately, there is no information in the book as to how long this livery lasted or how widespread it was. Maybe someone knows? teeinox

In their last years the prototypes were to be found on SouthWest – Northwest summer timetable trains. I have a picture of a Third Open in July 1960 at Exeter in a Kingswear – Liverpool train, being hauled by D809 Champion. And of D844 Spartan in 1961 hauling a train of ex-LMS stock, composed of all three periods, the leading vehicle of which is the Brake Third of the Mainline model. Both were in lined maroon. The lining on the early Mainline maroon versions could be a bit crude – their later ones and those by Replica and Bachmann were better in that respect. I don’t have these models (have been tempted), but have some of Mainline’s Collett “Sunshine” coaches from the same era. Like you, I do not like 6’ gaps between coaches, so they were converted to close coupling to get rid of the gap and to provide an NEM socket. I used spare Hornby drawbars meant for their Pullman coaches. Hornby or Bachmann 14mm metal coach wheels got installed, too. For the Keen coupling system, did you have to cut into the underframe to get enough clearance over the wheels? teeinox

I spoke to them at the Doncaster exhibition where I bought the starter pack. I already had an inkling that there was a problem with fracturing, so I put the issue to one of their sales people on the stand. What I was told that the problem with breakages occurred when the couplings were pushed in too far. So the product had been re-designed with a shoulder to prevent this happening, and indeed, there is such a shoulder on the ones I have. It was on the strength of that reassurance that I bought the pack. As for contacting them, I like to have evidence before doing so. That is why I originally posted these questions: * Have other folks had this experience? * Am I just dealing with a bad batch? * Or is there something I am doing wrong, and if so, what is the remedy? Thank you all for the experiences and views you have offered. I think the answers are emerging. But further information and views are still welcome.

I recently bought an “Elite Starter Pack” of West Hill Wagon Works magnetic couplings. These couplings are designed to go into NEM sockets and so have fishtails. The intention was to experiment with them to replace the Hornby close couplings on my coaches. The experiment didn’t go well, and I want to find out if my experience was typical, or I am doing something wrong? The starter pack contains 3 lengths: Close Coupling: 9.5mm long, Intermediate Coupling: 11.7mm long, and Standard Coupling: 12.5mm long. The one relevant to Hornby coaches is the 9.5 mm close coupling, and this is the one I did most of my experimenting with. Inevitably, if you are experimenting, you tend to insert the coupling, then take it out to try out a different arrangement, maybe several times. No problem doing that with Hornby close couplings. But with these, out of the 4 couplings I used, on one, one fishtail broke off on the second insertion, and on another, on the first try. This is a 50% failure rate. Hornby’s NEM sockets can vary in size, some being a little tight, but these are on Hawksworth coaches which are quite easy, offering little resistance. So…. * Have other folks had this experience? * Am I just dealing with a bad batch? * Or is there something I am doing wrong, and if so, what is the remedy? I have used clip-fit Hunt couplings very successfully, and I very much want to make this work. So advice would be very much appreciated. teeinox

I put the fishtail into a NEM socket, then drilled a hole through the socket and fishtail for a screw which then screwed into the extension on the bogie which supported the tension lock coupling. But not tightly, so it is free to move, but it is not self-centreing so coupling can be a pain. It is a kludge, and not a nice one. I have not come across the bending issue - yet. All the more reason to explore the Hunt option! I have managed to install proper kinetic couplings on other coaches, including an LMS restaurant car (a pig for clearance reasons). The only reason I didn't do so on these coaches is that I ran out of drawbars which were those sold by Hornby for conversion of their pullman coaches to NEM sockets. They are no longer obtainable. On further investigation, I found that the design of the buffer headstock prevented me from using the Hornby type drawbar to install a kinetic coupler. Haven't found another way. teeinox

The photograph below is of my two D1915 coaches after renovation. It was taken to show the differences in window treatment. On balance, I prefer the simple glazing. They run with the later super detail Hornby Stanier coaches and look O.K. For compatibility, they have Hornby close couplings. The photos show just how ugly those are. I am mulling over replacement with Hunt magnetic, which may be a challenge to fit on the D1915s. The Hornby coaches have heavily opaque white lavatory windows. When I used the SEFinecast glazing, I copied this, as you can see from the photo. But, while some LMS coaches did have this degree of opacity, judging by the pictures of D1915s on pages 16 and 127 in Jenkinson and Essery’s book, they had a more translucent treatment. So, the plain glazing was sandpapered to get the translucence, and a light coat of white washed over to strengthen the effect. Also, the interior of the toilet compartment was painted white to increase the white “presence”. Judging by Severn Valley coaches, the reality was a rather unpleasant shade of mint green. I passed on that! I also managed to find a photo of the interior of the Severn Valley CK. For copyright reasons, only a fragment appears here, enough to illustrate the upholstery colour. The treatment is said to be authentic for 1949/50 when these coaches were built. As for the sides of seats and partitions, the LMS typically used “Empire” wood veneers, so I left them Replica Railways plastic brown. I have no idea what an authentic floor colour would have been; grey or brown, I would guess! The Severn Valley railway does have a D1915. Originally numbered 9355, the SVR converted it into a buffet car, renumbering it to 149. The interior is completely changed, so no guidance there! teeinox

I had a similar journey with the glazing on my first D1915. I replaced the original, cloudy, Replica glazing with SEFinecast. I was never happy with it. Optically, it was no better than the original, and I discovered that in some windows the glazing actually sat slightly proud. Plus, the offering to go into the ventilators was just awful, so they were glazed with plain strip. When I got another D1915 (I am very fond of them), it was reglazed with plain strip. So, no flush affect, but the interior could be clearly seen and no strange optical affects. The result was better than the SEFinecast in the first coach, so I ended up ripping the SEFinecast out and replacing it with plain glazing. How did you choose the colours for the interior? I chose a dingy red for the seats, a bit like the colour the Severn Valley railway has used in the 3rd class of its recently refurbished Porthole CK. But what about the table tops? Were they covered in the ubiquitous BR grey vinyl, or left with what I would assume to be the original LMS varnished wood finish? teeinox

Looking at my locomotive collection of 16, 7 came from Hattons. Why did I choose Hattons? Because buying from them was low risk, they tended to have what I was specifically looking for, and all the purchases turned out well. But I only bought when there was a good price, and those could be found on Hattons. Prices of my locomotives ranged from £60 for a second-hand Bachmann Class 42 through to £109 for a new DCC ready Dapol Class 52. Rolling stock was different because the financial risk was low. Hattons did not offer anything particularly special that could not be found elsewhere, often at a better price. There are small businesses from which I have bought second-hand stuff with satisfaction such as Elaines Trains, Hampshire Models, The Junction Box, Triang-Man, and JW Model Railways. Quality of website, ease of search and payment vary widely, but that’s just part of the fun. Maybe businesses like these will benefit from the demise of Hattons? Let's hope so. As for eBay, it’s an entertainment. In my eyes it’s high risk, so I have only bought cheap locomotives on there, plus a lot of rolling stock. There have been “issues” with some purchases, but never a total dog. But when it comes to expensive locomotives, no, especially when the terms are “no return”. So, will I miss Hattons? Given my locomotive collection is complete, probably not. But for idle browsing, “window shopping” if you like, yes I shall!

No. Santa provided me with a Dapol class 22 instead!

Many thanks for your reply. It gave me the right direction and I got the coach apart. In fact, the tabs are part of the chassis, and hook into the glazing. There are 4 on one side and 3 on the other. One of the tabs at the end has broken and allows the chassis to sag: a bolt is required! teeinox

Santa brought me a Dapol ex-GWR Centenary composite coach for Xmas, the one which was originally an Airfix model. Charming though it is, I need to dismantle it, and unfortunately Santa did not leave any instructions on how to do that. Can anyone advise? Thanks teeinox

I thought it worth photoshopping the photo to see if the colour could be improved. It could be: it makes a rather "Hornby Dublo" scene, especially those refrigerated containers in the top right hand corner.

Whoops! My misreading your post. Thanks for correcting me. 17mm would not work on the pullmans. As you say, one can have the mixed 20/17 mm arrangement. As you say, orientation becomes a problem. I resolved it on the pullmans by equipping those types which would not run together with Roco couplings, the others kept the Hornby ones.

Many thanks for your reply, scouse889. It is most helpful. Taking into account the measurements you give, it looks like the spacing would be as it is now if I went ahead as follows: Hawksworth: 20mm. Stanier: 20mm (a pity, they could do with something shorter, but not as short as 17mm). Gresley: 17mm. The 20mm dimension you give for the buckeye variety is interesting since I have some Hornby Pullman coaches for which they would be good. But the Hornby R8200 gives too large a gap. So it looks like there would be no improvement in closeness; probably an aesthetic benefit, though. Interesting what you say about Hunt Elite couplings. The only type I’ve used has been the “clip-fit” type designed to fit over a spigot. I had to alter them and was struck by the rigidity and the brittleness of the plastic. That caused me to pause going for the NEM variety. Given your experience, looks like that was a wise decision. But then, I have had quite a bit of handling damage with the Hornby close couplings, too, which is why the Hornby magnetic offering seems attractive. On balance, the 20mm seems the safest bet. So, thank you for your advice.