Loconuts

No appology being offered Andy

My name is John Coates currently appearing in the Great Western Echo and published several times in the MRJ. So I do not know what I am talking about Capt?

There have been some ignorant remarks on RMWeb, just like other forums, I suppose, but this one just takes the biscuit for rudeness and plain 'being out of order'.

 

I would cease from commenting on things you don't understand, Loconuts.

You want to check out who you are talking to first.

Did you see the turntable in the NG&SGSL this issue?

Really? You could argue that having a radio controlled crane on your layout is the ultimate gadget! And Giles' real Modelling gadgetry is very much at home in MRJ.

 

Andrew

No it is a working accessory and it involved modeling, almost bordering on the Model Engineering. However returning to the editorial I generally agree with most of it as a DCC user but they were Jerry's own opinions and a lot of layouts that appear in the MRJ use DC. DCC works for me and my layout, I don't think it will be superseded for a long while as it was developed for the American market and has been taken up in a big way over there. It suits their type of layout and the way they operate them. 

And what is the point of that comment? Are you implying I am not a real modeller then? If so I take exception to your remarks. Comments like that make me wonder why I bother with RMWeb at times, but as others have said, don't let them win by giving up on the forum. If your comments were meant as a joke, then it was very poor IMHO.

 

I was following up on a comment made about the editorial concerning DCC. The reference to RM, which incidentally I very rarely buy, was to highlight MERG's CBUS as yet another standard for an electronic system for model railways.

The point is that when the MRJ first published it was stated that the magazine was directed towards those modelers who want to build to a better and higher standard. As to your second point, if the 'cap fits etc'. Judging from your final remarks on your Kelly Bray Topic you seem to be a bit touchy these days and maybe a rest from the RMWeb might be good. Concentrate on your 16mm and no my comments were not meant as a joke.

As a point of interest I have seen the MERG CBUS in use and was not impressed with it, a bit over the top.

With technology, obsolescence is a potential issue. Think video cassettes, mini disc players etc. The emergence of better battery technology could render powered track potentially obsolete. My guess is DCC could fall by the wayside.

 

August's Railway Modeller has an article on MERG's CANBUS based system. Yet another standard to challenge the status quo. As long as we use low voltage d.c. motors, then 2 rail d.c. will be here for a very long time I think. I'm not bothered about sound (noise...?) either plus the cost factor means no DCC here either.

I think you are on the wrong topic here, the 'Railway Modeler' site is elsewhere. I am afraid the MRJ is not for you 'Gadget Freaks' but for real modelers.

Well it's easy enough to store things for the layout if not the boards until more comes available. Sensible decision if you don't have time to scratchbuild what there aren't kits for yet.

I've paused projects waiting for certain parts and spent the last four years collecting bits for an Om layout hoping for the locos Bemo are likely to deliver later this year . . . . or possibly next

And get caught out at the 11th hour, I am 2 MMI loco's short (C-16 and C-21) because PSC decided to pull the plug on that project. But a bit of lateral thinking I now have a C-16 to the same standard as the MMI C-19 using a Broadway Limited C-16 and PSC castings plus a bit of work carving.

Don't worry, we've completed a lot more layouts than not.

 

A lifetime of part built layouts is well wide of the mark.

This project sounds it is a group project, if so is there no talent in the group to come up with ideas to progress the project forward. If the Alan Gibson kit you have is still in flat form scan it on your scanner and make paper patterns which can be stuck on sheets of brass and a few evenings work with a jewellers saw can result in in the sheet metal parts for 2 or 3 locos. If one of you know a friendly caster get the castings copied, word of warning do not sell on the surplus casting. Also look at combining the Slater's coach kits with the etched sides. There always ways round things as I found out when I went 7mm scale in 1975.

Hi Damian,

 

I think it is the right decision in the circumstances.  Rolling stock kits ARE coming, but many of them are a long way off yet, and what is existing doesn't quite "cut the mustard".  

I have so far failed in my bit of the project; that is finding an old "Lyn" kit through my NG connections, and finding time to build the goods-shed.

Scratchbuilding stock for this project would be a VERY big task, and difficult to motivate when you know there are future kits somewhere in the pipeline.

 

So you are doing the right thing.

Best wishes, Dave.

Was there a kit for 'Lyn', I cannot think of one.

Look at my first comment regarding things in the pipeline, manufacturers change their minds as their finances change so you could be waiting a long time. Also as most of these kits are produced by one man bands many things can go proprietors.

John

I fancy lots of things.

 

(but Friday night is the wrong time to ask...)

Oh pint night. What's it to be, having got through two failed projects?

This L&B project has taken 2 years out of your life and what with the earlier paused American Narrow Gauge project, a life time littered with part built layouts.

You have done some brilliant bench work for this layout and so it may be a bit large. My advice is to try some reworking of the plan to reduce the size. As to lack of stock well there is always scratch building, a common activity when modeling narrow gauge.

Don't give up yet.

John 

Is 'Reading' a proper verb, declined especially for MRJ then?

Isn't 'Reading' some place in Berkshire?

Don't forget you will have to add some extra roads for Loco servicing containing Coaling facilities, Sanding tower and Water tank. Also a ash pit with facilities to store cars on to take it away plus if your you are coaling from Gondolas they need tracks. That's two extra tracks. You have extra things like Lub store and Mess facilities. Also a road to store the Cabooses on.

All the extra roads can be taken off the Turntable. Don't forget the inspection pits in the engine house.

John

Bananas and custard, that is orgasmic. 

There is no pleasure in motorcycling these days, it is cold and wet and the roads are full of idiots, other motor cyclist!.

Hi Chaz

Don't beat yourself up over this. Peco do a narrow gauge wye point which is of a tighter radius than 21 inch and the Bachmann stuff runs through it OK. As long as the rails on the crossing 'V' line up everything it will be fine.

If you are worried produce a skeleton point using PCB strip and lay some track up to it. A bit of test running will prove it then all you have to do is put some wood ties in the gaps.

Also you seem to be worried about pushing trains through a trailing crossover, that's no problem it is pulling trains into a crossover that is the problem which this should not be. Curved points have curved crossing 'V's and providing care is taken they cause no problems.

John

Sorry, I was interrupted in my last post and was going to say that Leesburg was going to be my effort to get interested in operating rather than building. I carefully designed the track plan to enable a good bit of shunting using the loop and under-track magnets. Unfortunately as it happens I'm still not too interested in operating (I started another thread and learnt a lot about what others get pleasure from). So all in all it's been interesting and I still like On30 but RTR is not really my thing.....However, never say never again......

Jeff

I know what you mean about RTR, the interest does not last long. Although I have not built my Locos, all being RTR I have breathed on some being a BLI C-16 and a Bachmann Colorado and Southern mogul to bring them up to the same standard as the MMI offerings that I operate.

However I tend to build my own stock using the San Juan kits and Labelle coach kits. I started with Bachmann but to my eye it just did not look right and I have gradually replaced it to the point the mogul is the only item left.

Have you considered converting to electric traction? I saw a layout in the Model Railroader many years ago where the motive power was all early electric traction using boxcabs. If I remember right it served a mine complex at the top of a grade. Easy to build and you can still use your Bachmann stock to start with and gradually upgrade.

You did say you fell into the 8 x 4 trap which is common in the States as is the 6 x 4 size over here. I would recommend the TOMA form of construction around the room, much more portable than the 8 x 4 which is like shifting a mattress.

John

I agree wholeheartedly, I too used to be solely P4 GWR and LT, but now embrace the gauge vagueries of On30 and Bachmann RTR which is generally excellent. However having now had a great time building Leesburg as half an oval have now realized the error of my ways in favour of a terminus or through station. Consequently it is now on eBay for local pickup in or around North Georgia.....anyone interested?

I am sorry to hear that Jeff, Leesburg is a well modeled layout, was not so sure about why you went wandering off into the wilds of Wales and start modeling the GVT on the second half of the layout.

You were at the stage to start having fun modifying the Bachmann Locos and stock. If certain things are not right with the Depot they can be modified. By all means do the GVT but as a separate layout and turn the back half of Leesburg into storage loops for the time being and then develop it.

John

Stick with the hand-built track Chaz. It looks even better in the, er, flesh.

Don't get too close Chris, this American Narrow Gauge can be very contagious. I know as I was pretty sane once happily modeling Swindon products and I got bitten.

Chaz, great idea on the fake track spikes will pass that idea onto my mate in Canada as he only spikes every fourth tie.

John 

And I thought I was the only RMWebber who found it hard to wait for Horsetan's next posting . . .

 

Stan

If he spent as much time writing articles for the MRJ as does on this site we would have a couple per issue

Hi Chaz

You might be interested that the 'Mara Harbour' site is still up and running, the photos are still there.

If you remember he did a heavy weathered Bachmann Tank Car with faded lettering, worth reading back over. Covers painting the car trucks as well.

John

Hi Chaz

Try this site, Tichy Train Group.https://www.tichytraingroup.com/Shop/tabid/91/c/hopper-open3/PageIndex/1/Default.aspx

You might be able to cobble something out of the 'O' scale Hopper Transfers, a bit pricy though.

John 

Expense time Chaz, the yanks splashed a lot of lettering over their freight cars, not just numbers. You are going to have to design your own, one of the problems of going freelance.

A lot of this lettering was required by the Federal Agencies, suggest you look at photos of cars. Also the lettering carries on round the corner to the ends with various operating instructions, RR insignia and numbers. My side tippers are covered in such legends but they would not be any good for Hoppers. You need to find a company that produces the decals for the EBT cars, the only one I can suggest is San Juan Decals. Drop Paul Martin a line and see if it is listed in the SJD list.

You can use all the EBT lettering but just replace the references to the EBT with FVR.

John 

The interesting thing shown in one of the photos is that it is not a knuckle coupling between the loco and the varnish. It looks like a link and pin coupling as it is on the tender. The locos do not seem to have knuckle couplings.

I have been doing some checks on my stock and can tell you if the stock have the uncoupling tails on then the coupling gets fouled on the pilot. The only way to over come this is to remove the uncoupling tails. Now my couplers are at 0n3 height and are the larger narrow gauge couplings, the Bachmann HO couplings are a lot smaller and are mounted a lot lower down so the situation would be worse.

The way round it is to remove the uncoupling tails and go for manual operation, cut away the pilot in the area of the coupling pocket to allow the couplings to operate or extend the coupling forward using a piece of square brass tube so the tail clears the pilot.

John

Yes you are right about the AMS C-16 front coupling not fully functioning, it is the same as the BLI C-16. It is due to the pilots extending forward and not allow the couplings to work with the uncoupling metal loop beneath it. The Bachmann one has a pilot beam for switching so therefore a working coupling.

I have looked through my photos of D&RGW trains and I cannot find any of them running tender first and the only time a front coupling is used if two locos are double heading or there is a helper within the train or at the end. Switchers use the front and rear couplings.

John 

Hi Chaz

Found the site, http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/rslist.aspx?id=EBT

John

Hi Chaz

That hopper is a masterpiece, just a bit of prototype information on it though. The Bachmann Hopper is based on a EBT two bay stone hopper for a ballast work train and I believe there were four of them built and a side chute version. They were painted in grey with just the vehicle number on unlike the standard three bay coal hoppers which were in black and had the company Logo on.

All these hoppers survive today and are in storage on the EBT also Kevin Trim of Dorset Models used to make a kit of it (unavailable now) in quarter scale and has a finished one on his stand. It is a lot bigger than the Bachmann version which is 5.5mm scale.

The three bay hoppers were SG and used to go through a wheel lift to change the trucks to three foot narrow gauge. A little while ago I found some photos of the two bay hoppers, drop door and side chute versions plus a drawing of the three bay versions. If I can find them again I will give you the site they are on.

John

Flickr is not a safe place to store your photos as my son found out to his cost. A travel company pirated a couple of his photos that were stored on Flickr for their advertising blurb without permission. Not a secure place.

He like me uses external hard drives for storage purposes, his stored at my houses and vice versus for fire security.

Bobsleighing, jumping with the Red Devil's, (I think he once held the world record for the highest civilian free fall), mast manning, climbing Nelsons Column, cliff diving, potholig, fell running, walking the Penine Way, wrestling,......our Uncle John, often accompanied with Shep .......did the lot.

 

A true icon of my growing up.

Yes you are right about the record jump, however he was not booked to do it by the BBC.

He was invited to jump with the RAF Falcons at RAF Abingdon, having completed that jump he was in the Sergeants Mess having a few pints with the guys when he was approached by the Joint Services Free Fall Team and they invited him do a high altitude jump on oxygen (the JSFFT were part of our unit).

He nearly lost it on the way down as he started to tumble, luckily two of the team saw it and helped him stabilise. However I can tell you that there was a hell of a party in the Mess that night and could he drink.

It was a privilege to meet him on that occasion.