DCB

Looks like it fell off, it looks like a squared end on the axle. Maybe put it in a display case and gety a Wrenn one? Mine Wrenn one has 60:1 Romford gears and has given no problems in 30 years use, despite going everywhere absolutely falt out as it is so slow.

There is a diagram in the Peco instruction sheet relevant to the SLE 194. As you will see it needs TWO DPDT switches if two different controllers are involved. I actually use one 4 pole relay operated by a point motor on a 12volt DC Bus Bar ( for want of a better term) because basically I feel it is ridiculous to have to switch a separate manual switch on a diamond, and mine is DC so it would be even more ridiculous to have to change a manual switch on DCC with maybe yards of wire just to do one crossing.

I think the Morley type is the only really good hand held as it has only a potentiometer and three wires in the hand held and is centre off. They work brilliantly with all types of motor and regulate the voltage so you can actually test LEDs with them on the lowest settings and allow double heading with dis similar locos like a coreless Hattons 14XX and a Ring Field motor Hornby Dublo Castle. Downside is the hand held only works with the Morley controller. and operates the controller quite literally as an alternative to the controller knob through a change over switch. I use them, what more can I say.

The Railbus Fleischmann railbus 4401 - here: http://www.rmweb.co....g-up-the-train/ looks like the brushes are ok, they do look thicker than most which will will cause a few issues if originals can't be sourced. I would look at the magnets on the railbus first, always supposing you havelt burnt out the insulation on the armature. As for the others I don't have a clue as to what sort of motor of brushes they use.

The difference is you could be drawing many times the current of one DC motor on DCC if several light and sound equipped DCC vehicles are fed from one wire. DC usually trips at around 1 amp, DCC can be well over 4 amps and in my personal experience of running triple headed US style freights on DC using two 1 amp controllers in parallel those 2 amps will make fishplates glow red hot.

The superelevation needs to start gently as does the transition from straight to curve so probably best to start both together otherwise the trains will lurch horribly if the cant starts on the straight. It always looks to me as if the inner rail drops by as much as the outer rises. I wouldn't attempt superelevation below about 2ft radius in 00 as rigid chassis locos with fine flanges can't cope with that much twist in the trackbed. It is important with double track that the tracks are canted separately rather than the whole double track bed canted over. Most model curves need check rails rather than superelevation.

I chuck any old thing in if it fits but some Ringfield brushes are stepped with a large diameter against the commutator and a smaller diameter to form a spring seat. These really need to be replaced one for one as otherwise the springs don't fit correctly. You really do need the correct brush springs though, brush spring tension makes a big difference to the speed these motors run at. The X04 type need to be bent to suit so the brushes are absolutely on the centre line of the commutator though Wrenn, Hornby, Triang all fit the X04 (and the Airfix MW if ou shorten them) the Airfix won't fit the others (Too short) and the others wont fit the Wrenn without filing down the tops. Even the new X04 brushes seem to need bending to suit these days as if misaligned the motor may not start too well or run faster one way than the other.

I find the rigid polystyrene used in CD cases and the old DVD Cassettes is a more reliable material for glueing to loco bodies as thin plasticard sometimes warps when glued with solvent. I use Evostick Pipe Weld for anything vaguely structural. Be aware that solvent has a thickness and allow for it when choosing the thickness of material, some solvents and gel type superglue and can be quite thick.

I am interested in the LNER ex GC B3 Lord Faringdon class. Robinson's 4 cylinder 4-6-0s later designated B3 by the LNER were the GCs most powerful passenger locos on a tractive effort basis, only six were made and they seem to have a poor reputation. In 1923 when the LNER was formed Robinson was offered the CME job but declined in favour of Herbert (Nigel) Gresley. When formed the LNER had two Gresley A1 pacifics and 5 (?) Raven A2 pacifics and the next most powerful and modern express locos were the 6 B3s. The B3s were therefore rapidly transferred to Kings Cross for GN line services. It is said they were unsuccessful yet they seem to have remained on heavy Leeds services until 1927 by which time I believe 40 A1 class pacifics were in service. It is said the Ivatt Atlantics were superior to the B3 yet it is also reported the original Ivatt 251 class did not steam particularly well until rebuilt by Gresley with 32 element superheaters from 1922 onwards. On returning to GC metals it seems three B3s were at Neasden and two were rostered to heavy overnight passenger trains to Manchester, the implication being this was a secondary duty yet elsewhere I read that at this time the heavy GC overnight Newspaper train was one of the most tightly timed trains in the UK. Can anyone point me in the direction of further info on these locos and the services they operated.

It's hard to understand why the GW would run perfectly good 2-8-0s into the ground instead of fitting vacuum brakes and using them like 28XXs. Could the GW drivers lack of understanding of how to drive these GC locos have been the cause? From reading engineman's reminiscences from oop north It seems they liked long cut offs and small regulator openings..... The original GC versions did a fair bit of excursion passenger traffic.

Pretty much the same size as my old spare room layout which was 00 gauge and was about 18" at its widest with the idea the room could still function as a bedroom. Also the layout crossed over the doorway with a lifting section at an angle which allowed the door to open and 60" clearance under the board. I would certainly suggest a layout around the outside of the room rather than a table in the centre if it is to be permanent. Keeping it high is also good, my 60" is a bit extreme but 36" gives a lot of storage volume underneath and depending on your stature can give a good viewing height sitting down. 12 X 8 equates to 24 X 16 in 00 and that means scale length passenger trains are most definitely do able. Just watch the operating well sizes if you scale down a 00 scheme, though using a CJ Freezer 00 scale plan and simply laying N gauge track and narrowing down the track centres could result in a cracking good N scale layout.

If you throw the wrong motor you will damage the 3 way point. Its one problem I avoid by using diode matrix route setting which does not allow the blades to move in opposition as in Motor 1 left Motor 2 right So I would suggest a simple pair of diodes between the point motors so the no 1 motor goes to the right at the same time as the 2 motor goes right and the number 2 motor goes left as the no 1 goes left but not vice versa. See drawing

For the set track version below 4 X ST 3 1/2 curve 1st rad 6 X ST 12 Full curve 1st rad 9 X ST 15 Full curve 2nd Radius 2 X ST 19 Full curve large Radius 7 X ST5 Right Hand Points 8 X ST6 left Hand Points 18 ish ST 11 straights or streamline flexi 4 ish ST 1 straights or streamline flexi I can't find any curved points for the crossover top right so it had to be set back, you could add the crossover in green to make turn back easier but it is overkill really. I think I would use a mix of streamline points in the station area and some set track ST1 curves with flexi for the larger radius to reduce the distance between tracks which will improve the appearance. /

Get a Morley or OnTrack power unit. They will deliver a very nearly constant voltage almost irrespective of the load, I use one to test LEDs on one of the lower settings and yet it runs heavy Hornby Dublo locos at a scale 100 MPH. Just stick a Multitester across the motor and read the voltage as it increases from zero. In fact zero is not exactly where the knob says and the voltage changes seamlessly from negative to positive at zero volts, there is no isolated off position. At some point a low voltage motor will be screaming its head off before throwing its windings and chucking in the towel. H&M Variable Transformers are similar but minimum voltage is around 5 volts off load To use motors on cheap and nasty resistance controllers you need a motor which can cope with at least 15 volts as plenty of controllers deliver 20 volts.

This is very much in the design idiom of the Hornby Track plans books rather than the C J Freezer style or that featured in most layouts in RM etc. Its a shame you didn't go with John KS's plan Given that it is set track based I think a basic error has been made here by laying track on the base plane of the layout. Elevating the track bed 4 to 6 inches above the base plane leaves lots of room for street scenes below the track level plus bridges with roads and rivers or Canals beneath. If you fill the layout with track like I do then a flat baseboard works as almost nothing outside the railway boundary is modelled, but even I drop the baseboard six inches or so on scenic sections for effect. I think the lack of operational potential will cause this layout to pall rapidly, though watching fast trains overtaking slow could be fun, and 125 MPH round those curves could be great fun in a sort of Scalextric sort of way

Are we talking Grafar N Gauge here.

Does it have springy copper strip pickups. Those sometimes get bent so an edge is making contact which makes squealing noises. Not too sure what a clubbed seal sounds like, is it a sound like the cat when you slam its tail in the kitchen door?

The later CJ Freezer plans look like 18" minimum radius which is almost dead on 9" in N gauge, some are 15" some require pointwork no longer available in 00 and not available in N but stretching a 6X4 to 4X8 and then redrawing for N should result in some great schemes as you can work in reverse loops and scenery where CJF has operating wells in 00. With 00 I would recommend using set track curves and set track straights for the main line with streamline points and flexi for sidings. Reason being streamline flexi tries to straighten out and kinks at rail joints on curves especially on less than about 22" radius, and is a sod to lay in a straight line. Check any issue of any model railway magazine from the last 20 years and see the dogs hind leg appearance of tracks. Fine for modern image but in steam days tracks were aligned by eye and ran straight as a dye. See any Railway Magazine or of photos permanent way pre 1960 . One advantage of N is you can lay 180 degree curves at almost 12" radius from one yard length so you can blend the curve in and out as in a transition curve without any joints to kink though it is still a sod to lay straight. The 8X4 (4X2 in N) could be adapted with curved lengthened platforms, crossover, a turn back siding/ platform. Added length to the loop to allow a saw by, tamper siding etc to add interest. The clockwise service could terminate in the bottom platform, cross over and reverse into the dead end to wait the next trip out of the way of through traffic and reverse again in the "Hidden" loop. There is a lot of wasted space where the 00 access hole would be, In steam days I would have put a small MPD there, in 2017 it would be high density housing! See my quick re draw. I like curved platforms, there are gap issues but generally because people will make platforms too high. Bottom of the buffers is about right, bit below is OK and then the buffers clear the platforms. Simples.

I think Ribblehead Viaduct starts right at the end of a station platform so no need for a break between a station on an embankment and the viaduct. Away from the S&C there are plenty of platforms actually on Viaducts, Stroud GWR being one. Ribblehead is obviously going to take over the whole house but I think it is Arten Ghyll viaduct north of Blea Moor and Ribblehead which is high but fairly short and very dramatic which might provide inspiration, though it would need a fair old drop in baseboard level to accommodate.

Preserved railways should make good models if you like countryside or simple branch line stations, especially as you can get away with about 2 rakes of 5 coaches and tens of locomotives from Rocket replica through Adams Radial and Gas Turbine to class 68 including all the variations of Flying Scotsman from LNER green to BR green through NE Black. Short freights of immaculate wagons with a brake van each end would not be out of place either. For the larger layout lots of kit parts like boilers and wheels strewn about would help the ambience as would lots of derelict and semi derelict Coaches in NSE livery and a shed full of non functional locos with bits missing. The 25 MPH speed limit would suit the 60:1 gearing types. Most people under 50 only have experience of preserved steam and they must represent at least 20% of active modellers. My son now 21 saw the V2, LN, City of Truro, Evening Star, 14XX etc at Toddington on the GWR, Tornado, S&D 2-8-0, Manors at Minehead and Beattie well tanks, T9, 64XX and 42XX at Bodmin. He still models late 1950s though.

Looks good. I would lose the facing crossover into the goods shed as the S&C famously had no facing points from Settle to Appleby. I would lengthen the laybye to take decent length trains. The signalbox should probably be on the Laybye side so the signalman could see the tail light and allow a following train into the section as a train backed into the laybye. The disappearance of the line into tunnels a short distance from a Viaduct seldom works well, I have often thought of using a bridge or two as scenic breaks with track in cuttings beyond but arranged so there is no view of the curve and cutting except through the bridge. Raising the boards at the front of the layout as one would if there was a tunnel would probably work. Trains need to shunt into the tunnel as drawn to shunt the goods shed so changing to a bridge would make this easier, I don't think the S&C went in for foot bridges

That is a good reusable connector but is only two way so you may well need quite a few for your layout and if they are black and red then you could have issues working out which fits which. I use car wiring multi pin connectors recovered from scrap cars, a friend used Aircraft quality connectors from scrap aircraft, there are at least twenty other options listed elsewhere on this forum. In many ways the German layout is an example of bad practice. The track laid direct on a robust flat ply baseboard which does not allow for any scenery or relief below track level. The wiring is awful. straggling around unsupported. I either run wires in some rectangular trunking which you can pry the lid off to add more wires or if the wiring is really ugly I put a thin ply panel on the bottom of the baseboard to hold it all in.

I am just wondering why K's made such good models of LMS GC and LNER types and such awful models of the GW 28XX and 42XX. The 44XX with a late front end and early short bunker and hideous oversize cylinders dragging almost on the ground. I have had my 44XX 45 years now and its still on my to do list to lengthen the bunker get it running. The 28XX is beyond all hope replaced by a Hornby Tender drive body on a Hornby Dublo loco drive Chassis and so will shortly be on Ebay while I hope to make the 42XX into something vaguely like a 42XX if I can lower the firebox and raise the cab roof or find a GEM 56XX cab roof. Last iteration had a Hornby Dublo Ringfield and would pull a house down until it snapped its coupling rods. Why didn't K's take a tapeand Kodak Brownie round Barry scrapyard when designing these kits?

Here is my MO. Cut baseboard surface to size. Put 2X1 along one side cut to length, screw top to 2X1 with short screws. Do the other side. Add cross pieces of 2X1 cut to length and secure with long screws through holes drilled in 2X1 side pieces, Screw cross pieces to top. Job done. Lay track.

I think I am trying to say it doesn't matter how high the platforms are as long as they are at least 1mm in 00 scale below your buffer centre line. The prototype buffer height varied but the lowest likely height is 3ft 3" the GWR used 3ft 5" for tenders and 3ft 4 1/2" for locos as far as I can tell from the Russel books so with a max platform height of 3ft the platform should be at least 1.5 mm lower than the centre line which is pretty much level with the bottom of the buffers. Burrer beams and footplates varied on locos Platforms look very wrong if they are level with the centre line of the buffers or the bottom of the doors on Mk1 coaches. Some of my platforms are too high (see pics with 1960s Hornbty Dublo Castle and 2000s Hornby Grange and its on the to do list to lower them or raise the tracks. The widest bit of a GWR Hall etc cylinder is at 3ft above rail so the platform should be exactly level with it or below, at least half the driving wheel should be above the platform. It is a percentage thing, a small difference in height on an 00 scale model is a lot more noticeable than a small difference in length and rolling stock models have been getting lower since Triang days yet some of the off he shelf platforms seem designed for Triang Super 4 track laid on underlay.