DCB

The off load voltage is often around 21 volts on cheap and nasty DC controllers. It sounds like one of the rectifier diodes may have failed leaving it running on half wave. Probably best to get something else off ebay for £5 and see if it improves matters. I won't use them preferring Morleys and the like which deliver from 0 volts to around 9 volts (N gauge) or 15 volts (0 and 00 gauge) off load depending on control knob settings

Why not try it. I had been fitting nickel silver code 100 rail into code 100 peco streamline steel track sleepers as an economy measure to use up good sleeper bases in the garden. I find the locos pull better around curves (3rd radius) but stock drags so the stalling occurs on the straight following the curve. Apart from Magnadhesion Triang locos I don't find significant difference in grip between steel and N/S track. I have code 100 steel streamline track and code 100 N/S nickel silver points as part of the same gradient. I find cleaning the track can cost 2 coaches, I don't do it unless I get problems, as slipping wheels tend to keep themselves pretty clean, only the point blades and frogs seem to get dirty.

That's a big area, equivalent to 18' X 4' in 00 gauge so really the world is your lobster. I like watching trains go by so continuous run sounds good I would go continuous run with single track as I understand Dapol have 12" min radius so you need the full width to get the turn in, and then swing the tracks back away from the baseboard edge to feed a fan of sidings. There is a lot of single track main line these days. I would think about dropping the centre part of the baseboard to improve the visuals. For the proper modern image look you need scruffy 125 year old buildings, and for the real authentic look working semaphore signals. I was at Great Rocks last months, long trains of bogie aggregate wagons, half a dozen locos semaphore signals operated by a tatty old Midland signal cabin or three

It would not have been Rocket Science to have provided a banker as presumably the load was a lot more than an average WSR train. The WSR has several eminently suitable tank locos. I also wonder if driving technique comes into it. I am always impressed by the way NYMR drivers get 3 cyl locos like Sir Nige and Repton away from Goathland up quite a gradient with very little or no slipping even in the wet. Its a bit of a shame the NRM built a replica of the 1947 Scotsman rebuild instead of the 180 lb long travel version which ran the non stops in the late 1920s. Lets face it there can't be anything left of the original Scotsman apart from a nameplate or three hanging in some blokes outside privvy in Darlington, Should have done a Ffestiniog and assembled all the left over bits into a non working exhibit....

Maybe one of our train operators could name a loco Boaty McBoatface instead.

The calculation was based on the 64 foot Mk 1 and Mk 2 coaches which are 67 feet overall with buffers extended or about 66 feet with buck eye couplers in use. 66 feet is 22 yards, is one chain, and is 1/80th of a mile. 4 X Mk1s are 1/20th of a mile long and will take 1/20th of a minute or 3 secs to pass by at 60 mph. I wrote out a chart based on this and extrapolated it to cover speeds from 5 to 120mph in various increments, and further extended it for 12 ft wheelbase wagons and often carry a copy to exhibitions and preserved railways. Usually at exhibitions kids run at scale speed and the oldies run trains ludicrously slowly. What matters to me is the rotational speed of the wheels of steam engines (and Gronks), if you run scale speed with coupled wheels it will look right. Bogie Diesels are different they give no clue as to wheel rotation speed Preserved railways run passenger trains at the same speed unfitted goods and mineral trains ran pre 1968, Back to the Gronk, I think the 08 was 15 Mph max but agree around 4" sec maximum. But the Gronk was very much an exception, 204 hp 03/04 diesels and even 1880 vintage industrial 0-6-0T steam locos could run at twice that.

The difference between models and the real thing visually is you generally view the real thing from ground level plus 5 feet and the model from 150ft up in a helicopter/ hot air balloon/ Blackpool Tower. Its actually hard to see more than about 3 coaches from most real railway viewpoints so why not restrict where one can view a model from , perhaps to a road approaching a bridge under a station throat. I was fixing gradients the other night, under a baseboard and looked up to see a parcels train passing with a retaining wall in front and blue wall (sky) behind and it looked really good, much better than it usually does from a higher viewpoint. My old bedroom layout was actually at 62" high so it was viewed at a realistic height and was difficult to see trains other than close up. The garden line looks best from the bedroom window for the opposite reason....

The point about warping is important, I have been battling with warped timber this afternoon, timber bought "New" 30 odd years ago which has distorted quite noticeably and enough to create unwanted 1 in 100 gradients, Today 3 hours work lowered the summit by 1/4" and allowed a 9F to pull an additional 3 bogie bolsters up the grade, (or a total of 14 Mk 1 coaches). Somewhat fortunately the bit in question has trackbeds built on risers so so apart from the summit where the 5" trackbeds join a 30" wide baseboard I was able to adjust it by changing the thickness of the packing etc. My "Answer" to warping is to buy good dry second hand timber, I get mine from scrapped builders vans in a local scrap yard. Planed and sanded it is as good as new and won't twist like a dogs hind leg after a couple of years. MDF sounds like a very good choice for trackbeds, the problem I had is the trackbeds are double track width climbing at 1 in 50 around a 3ft radius curve and keeping the track level means quite a significant lateral twist has to be applied and the fibre board used fought me constantly as it didn't like the idea of not staying flat. I used Riser supports every 8 inches or less around the curves. L girders or other riser based baseboard systems make realistic scenery much easier than trying to do something based on a flat monolithic slab,

Common return can be complimentary to Cab Control but is not a necessity. I did use common return but have since abandoned it in favour of feeding both sides of sections from two pole switches as this means my individual isolators to allow moves such as attaching a pilot loco can go in either rail which simplifies wiring in some situations. Sectioning the layout is just as important with DCC unless you want to cut and resolder lots of dropper wires every time you have a fault.

No idea where I saw this idea but its not great as accurately sawing a plywood disc is challenging, which is to say for someone of my ability it becomes impossible. I just used a bit of electrical trunking with a screw through to form a simple turntable. Will get pics Weds hopefully.

Sounds like a great idea, There were a few (20ish total?) US 2-6-0s imported around 1899 for the Midland and different ones for the GNR when UK builders were working flat out and a very few big tanks 0-8-2Tetc for South Wales. Most pre 1900 US locos would be suitable for UK railways except overall height to cab corners and chimney (generally 13ft to 13ft 6 depending on the particular railway company) and width over cylinders. UK lines had raised platforms for passengers which were rare in 19th century US and US cylinders wouldn't generally clear them. However US folk were not stupid and a standard US boiler, frames, wheels etc with cut down cab, US or UK 1890s style, and lower chimney dome etc but if necessary redesigned cylinders would have been a very viable option for a UK railway starting up in the late 1890s. If it is a scratch build it should provide few problems, altering RTR is more difficult as most US prototypes are made to a smaller scale than UK for a common gauge and in particular H0 US steam locos looks plain weird on an 00 UK Layout . The Vacuum pumps on GW locos were pretty much hidden, either between the frames or tucked up under the running plate angle. The give away is a vertical extension bolted to the right hand cross head which operates the pump. On 28XX locos the pump is quite prominent, and on 78XX the running plate angle is widened in an attempt to hide it. The pump maintained vacuum at anything much above walking pace and the ejectors blew the brakes off for starting. The big GWR locos had a four cone ejector on the right hand side of the firebox with a pipe coming back horizontally from the smokebox. This shared brackets with the loco handrail. The GW locos without the 4 cone were restricted to 10 coaches as brake release was painfully slow with 10 plus coaches and just a single cone ejector. The pump used a lot less energy than the ejector and so saved steam. I have a not dis similar idea for a small fleet of Never Wassa locos of my own design for a layout of a fictitious line on the Isle of Sky, 2-4-0T and 4-4-0T and 4-4-2Ts hacked from Triang Nellie, Jinty and M7 locos with a US goods loco hacked from a Triang "Davey Crockett!" I reckon I might give them Air Brakes....

I read somewhere that the GWR ordered that the polishing of the tank tops on Panniers in particular was to cease following an accident where someone slipped. The GW never had that sudden "Cleaning Locomotives is a luxury we can no longer afford," moment and standards just slowly slipped. An intelligent application of dirt where it would not easily be seen from platform level is probably appropriate, rather than LMS/ LNER levels of neglect. Dull paintwork livened up with an oily rag rather than high gloss seems to be the norm. Summer services which took cleaners away from cleaning and on to firing duties would also have impacted on cleanliness. Actual rust would have been rare apart from parts that got really hot fireboxes, ashpans and the like not hidden by boiler cladding. GW locos were repaired on a mileage basis, LMS and LNER patched up when they wouldn't go any further. GW locos were painted during overhauls, rather than being painted after overhaul as per LMS. There are pictures of immaculate ex GWR locos at Swindon for scrapping in the 1950s

I have used blocks for permanent layouts for years, effectively "Cab Control" so you can drive a train anywhere on the layout from one controller, Using rotary 2 pole 6 way or 3 pole 4 way switches from Maplin any section can be fed from any one of 4 controllers and as soon as the loco is clear the section can be switched to another controller. You can also switch everything off one bit at a time when faults arise, which is a very good reason for using sections even if you use DCC. Without this facility fault finding can literally take hours and involve snipping wires to disconnect bus bars etc, Nightmare, One controller permanently feeding one section of tracks and further controllers feeding other tracks is rather inflexible, works ok for starter layouts with set track but getting locos from one controller to another can cause issues.

That sounds very much like it. I shall look on the Swindon Library Website / Ebay etc Many thanks. Just ordered The Day of the Holiday Express from Ebay, £ 2.80 inc postage. Many thanks to all who posted suggestions.

My MO with small LEDs is drill two small holes in something insulated the same distance apart as the led wires. Poke a feed wire down each hole. poke the led wires down the same hole as the feed wire. No soldering, easily replaced LED. I also slip insulated sleeves over the LED wires and prod the feed wires down the sleeves again to avoid the need for soldering. The right size holes should make detachable LED headlights for 00 steam locos do able if not exactly easy.

Don't get the idea Stirling Singles pottered about on branchline Pick Up Freights. They had an axle load around 20 tons and were very much main line locos. Pre WW1 the Fitted Freights and Fish trains were very much "Crack," Top link workings running at express passenger speed. They became popular from around 1900 and like many pre group railways the GNR simply didn't build anything suitable to haul them until Gresley's 1912 K1 class followed by the larger boilered K2s and 3 cyl K 3s. Other companies such as the GCR and Caledonian built small classes of 4-6-0 locos specifically for fast freight traffic but the GNR had nothing between 0-6-0s and 4-4-2s and 4-4-0s. Later the NER which built 4-6-0s for fast freight B16 etc used their Atlantics in pairs on the Scottish Fish Trains and later A4s were on these workings.

Not difficult at all, solder wires to the motor tags instead of letting them touch the chassis halves, connect wires to the chassis halves and feed them to a decoder in the tender make sure you fit tender pickups. The wheels usually fall off because the contact between stub axles and chassis is poor and causes arcing which heats the axle and loosens the wheel on the plastic axle, Tender pickup helps dramatically as does fitting wheel back pickups to the split chassis. If you loosen the chassis basepate you could could possibly cause the gears to strip, I would file the chassis baseplate away below the axle, A sprung strip would probably short out but a couple of small coil springs in holes above [Edit] an unpowered stub axle would be excellent but need some quite fancy workmanship. Edit On reflection I think the split chassis Mainline std 4 motor drove the rear axle and Bachmann the centre so the Mainline would need springs on the centre axle and Bachmann either rear or front. Maybe if there is a non split chassis alternative get that and avoid a lot of hassle

I had a book from Swindon Library some years ago with a lot of detailed info on Summer Saturday loco workings on the GWR line to Devon and Cornwall. It was not the David St John Thomas book, I have a copy of that, but I can't remember the title of this other book. Can anyone suggest what it might have been?

Triang Magnadhesion works well on a couple of locos I still operate doubling the haulage on steel track but slip helplessly on N/S so the DCC concepts has potential to help. Just make sure you lay enough so the whole train is clear of the top of the gradient before you lose the magnetic pull. Again with the 3% risers measure the actual gradient. Use a decent spirit level, with big deflection for small change in gradient. I first test my spirit level to ensure it shows the same when turned 180 degrees they can get knocked, Then I mark my spirit level on a bit of masking tape at 1 ft or whatever distance and make up a packing piece 3% of the length marked thick so it shows level when the grade is right. This is more accurate than trying to work from a level base as if the baseboard is actually 1 in100 your 1 in 33 can become 1 in 25 . Keeping the gradients even is much more critical with short trains, typically 2 locos will pull 8 coaches where neither will pull 4 if the grade varies to give one steep bit like mine does! If all else fails you could use a banker.

It must have been repainted during the war to have the post 1942 GWR on the tanks so that would just about certainly have been black. I guess quite a few managed to survive the war without a boiler lift and repaint but they would have been in pre 1942 shirt button livery. I can't see them painting out the shirtbutton and painting G W R without slapping black paint on.

Yes You are right, school was 45 years ago

I get away with 1 in 33/36 ish on a 200 degree climb of about 15 feet between levels on a layout with a similar concept to yours. With a short section of 3rd radius 7 coach trains of Lima or Triang/Hornby Mk1s are right on the limit for weighted Triang Halls, and also weighted Hornby Counties and Black 5s with lightened tenders with pickups removed etc, But with a standard Bachmann Manor or Hornby loco with a DCC decoder where the weight should be and draggy tender pickups, that reduces to 3 or 4. The Railroad DCC compatible County would only pull 3 when new. My ruling grade outside is 1 in 14 and weighted battery powered Lima class 37s manage 6 coaches or 7 on a good day. A problem with these tight curves on gradients is the twist in track and track bed. If you use a single piece of stiff board on a 5 degree slope the trains will be leaning 5 degrees off vertical by the time the have turned 90 degrees, so set track and Hornby or similar risers rather than a curving rising baseboard surface makes a lot of sense. One I am struggling with has a fibreboard trackbase and it has to be screwed down very firmly to keep it in place and the joints between sheets are a nightmare, I guess the thinner the better for a trackbase on these curving gradients On 2nd radius 1 in 20 spiral six coupled steam locos typically only have 3 wheels on the track which is why my 2nd Radius minimum clearance spiral on the "Bed" layout never worked. My other current project is reducing the gradients of the carriage sidings to less than 1 in 100, which seems to be the gradient coaches run away on, by levellling the baseboards. its not easy. So if you build a 1 in 50 gradient on a 1 in 100 baseline it ends up at 1 in 33. So my advice is Always measure the actual gradient, never calculate anything. If the layout is portable ensure the legs are easily adjustable

Yes 1000 was delivered with a double chimney which was so successful that 1001 etc were fitted with a single chimney! The class had a massive reconstruction in the mid 1950s with new tube plates if not completely new boilers to provide much larger superheaters as well as double chimneys. The worst feature of the 00 RTR County is the cab and Tender are too narrow. The Tender looks like the Hawkesworth Castle Tender which was 8ft over the tank rather than 8ft 6" in the County and the Cab is also 8ft 6" wide compared to the 8ft King, Castle, Hall etc. The RTR just looks plain wrong compared to prototype pictures and our Bristol Models County which is scale width and is a very imposing loco. The GWR Pacific would also have been 8ft 6" wide as were the 94XX tanks and models of the Pacific using the King Cab always look wrong to me because of this.

As an alternative....... After 30 odd years of slightly inclined sidings which modern stock happily rolls out of I had some time to kill yesterday so I finally took a spirit level to them and started to "Adjust" the supports to bring them level. I did the marshalling sidings first and the change in angle as the main line climbs past at 1 in 75 or so is very effective, only trouble is the main line should be descending at that point... Oh well no running on Thursday, Civil engineers possession while the main line is tweaked.

It looks good, bit short on storage but should be good to operate except for the short headshunt by the signal box which would usually be a trailing rather than facing and the short headshunt would make shunting the yard almost impossible. I would put a further connection from inner main to the headshunt and connect the headshunt to the outer with a diamond or single slip (A) and move the crossover to the right (B) If you use the single slip A there is no real need for B but it would restrict the length of train which could be run round. Elevating the track is great idea but I would slope the scenery up to cover the hidden tracks and the ends as well. A river under the station would be good