DCB

Lots of people seem to be disposing or old mazak non insulated Romford Drivers, both in store and on Ebay Ideal for 2 to 3 rail conversions....

The cap was primarily for radio suppression and running without a cap on DC causes the armatures to flash over which rapidly destroys the brushes. I have about 10 Triang Transcon diesels and various X04 beasties we use on a floor layout on holiday, as well as more detailed Triang based locos / chassis and I just use a big ceramic cap across the pickups (or Brushes) A jinty would easily take a pair one in each tank. Maplin used to have goody bags of assorted ceramic caps, I just used the biggest. Highly scientific and all that. I have used Relcos with good results for 30 odd years. Weighting locos works well to in prove pick up, DCC ones are inevitably lighter than DC and I sometimes run a DC garden line in the rain with no pick up issues.

I only just noticed this thread. I'm just wondering whether the two short platforms should be lengthened at the expense of the station building equal length platforms are good or longer arrivals than departures. I feel 5 MK1s is about the minimum for a semifast or 5 suburbans for an outer suburban . The arrangements for getting released engines to shed, if that is what that is in the right hand top corner look a bit tortuous. Are the lines paired Up slow Up Fast or Up. Slow Down Slow. Paralell moves on adjacent tracks look good but need careful setting up to get best visuals. A departure, simultaneous arrival and a parallel shunt move alongside the arrival look good but you do end up with a big workload (And sometimes turn the wrong knob and hit the buffers at high speed) I do wonder whether in practice you would actually be able to run more than one train at a time on the Double Minories. The Marylebone plans show the tracks paired Up Slow Down Slow etc so did the slow lines just end at a brick wall in the tunnel? They could not have combined in the tunnel. Incidentally after being designed for 6 platform faces back in 1890 something it took from 1899 to 2006 to actually get the extra platforms added. The LNER liked simultaneous departures from Waverley and even the Cross, and sometimes started two trains together knowing one had to follow the other north of Welwyn as it was down to double track. I guess Grandstanding is prototypical

What the comparison does not show is that the Hornby will still be running in 2050 whereas the Bachmann will be lucky to see 2020. I use Bachman coupling rods etc on re drilled Hornby chassis with romford wheels in a search for reliability.

Do a screenshot? I do screenshots of Anyrail and then resize them through Faststone image viewer, which is freeware.

Serious jealousy creeping in. My garden railway is Scotland 1987 ish, large logo 37/4 era as we have been to Scotland Ft William Inverness etc every year since 1987. But one thing rankles, operation, are you running wrong road? The West Highland loops were mostly laid with a straight road in and a curved road out to suit conventional left hand running. However with the coming of RETB s and spring points and the loss of signalboxes and semaphores the approaching train has to take the curved road so at the WHL stations I have observed the they run right hand road, It does not seem to apply on the Mallaig line (at Glenfinnan) . I like the way you modelled the station at the Fort. But again all my photos show the steam train in the right hand platform. I have never seen the departures but on arrival the steam engine runs round and takes the stock back to Mallaig Junction. It does not hang around as there is a service train due. Currently it is not unusual to see three trains in the two platforms. There always seems to be the sleeper stock in the siding nearest Morrisons though I never saw it in ETHEL days. Nothing happens for hours and then everything happens at once. That is a feature of north scotland railways generally, bursts of activity with very long periods of inactivity between. I am fairly sure the K1 was green in Green Cream stock days, I remember 5MT George Stephenson as a regular but the most impressive performer was the 8F absolutely storming Glenfinnan summit a good 10 MPH faster than the slippery footed Black 5s which appear to be absolutely on their limits slipping on the climb from Glenfinnan even on dry rail. Still I must bite the bullet and get my locos fitted with RC gear so I can get some running sessions in before the summer ends.

I found removing the tender pickups was worth 2 extra coaches up a 1 in 36 and replacing the Mazak and decoder with lead gets the haulage up to my benchmark of a weighted Hornby Hall, at least a coach better than a Bachmann Hall. The cab and tender let the model down, the tender is more nearly an 8 foot wide 6 ton 4000 gallon Hall or Castle tender rather than an 8'6" wide 7 ton 4000 gallon County tender and the cab is noticeably too narrow to match. The cab roof also should be similar in profile to a King rather than rounded. I have a Bristol Models County on a Triang chassis and it is a much more imposing and powerful beast, the extra width of the County really makes a difference. As regards the prototype they were not really successful, Castle power with Hall costs was the design intention, and the boiler the Std 15 was based on a project for a high pressure Castle with a sloping throatplate and shorter barrel facilitated by using a larger Stanier 8F front tubeplate, it was not an 8F boiler as it was tapered while the 8F Black 5 etc boiler family were half cone like the Pre 1909 GWR std no 1 boiler. In service the Countys were very highly regarded when new as express speeds were low and loads high so they could be used turn and turn about with Kings but as scheduled speeds rose their reputation faltered and the GW reverted to building Castles and Halls. They developed a reputation for surging on starting which was uncomfortable for passengers and positively dangerous on goods which resulted in them being banned from freight workings at times. Completely rebuilt or new boilers with different superheaters running at reduced pressure together with double chimneys and valve gear mods tamed them to a certain extent but they were most appreciated in the North and in West Wales were they worked with some distinction but generally their performance was no better than the smaller Saint class of 30 years earlier.

There is a thread on this on the Model Rail forum. I commented but it needs some butchery around the firebox door area which reveals the chassis. However as someone with three burned out Bachmann pannier chassis and a Bachmann Pannier powered by a 1970s Triang Hall chassis with Romford wheels and with new axle holes drilled to suit the Bachmann coupling rods I just can't see the point.

Surely the Mk 2 A and Mk 2 D should not be in the same rake, I would have thought the D would need an ETH loco to run the air con even in the summer service. My recollections of the Blue/Grey era is the 37s were freight locos except from around 83 when they replaced 27s on the Far North and with ETHELs on the West Highland lines up until 85 when the large logo 37/4s came along with ETH stock on the Far North. The 1980s blues were a variety of different colours as they faded horribly, much lighter than either Bachmann or Hornby. Leaving Hornby models in the garden for a couple of years is a good way of getting the right shade.

What scale? 5' sounds a bit on the small side for 00

There is no reason the Southern withered arm could not have thrived well into the 1970s, much of the route has lousy road access even today. The real problem was nationalisation, the Government could not pay what it owed for the war work the railways did so it had to nationalise and with that came reckless investment with no regard to a return on that investment. The southern got off lightly, saddled with 50 or so coal gobbling Pacifics it could well have done without which mainly replaced perfectly good economical and fast Adams and Drummond 4-4-0s. Most days there were two turns west of Exeter requiring 7p power, the Brighton Plymouth and a fast freight. Excess staff became a problem, but only after a shortage of staff mainly in the London area. The Southern avoided massive investment in shunting and hundreds of obsolete diesels which crippled BR. If only common sense had prevailed, the T9s had been maintained and M7s 02 s etc continued at work reinforced by SRCR 0-4-4Ts displaced by electrification up till the 1970s by which time reliable Diesels, maybe even 75 mph road switchers to replace 60 MPH tanks instead of 30 Mph Gronks and wagon load freight may have continued. The Southern had a tiny number of 0-6-0T shunters in the West , didn't really go in for shunting as a hobby/fetish like some other outfits and was actually well placed by 1/1/1948 for a bright future

The Glasgow Map is pre the Halwil to Torrington line (1925). I think a gurt dollop of modellers license is required. I would assume either that the Torrington line was freight only, Clay and maybe the Torrington milk until the mid 80s if Torrington to Barnstaple had closed instead before Torrington to Halwil. Crediton is maybe a bit more complex than Halwil would have been, but using that modellers license why not preserve the Torrington line. 5 coach trains of MK1s with Tornado or Flying Scotsman connecting with single unit 153s sprinters and 142 pacers.. Or in 00 Torrington could be 009 with Lynton and Barnstaple stock....

I built a three diode matrixes capacitor discharge system for H and M point motors operating Peco Streamline 00 points some 30 years ago which is still going strong. It uses electric pencil and three matrixes are all fed from the single capacitor. There are up to 5 points to throw and to avoid damage dead loads, spare H and M coils, are used so there is at least 4 motors in circuit whenever anything operates otherwise the point blades can get ripped out of the tie bars. I have no CDU, the Capacitor which I think is 50 volts just floats on a 16 volt transformer and as I said feeds any of the 3 diode matrixes through an electric pencil with the matrixes all being common return. The Matrix are simply 1N400 diodes with insulating sleeving over their bare wires connected between choc box wiring connectors screwed to hardboard. The pencil which has a sprung contact from an old mains light fitting touches 4BA brass bolt heads which are connected to the matrixes with car wiring, 5 amp? I also have made matrixes with a 6 way rotary switch for selecting the route and a push button to energies it

Great thread.almost makes me want to forget about 4-4-2T conversions of M7s for the line they never built in the isle of Skye, but. When I did a lot of train spotting circa 1985/2000 at Cheltenham mainly, when Class 47s were common on Birmingham Bristol passenger turns, the radiator shutters were very prominent as they opened up as the loco powered up to depart. Also the bogie compensating beams used to work overtime on the uneven track. Neither of these features ever seem to get modelled so they can actually work like the prototype. Just a provocative thought.....

No 1 looks ok but 2 and 3 would be awkward to shunt with the kick back sidings requiring the main siding to be emptied to act as a headshunt, quite awkward and tedious to operate. The continuous run looks a bit cramped to operate 64ft coaches and big (class 31?) Diesels. I would lengthen the loop towards the right and delete that kick back or just leave a short stub as a trap. I would also change the hidden section, bring a continuous line forward and I think it would be fine with 50ft or even 57ft coaches and 4-4-0s but that is not what you are after. I had a continuous run in a room about 9X10 which was ok but I ran suburban coaches 55 ft? and tanks on passengers and short freights and it sort of worked. However it was high up at around 60" high across the door which gave a literal duck under rather than a crawl under. My door cleared the lift out section so I could leave it erected while going for a coffee etc.

The WS Beckett GWR Train formations and Carriage workings (1931) lists a Birkenhead to Bournemouth West and Bournemouth West to Birkenhead service in 1931 which had alternate SR and GW stock with 9 X SR coaches to Wellington then 6 plus 2 GW to Birkenhead and 3 SR to Manchester (London Rd) presumably via Crewe which is a big chunk of GWR route mileage Basingstoke Reading Oxford Banbury, Snow Hill, Shrewsbury Chester etc. Not sure where engines changed, probably SR to Oxford. A Birkenhead - Margate service also ran with 8 X SR coaches to Reading then Redhill and Margate (3) Hastings (3) Ramsgate (2) an odd train Bk Com, 3rd, Bk 3rd, Bk 3rd. Comp, restaurant, Composite (all corridor) There was a York to Bournemouth West service with alternate SR and LNER stock, again probably SR loco to Oxford, but then was it GW to Leicester(?) or LNER from Oxford? From the above SR stock would be seen on the GW Bristol line from Reading to Didcot, Basingstoke and Oxford Banbury lines, Birkenhead and Crewe lines north of Banbury, The LNER to York (Doncaster - York?) and even the LMS to Manchester. There was also a Brighton Portsmouth Salisbury Cardiff service with alternate GW and SR stock, engine changing at Salisbury(?) Post war there were 2 SR Green SR powered locals each way per day from Exeter to Plymouth but this was introduced from 1939 I believe for route knowledge purposes, and SR stock on the MSWJR to Cheltenham but again not pre war. Castle Cary Via Weymouth was not viable as the route is very circuitous. Bincombe Bank twice? but the Weymouth line beyond Dorchester was GWR with the SR loco shed at Dorchester so GWR Weymouth had quite a lot of SR stock in 23 to 48. I don't think there was any SR stock on the S and D between 23 and 48 as pre 1930 it was still the S and D joint line with blue stock etc, then LMS took control of trains and SR the infrastructure The SR green stock was a post 48 BR innovation. Bournemouth Basingstoke Reading Oxford services took Eastleigh locos to Oxford and Green stock to Banbury and beyond both in 23/48 and 48/66 eras.

Were the E2s used for anything but shunting? I seem to remember them being at Eastleigh for shunting at Southampton docks. Did they have balanced wheels or were they effectively limited to 30 mph like the E1s? The E1R rebuilds were initially unsuccessful as branch engines on the Halwil Torrington line due to a lack of balancing, the later ones had balanced wheels. Too many modellers assume other railways used Tank engines like the GWR. The GW had a fleet of approx 1000 mixed traffic saddle and pannier tank locos of 850, 2012, 57, 54, 64, 74 and 94XX classes capable of 60 MPH and of heating and braking passenger stock. Some lacked vacuum brakes and steam heat but all had balanced wheels and good valve gear. Few other companies had significant numbers of such locos, the LBSC had terriers, but preferred 0-6-2Ts and the LSWR preferred 0-4-4T. The GE had the J69 passenger version of the J67 shunter but the initial J50s were not balanced. Interesting about Hornby buffer heights, I thought they were nearer 1mm too high and I have lowered numerous Hornby and Triang vehicles and locos to Hornby Dublo buffer heights (dating from 1938?) Hornby and Mainline / Bachmann have now produced several GWR models which sit too low due to using a standard generic running plate and overall maximum height whereas the GWR had an extra 6" of loading gauge to play with . The GW also had tender running plates rather higher than most companies and used deep buffer beams to get the buffers at the right level . The Mainline 2251 with skinny buffer beam and undersize wheels being frankly laughable. Is the E2 body the right width, Hornby made the GWR 8750 too wide by around 2mm which makes it look ridiculous alongside a Bachmann one. The old 9F wheels were similar size but very different to the E2, Heavier balance weights, longer crank throw, different crank pin thread, I have some next to my lathe awaiting an attempt to reprofile them to fit a 28XX GWR 2-8-0.

There is no single good solution. Instantaneous currents are quite high with some capacitor discharge systems, several amps probably nearer 10 than 5, but well within the capability of the 5 amp car wiring I use. I find 90% of wiring faults are poor connections, 50% connectors and 40% solder joints, The higher the current the more likely to fail. I would not use Din plugs for points, I use them for wander lead controllers with currents down in the milliamp range, they are sods to solder wires to and fall apart after a few connects and disconnects. Choc blocks are ok but keeping the wires secure under the single screws is a challenge, big blob of solder on the wire end helps but you need good strain relief on the wires to stop one pulling out. My connector of choice is the multipin car wiring connector if it only has to be removed occasionally, easy to solder or crimp and available for pennies from your friendly local car breaker. I never tried a D connector. As regards wiring plans I commit them to memory and then forget, but if it is laid out logically then it should not be a problem

It is not the length but the depth of the stack of timbers, It was common for timber loads to overhang but careful marshalling or a dedicated low wagon marshalled as a runner would solve the possibility of the load fouling an adjacent high sided wagon. One layer would be fine but the upper ones need roping securely at the very least

Looks good, What is beyond the wall where it says beware of trains? Maybe you could have a terminus or sidings in there?

I guess Great Gabbard would be rather like Ryde Pierhead but with a rather longer approach viaduct?

Not sure where the platform would be but the top sidings look a bit odd. I suppose a couple of strong blokes could push a wagon into the kick back or they could use a rope.... The bay platform is an over used model idea. Basically they were end load docks in most instances. Apart from dead end platforms at main stations they were not used for arrivals. Thinking of them as "Departure Bays" is a better way to make them look right. Trains terminate in the though platform and then shunt to the bay to await departure at a later time. Most bays never saw a passenger train especially at ordinary passing stations though a lot saw vans for sundries traffic. The FY looks like it eats length, you need 12" between scenic break and first point to allow running round and 3 way points are bad news, I know, I used one very much like your plan but without the turntable

The difficult bit of the BR standard 3 is the boiler which is / was a modified GWR std 3(?) boiler a second cousin to the 2251 std 10 boiler havingbthe same boiler length I believe but a shorter firebox and the Bulldog and big prairie std 2 which habve the same firebox but a shorter barrel, all having the same smokebox diameter and firebox tubeplate diameters and tapers but different firebox and boiler (parallel section) lengths. The Bachmann 2251 boiler grafted to the std 4 2-6-0 cab etc might be a starting point. It is very clear the GWR were taking the ****** with the 2-6-2T making an engine as big and heavy as a Prairie and as useful as the 1902 2-4-2T which preceded the Prairies which had the same no 3 boiler. After all it was a 3MT where the much smaller 45XX was 4MT. However the laugh was on them as it had a nice comfy cab and to the footplate crews used to LNER monstrosities they must have seemed like Rolls Royces. However the GW themselves nearly made a similar loco in the 1930s with the No2 boiler on a 43XX chassis, before deciding to build the 2251 class. (Which begs the question "why not make another 20 2251s and a batch of 94XX with 2251 wheels instead of the std 3 tank?" Fortunately the newly nationalised railway was awash with investment funds so we got another (non) standard loco class. ...

ejstubbs makes some good points I had forgotten, like wresting the fishplates off set track, some appear to be spot welded on to steel set track, as he says bin them and use standard streamline joiners. I am far more cavallier than ejstubbs. I happily separate both set track (Peco and Hornby) and streamline into sleeper base and individual rails, or even individual sleepers. For a filler section I cut the rails to length and slip on the required number of sleepers slip on the fishplates and sort out the sleeper spacing when its in place. I sometimes shorten the fishplate and use a dummy sleeper, one with a groove to take the fishplate instead of a rail fixing under the fishplate. I prefer the Hornby set track if I am not altering it as the sleepers at the fishplate end are cut away more neatly than Peco. The crucial clearance is end throw on locos to the centre of the coach, 4-4-0s are particularly bad and some Pacifics and 4-6-0s not much better. The old crude Triang L1 and M7 are particularly bad but with tweaks to provide side play on the rear drivers on the L1 and restrict bogie sideplay they can be tamed. T9s and the like with traction tyres are hopeless as they derail and foul. The picture of two coaches suggests that the clearance could come down to 55mm quite easily, the coaches need to clear, by a couple of mm no more. If you cannot run two trains past each other or past a stationary train there is no need for clearance. I have three feet or so of station throat with negative clearance but you cannot park or run 2 trains there simultaneously so it does not matter. Equally if you dont use both tracks of double track at the same time you don't need the clearance. 00 is supposed to be 1;76th scale locos and stock on H0 1;87th scale track, and I try to work to H0 clearances and "Just" clearances for which I use an old Hornby "King" for end throw and a Hornby MK1 for the centre

I habitually mix streamline with settrack. I have a sort of transition around 2 ft radius, over 2ft I use code 100 setramline, below set track,I used to cut the sleeper webs on set track curves and ease them out, 2nd radius will go to 19" and 3rd almost to 2 ft On small layouts I find absolute precision in laying straight track pays dividends so I use set track long straights. On big layouts you cannot beat the long sweeping curves possible with streamline flexi Set track points are pretty useless, as standard they give ridiculous track spacing and lousy running as they are actually only 15" radius in places. A standard 2ft streamline point is no longer than a set track point but gives the streamline a much closer track spacing. Best space saving point is the streamline small Y. The set track geometry is a left over from the 1960s with 14" radius curves pacifics and scale length MK 1 coaches. I find around 55mm is about right for 2nd and 3rd radius curves and 50mm is a bit wide for straight track so I trim streamline points. I squeeze marshalling storage and carriage sidings down so trains just clear, see pic. It also allows more roads, 6 per foot against 4 or 5 with set track points.