ejstubbs

I make it 32' x 2' - he's got 4 of the 6ft boards, remember.

I find the explanations on the signalbox.org web site useful. I also found browsing Bob Essery's Railway Signalling and Track Plans informative - he does provide examples of signalling a number of different track layouts, as well as explaining operational considerations. Heck, I even found some illuminating information in good old Cyril Freezer's Model Railway Signalling. But when it comes to specific situations that don't obviously fit neatly within the basic rules then asking the question here has provided some extremely helpful guidance - as has browsing other modeller's questions of a similar nature, even if their specific layout isn't necessarily identical to mine. I think that, when asking question of this nature, it really helps to provide a clear track plan and an explanation of what the intended traffic is supposed to be (eg which lines disappearing off scene are main lines or branch lines, which types of goods are intended to be handled in which sidings and so forth). Annotating the points, platforms, sidings/goods facilities and (if you already have an idea of what might work) signals on the diagram make it much easier for people to then explain where amendments to layout, operation or signalling might be required. While I respect what the OP was setting out to achieve, I personally doubt whether a forum thread - or, at any rate, a single forum thread - is an effective way to go about it. (And I do wonder whether some folks expect to get rather too much for free on t'internet when they might be well advised to, you know, buy a book about it, at least to give themselves a grounding...)

Well, Bachmann came up with the goods - in the form of an e-mail with the documents attached - within 24 hours, so kudos to them. No explain as to why the documents aren't on their web site, though. To top it all, I actually came across the originals last night, quite by chance, and in a wholly unexpected and inexplicable place: folded up and tucked inside the documents for the 3F. D'oh... Thanks again to Free At Last for making the effort to scan them.

What a star - thank you! Looks like the spare part numbers for the 1F are not the same as those for the 3F Jinty. Doesn't mean that they're not actually the same physical parts, of course. The 1F is noticeably smaller than the Jinty, though (according to Wikipedia the 1F has a 15' wheelbase whereas the 3F is 16'6") so I would have expected there to be some parts not in common.

Now why didn't I think of that myself? I've contacted the Service Department through the "contact us" link on Bachmann's web site. I'll post an update when/if they get back to me.

The report linked to above says 40k to go so, looking at the stage 2 route, my guess would be Widdrington where the B1337 crosses the ECML. I really wouldn't want to chance it crossing the ECML in open country! (There's a yellow road that crosses the ECML on the level immediately after it turns off the A198 from Seton to Longniddry. Gives me the wig every time I see the crossing as I drive past. Those IC225s don't hang about along there if they can help it, and if anything were to go wrong...) I'd take a punt on the rusty rails crossings being probably the ones on the A1061 at South Newsham and the A1068 at Choppington. (Those were closer to the finish and probably more likely to appear in the highlights.)

I bought a Bachmann half-cab 1F (product number 31-433) soon after the model was first released. I don't seem to be able to locate the manual and service sheet which I assume came with it (although I can't be 100% sure that they did), and Bachmann don't seem to list them for download on their web site. Does anyone have copies of these documents which they could perhaps scan for me, if they were feeling terribly kind and helpful?

A "no returns" policy does not apply if the item is not as described - which includes not working if the listing didn't indicate that (eg described as "for spares or repair"). The policy is mainly there to stop people returning stuff because they decide it's not what they want. This is enshrined as a right in the Consumer Contracts Regulations but only between a customer and a business. The regulations don't apply to private sales of any kind, new or used (and eBay doesn't require items sold as new to be returnable either AFAICS), but they do apply to businesses selling used goods.

I think the buyer has to cancel the return request. If he goes to his purchase history in "My eBay" it should show his order for the item with the return still outstanding, but with an option to cancel the return. You and he then just work out the refund between you, presumably via PayPal. There's no need to get eBay involved in a £10 refund UNLESS you think that the buyer later might pull a fast one and start a "not as described" dispute after you've refunded him the £10. That could end up with eBay refunding him the full amount that eBay thinks he's paid, so you'd end up even more out of pocket. Even simpler: I think that eBay will just expire the return request if he doesn't send the item back within a certain time - about a month I think, maybe 30 days. It should indicate the time left to complete the return in the "My eBay"entry for his order for the item.

I thought he'd just run out, after having to hand all his apostrophes over to those who favour it's and their's as possessives. (I think I even saw theirs' recently <shudders>.) Is this the right room for an argument about of being used in place of have?

I stand corrected! Note that "for the pedantics amongst you," should be either "for the pedantic amongst you," or "for the pedants amongst you". Just a point of grammar (Actually, "pedantics" sounds like quite an interesting subject for a university course module. Some people on here could probably get first class honours...)

I think "might be possible" is more accurate that "would be possible". True, looking at the roads north of the lake it looks like something could be done using Chemin des Floralies - the wee link road that the map shows as leading back on to the track from the roundabout at the east end could possibly be adapted, although when you look at it on streetview it's actually two separate car parks at the moment. That would lop about 1km off the 4.38km of the current circuit. (The Avenue Pierre Dupuy is a non-starter, I think, because the slip road to it takes you westwards, away from the island.) How much shorter does the circuit need to be for Formula E? It would still be necessary to find a way past the restriction on the number of race weekends per year.

That photo is dated 1978, the year the track was first used. Up to and including 1986 the pits were at the other end of the island, immediately after the hairpin. Source: http://theracingline.net/racingcircuits/Canada/index.html

I don't think there is a lot of scope for shortening the lap of the Circuit Gilles Villeneueve. Most of the open space in the middle of the circuit that would be needed for a short-cut is actually water! Also, according to Wiki only two race weekends per year are permitted on the track. One of those is the F1 weekend. If Formula E wanted to use the track then whatever uses the other race weekend would have to get bumped elsewhere.

It's closing again after tomorrow, for a few days. I'm going for a stroll on it this coming weekend. Apparently the idea is to increase the speed limit to 70mph over time (perhaps to allow Fifers to come to terms with the idea of crossing bodies of open water at such insane speeds). That should increase the throughput over the old bridge. And it has a hard shoulder - it is full motorway standard, unlike the old bridge - so breakdowns should be less disruptive. The intelligent traffic management system should also help keep it moving at busy times. Well, that's the plan, anyway...

If Grayling ever did anything with the objective of impressing people, he doesn't seem to have succeeded. He seems entirely adequately impressed with himself to need to worry about what other people think of him.

No, it's not. Freeview+ was the name used for a while for Freeview boxes with recording capability. The name was chosen deliberately to make people realise that they did the same job as the Sky+ boxes (though for Freeview, obviously, rather than Sky) which were very popular at the time. Freeview+ has been more or less superseded now by Freeview Play, which includes the "backwards EPG" feature for viewing catch-up content on BBC iPlayer, ITV Hub, All 4 and My5 without having to fire up a separate app for each one. Both Freeview+ and Freeview Play refer to equipment with recording and/or catch-up capabilities in addition to broadcast reception. Talking Pictures is broadcast on a Freeview HD multiplex, although it isn't an HD channel. That means that you need a Freeview HD set-top box or TV to receive it through a UHF aerial: the HD multiplexes cannot be received on non-HD Freeview kit. The HD multiplexes have significantly more bandwidth available than the non-HD ones, specifically to cater for HD channels which need the higher bandwidth. However, the demand for the multiplex capacity for HD channels hasn't been as great as expected, so some of the spare capacity is being sold to non-HD channels. A non-HD channel takes up proportionately much less of an HD multiplex than it does of a non-HD multiplex (everything else being equal) so you can get more such channels on an HD multiplex without having to squeeze the video resolution or audio quality (as happens on the non-HD, non-public service multiplexes such as the SDN and Arqiva-owned ones where a lot of the +1 channels live). In that sense, it's probably a good thing that Talking Pictures TV is broadcast on an HD multiplex - apart from for people who can't receive the HD multiplexes. There's no such thing as "Sky Freeview". They do (or did, I think they no longer actively market it) have an offering called "Freesat from Sky" which, on purchase of a viewing card, allowed access to a number of free-to-view satellite channels in addition to the free-to-air channels offered by the 100% fee-free and subscription-free Freesat service. Talking Pictures TV is on Freesat (not "Freesat from Sky") channel 306. There is a view that Sky chose the name for their 'free' service with an eye to creating confusion with the nascent Freeview terrestrial and Freesat satellite services, during the run-up to analogue terrestrial TV being switched off. You do not need an HD Ready TV to watch Talking Pictures TV. "HD Ready" means that the TV's screen can display 1280×720 pixel HD content; there was another term "Full HD" which meant that the screen could display 1920×1080 pixel content. Neither term conveys anything about what broadcast signals the TV can receive. This was a source of widespread confusion to consumers ever since the terms were dreamed up in some marketing department somewhere, before the days when HD reception became more or less a standard feature in TVs - at least modern "big screen" TVs. No-one really knows how many people thought that they were watching 'HD TV' when in fact they were just watching standard definition broadcasts upscaled within the TV to fit its high-resolution screen. In the early days, the only mainstream sources of true HD content were Sky HD for broadcast content, and Blu-ray (or, before its demise, HD DVD) discs. Talking Pictures TV is not an HD channel, it uses the standard definition 576 pixel vertical resolution which pretty much any TV sold from around the late 1960s onwards can display. (The 576 pixel vertical resolution is based on the old "625 lines" UHF TV pioneered, in the UK at least, by BBC2. The missing 50-odd "lines" were not used for picture in analogue TV - they were actually made use of by the later Teletext system to carry the digital information used by that system, encoded in to the picture signal.) What you do need to receive Talking Pictures TV is a TV or separate set-top box capable of receiving either: the Freeview HD multiplexes - which use a higher-bandwidth digital terrestrial broadcast technology compared to the original Freeview (DVB-T2 vs DVB-T, if you want the actual terminology), or the free-to-air satellite channels - which means either a Sky box (which doesn't need to have a viewing card installed if you only want to watch the free-to-air channels, which include Talking Pictures TV), a Freesat set-top box, or a Freesat capable TV.

I think you may be confusing a modern potentiometer: which even the latest electronic DC controllers use, with a wire-wound rheostat, such as found in venerable beasties like the Tri-ang P.42: Rheostats are, as you say, retro tech for our purposes and probably best replaced with a complete new controller. Modern potentiometers in an electronic controller are fine, but pretty much non-user-serviceable so if they do go on the fritz then the simplest remedy is to replace them - if you can source the right one. The OP may be able to find some kind of specification or ID on the existing pots - there's usually something marked on the bottom face of the round body of the pot, which can if all else fails be plugged in to Google to see if it sheds any light. Gaugemaster may be dominant in this field, but they're not the only game in town. Apart from the ones available from foreign manufacturers as listed by Dutch_Master, there's: Morley, whose Vector dual controller with built-in CDU works fine for me. I particularly like the centre-off potentiometers they use - especially now that they have a positive detent at the off position, and it really is off. (I've never got on with reversing switches.) The Vector is fully self-contained, so there's no separate transformer required. And it comes with two hand-held controllers included, that plug in to the base unit; Modelex, whose single units seem to be liked by some; The Pictroller which is an update on the widely admired Pentroller as originally developed for Pendon. This offers a variety of control modes and settings, as well as having capability for automatic operations. Quite a sophisticated device, but priced accordingly. Hornby still does single and dual DC controllers, though I'm not aware of them having many actual fans. And Bachmann does a single DC controller which some rate highly for the price (this one is often available second-hand having been split from a Bachmann train set). There may well be others out there that I've forgotten/not run in to online. There are plenty of threads on RMWeb and other model railway forums on the subject - again, Google is your friend. (Incidentally, if you can't see the photo of the inner workings of the Triang P.42 controller then the URL for the photo is: http://yourmodelrailway.net/gallery/15/15_251330_350000001.jpg. It's in the ninth post on this thread on the yourmodelrailway.net forum. The embedded photo shows up fine when I edit the post, but not when I view it as part of the thread. No idea why. Sorry.)

My suggestion: we have a number of similar-looking holes in our lawn at the moment which appear to be caused by fungal fruiting bodies (aka 'mushrooms' or 'toodstools') which come up overnight and then get eaten by wildlife (magpie/squirrel/fox/hedgehog/something else) passing through the garden in the early hours. Sometimes you can find the remnant of the 'root' (apparently officially called the "volva") at the bottom of the hole.

Can I just point out that Allan isn't really nominating anything: he's just cutting and pasting text from the Wikipedia entries for the films from this list (sometimes with a bit of re-work to create a brief resume from a rambling entry). Those who find themselves unable to wait for the addition to this 'thread' could save themselves a chunk of time by going direct to the source. I'm not sure what the Wiki Foundation's view is on this kind of plagiarism but I doubt it is likely to be favourable. I would in general agree that pointless remakes are annoying. However, I would qualify that by saying that IMO the Cohen brothers' version of True Grit is very good. I find Jeff Bridges much more convincing than The Duke as a no-good alcoholic has-been who finds redemption in the end. For me, Wayne was always just a little too noble and righteous from the outset.

Tinned wire ends get squished and weakened when the connector block screws are driven home, much more so than if the individual cores are able to shuffle about to accommodate the pressure. Ideally, wire ends going in to connector blocks should be kept tidy with a bootlace ferrule of the correct size crimped on. Why would you need to twist them together, if you're using a choc block with terminals looped together like in your photo? One wire per terminal would work fine - in fact, that's pretty much exactly what the OP was asking for! (Your photo is a bit puzzling in that respect: you've created two sets of three linked terminals, but only used one terminal in each set - but used that single terminal for two wires, leaving two terminals in each group unused. Maybe it's just a poor choice of example, and you do actually have a use for the other two terminals.) Using solid cable core for the connectors between the terminals on the other side of the choc block is a good idea* because the solid core is largely impervious to the terminal screw. You don't have to cut multiple short pieces: you can use one continuous length bent in to loops of the correct width. A pair of pliers is helpful to crimp the two "legs" of each pair of adjacent loops tightly together (but no so tightly that it weakens the wire too much) so that they go in to the terminal holes without a fight. This also means that you know that both loops into each terminal have the same connection - hopefully a good one - rather than risk one "leg" being held less tightly by the terminal screw then the other - which could be a troubleshooting nightmare if any problems ever arose. * Of course it goes without saying - doesn't it? - that an arrangement like that with exposed, uninsulated conductors should never be used for mains voltages. It may be a shorting risk even with low voltages, if you have two such blocks close together "back to back".

Except that the forum software doesn't offer that feature. What it does is e-mail you every time a new post was made to the Bargain Hunters thread. A few people seemed to get snitty when they thought that too many of the posts weren't actually bargains. It's what's called an undocumented feature: the immediate notification function is indiscriminate, but so long as people behave more or less the way you want them to then it more or less works. But this is an internet forum and, much like the big wide world, people don't always behave the way you want them to on here, and sometimes you just have to put up with it. If it gets out of hand then you can say something on the thread to try to calm them down, but the only policemen on this forum are the moderators. Complain to them (are there actually any others apart from Andy Y?) if you think people are continuing to behave unreasonably after being asked not to. What action the mods take is then the end of the matter. Remember that this forum is free to use. If it doesn't work exactly the way you want it to then you don't have a whole lot of redress. You can't ask for your money back. The best you can do is try to influence and persuade people to conform to how you want them to behave. Some of the comments about off-topic discussions on the original Bargain Hunters thread were not couched in particularly diplomatic terms. "im sick of my mailbox being filled with topic irrelevant updates," is hardly a friendly and persuasive way to cajole people into doing what you want. Though I struggle to believe that this could actually be true of any RMWebbers, it did have a bit of an air of entitlement to it. There doesn't seem to be an emoji for "aw, diddums". Have an Agree. As has been pointed out above, the options in the poll were not worded in anything like a neutral fashion. Given that the people responding are going to be a self-selecting subset of the total RMWeb user population (less than 100, whereas I'm sure that RMweb has many, many more users than that all told) with an interest in the topic, then using loaded wording like "I'm quite happy to clog the thread up with discussion despite polite requests not to" is extremely likely to deliver a skewed result, and stifle debate on the actual pros and cons of a reasonable amount of discussion/feedback on certain bargains that get posted. A prime recent example on the old thread was the cheap soldering iron that, it was pointed out in subsequently, didn't go below 200º - put that information on a different thread and many people interested in the item won't be made aware of that drawback. That could end up wasting them money, which is rather more of an issue IMO than some people having a few more e-mails in their Inbox than they want because they're desperate to satisfy their acquisitive urge at the lowest possible cost. (See: anyone can use emotive language to try to make a point - but dressing it up as a "poll" is more than a little disingenuous.) What I do think went wrong towards the end of the old thread was people posting asking for bargains. The Kadee discussion that got some people so wound up kicked off that way, and I will put my hand up and admit that I was one of those responsible for it being prolonged. I would be 100% supportive of people feeling free to say "please post requests for good prices on specific items elsewhere: this thread is for notifying the community of one-off low prices for any product relevant to RMWeb users." (This does actually echo a genuine bugbear of mine, which is people who resurrect an old - as in years old, sometimes - thread to ask a new question, simply because the old thread had the name of the product or some other keyword in its title, which presumably came up on the forum search engine or Google. Again, I would support a general recognition on the forum that this is not good practice, and people should be politely advised to start their own, new thread to ask their specific question.)

I have to agree: I would have thought that an "old fashioned engineer" really should be able to draw curves of known radius... In case that's the information that's missing, the centreline radii of the Setrack curves are: 2nd 438mm/17¼" 3rd 505mm/19⅞" 4th 572mm/22½" As 28XX says, adjust by 8mm/five-sixteenths of an inch either side of the centreline to see what the actual track will look like. (Note: dimensions in inches provided for the benefit of the old fashioned.)

I'm sure I read somewhere that the MRRC motors don't work so well in locomotives on account of them being designed to drive slot cars at more or less continuous high speeds. I believe I read that they tend to spin faster than the X03/X04, making low speed control eg for shunting problematic. However, if others have direct experience otherwise then it would seem reasonable to discount that information.

The 1959 Railway Roundabout DVD appears to feature a pannier tank hauling a two-coach push-pull train bunker first (ie smokebox towards the first coach). You can view it on YouTube here.