Derekstuart

This video (below) is produced by GWR and supposedly shows how much faster the acceleration is from one of their new sets compared to a HST. This is supposedly to show how much better they are. Without getting into the rights and wrongs of this (opinion is split between the nice and comfortable, reliable and familiar HST and the new green credentials of the new sets), does anyone have any views on whether this is a fair test or whether the HST has not been driven to its full potential? I for one after travelling 10,000s miles on them have never seen one pull away this slowly when both PCs are working. https://www.facebook.com/gwruk/videos/3394464530779763 Both trains will have their supporters, that's not in dispute- all I would like to know is whether this is a fair test or not. Thanks.

Hello Matt I've been using Antex for many years but really went off them following 2 poor irons I bought a few years back. However, spurred on by a discussion here, I contacted them and found them really helpful and am pleased to say that I've gone back to using Antex- both work and hobby- and found them to be well ahead of other makes. I'd certainly recommend staying with the tried and trusted make. I have a couple of Draper irons (25w and 50w) and, to be frank, they don't work anything like as well as the Antex ones. I can't comment on Weller.

Thanks for the info. I'd never heard of 'Dynamis' until you mentioned it. (I have now Go-Ducked it- every day is a learning day, it seems.) I have just found the Blue Pullman- with Dynamis system- for £800 in Rails. It's normal to find a bit of difference between retailers, but £400- 33%? That's a bit cheeky of my local shop. That said, I don't know what their terms were when they bought it in, though I can't see the wholesale price being sufficiently lower to Rails to warrant that, but I don't know.

Sorry, yes it's a four car. So only just over £300 per car. You're both right there- there are a few others for £500-£600, which seems excessive anyway. But £2,149? I mean common sense would say there's no point listing something for that price when there's several options 1/3 - 1/4 of the price. That said, I went past my local (currently closed- possibly permanently) model shop and I've seen a Bachmann Blue Pullman for £1,200, which seems about the normal price now. Things have changed in the past few years it seems. Indeed. Given what a lot of people say and do, especially at the moment, I'm inclined to think that would still apply to many even if they had NO money at all.

Now I've seen some prices get really silly when multiple bidders are losing all sense of reality, but an opening price set by the seller for £2,149 for a two car Bachmann Underground model. Am I missing something somewhere? Are they cast in gold or platinum? https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/London-Underground-Bachmann-35-990-S-Stock-4-car-train-pack/164297562067?hash=item2640e5d7d3:g:C94AAOSwZRNfFJ5v

Many thanks for that, Pete. I remember the DBSOs well from Scotrail days. I thought they were ready before they put the electrics through to Norwich, although Bomag so 'eloquently' informed me this was not the case- though I am fairly sure that was the plan before they were delayed on their journey South and undoubtedly further delayed whilst they were converting from FDM to TDM systems. Good old days. Gone forever.

Joke? Ok... I can't see the funny side. The reason the Cobblers got their name is they originated in Northampton and that was once the largest shoe and boot manufacturing area in the World. I can't see the connection to the GEML, but anyway... I corrected that point about 37/47 well before you posted your comment. What has 1960s WCML got to do with it? The name 'Cobbler' was a term attached to one (originally two) semi-fast Northampton- London and return services. They continued until around 1989, though the name disappeared entirely with the introduction of the 321s. As it happens, I last used the GEML in 2018. I don't see the relevance.

Yes, I remember them well. AL1 or AL5 usually and a collection of aged MK1s... But it still beat the timings of the then new 321s. (standing by for someone to jump up in outrage and tell me I'm wrong...)

You are full of information but it's a shame you left your manners and civility behind. There's no need for 'cobblers' when a simple "I think you are wrong because..." Thank you for confirming, as I wrote above, that there was an electric to diesel change at Ipswich. So there was a relatively brief period where electrics were running right through before the DBSOs arrived.

Hello all A bizarre one, I know. I am trying to work out the precise location of the termination of the catenary heading away from Carstairs, before the line to Edinburgh suffered electrification. I seem to recall that it was on a left hand curve and the terminating gantry was offset to the right, rather than above the running line. It was only a short distance away from the junction. I don't recall whether it was before going over the first bridge (Lampits Road), though it was about this point where the Brush 4 would open up- after the curve over Lampits Road, the line is straight and presumably has a higher speed rating. If anyone knows of any old cab videos on youtube, or indeed if any regular passengers/ rail staff know the exact location, I would be appreciative... Even whether it was before or after the bridge would be useful. Many thanks.

Hello 125. Don't forget that the Ipswich- Norwich part of the line was still in the hands of 37s and, if they were very lucky, a 47(s). It seems that full electrification coincided with the DBSOs, though others may be aware of a crossover era where electrics ran through before the DBSOs arrived.

No, I don't personally have any Heljan Brush 4s, I'm just going based on photos here and ones I've seen in the local shop. I did of course forget VI's 47. It's hard to get now, but I'd say the best of the lot. It's a shame none of the retailers could commission new runs. I understand VI still have the tooling, but opting for no more productions just for commercial reasons.

Thanks Tractor. I have found the Bachmann one to be very good, but I haven't tried that experiment, so I'll take your word for it. Overall I prefer the look of the Heljan one to Bachmann (though the Lima one still has the most accurate look overall (windows excepted). (the above regarding accuracy of looks is just my opinion. Others may have different opinions.) Thanks Roy. I did read something about it at the time, but I was not really active with modelling at the time.

That second link is a good one. I'm not sure what exactly he's done to the cab windows but it's about one of the most convincing and accurate looking that I've seen. I must ask him. In the case of the hallowed Brush 4, it is well known that Brush still retain all the engineering drawings for this World-beating locomotive design. They have assisted model projects previously and I cannot imagine that they'd be any less enthusiastic about helping prefect a model of a perfect class. So is there need for scanning? I bet a competent CAD operator could convert drawings to 3D faster than cleaning up an automatic laser measuring session. Hello Roy, if I may, I don't think it's just the issues of shape with the Bachmann 47. The bogie frames, for example, look really poor to me. Were they scaled up to 1:1 and made from metal, I doubt those springs would hold up your car, let alone 120 tons of Brush 4. I've never really thought the Bachmann 47 looks right, despite its mechanical pulling power, which is the best of all. By 73 roof dimples, do you mean the deformed cab roof domes? I must admit that I've never noticed them, despite travelling several times a week Victoria- Gatwick. So you're probably right inasmuch as it's what we expect to see rather than what we really do see.

Hello Steve If it's any help, I used to operate Leyland 6** engines on buses and they were governed to 2,100-2,200. I believe these are very closely related to those used on first generation DMUs. Of course, changing the governor maximum is a case of adjusting a screw (at least it was on the engines we had). Certainly the engines would be capable of running to those RPMs. The other thing is your mention of fluid coupling slip. I thought gear two onwards were direct drive (for others not familiar, that means that the impellor and turbine mechanically lock together to reduce the losses of a fluid coupling). ** I am going based on my experience with road vehicles and the understanding that the same technology- especially from Leyland- was used in various DMU builds. I am not stating a fact re rail.

I don't understand what it is with the Brush 4. Granted, being the best diesel locomotive the World has ever seen (despite what those who like those things with the big noses might say) it's bound to attract the closest inspection, but no one has managed to get it right. Lima got the nose almost right, but windows wrong, Bachmann got the windows right but nose wrong, Heljan (first version) looked right until you compare it to other stock. Ironically, I think the one that got the look closest was the original Hornby one, though it's so lacking in detail and dare I say very slightly overscale, it would still take too much effort to get it right.

Phil, I read a story in a paper (so it must be true) where everyone's alarm clocks went off in the middle of the night, which was eventually traced back to the National grid having two out of sync. 50HZ, thereby turning it to 100Hz- thus making equipment relying on the electrical frequency for timing run at double speed. It might have been something to do with emergency generators rather than the main power station. It must have been 20+ years back. So I can understand why they are so fixed on protecting the frequency now. Perhaps back then all that went wrong were a few alarm clocks, but given how everything is now computer controlled, God knows what the consequences of that could be now.

Hello HPM. Are you sure about this? My understanding is that the public restrictions were removed some time back. Originally you could only navigate to around 90ft accuracy, whereas now it can be 'up to' 3ft. Naturally, the US Department of Defense, who own the system, have the ability to remove or restrict this public feature at any time. I believe their reason for removing this restriction in the first place was because it served no purpose. In a time of war they can restrict it if they need to. However, I stand to be corrected on this if I am wrong.

I'm sure this has already been discussed, although I can't see it anywhere. Has anyone any opinions on the ledge in front of the cab windows? I understand the 4mm is using CAD originally developed for the 7mm version. The pictures released by Heljan look as if this ledge is far too deep- but that's only from a few limited development pictures I've seen. Has anyone seen anything more up to date to see whether this has been corrected? Thanks.

Thank you. I should have stated this was from around August 2017 to January 2018 before I get the people responsible for it in 2020 into trouble. It was spotted from the train as we sat at the down fast platform. I have photos somewhere. I reported it to the 'guard' (or whatever they are called now) and he said he'd report it to whomever he reports to. The guard from Jan 18 was certainly a real railway professional and I am 100% certain he'd have reported it. As a point of note, this isn't the only time I've had a concern on the GEML. One time out of Norwich, just before the bridge on a crossing, it felt as if we'd dropped in the dirt on an axle (I'm not saying that's what happened, but how similar to how I imagine it must feel). It stopped suddenly when we went over a crossing not long after. Again this was reported to the guard (the same one as in Jan 2018 and I know he reported it as he told me the next time I saw him. He mentioned he'd asked for a follow up and told there was no fault found- but at least it was checked). Sorry for the off-topic but I wanted to clarify the historic rather than contemporary nature of that observation.

That is true. But I like the Japanese work ethic; they strive for 100% perfection (even if they can't achieve it they may get 99%, but if they set 99% target they may get 98% etc). They wouldn't judge their performance in one sector by comparing it to another. I still travel by train and I wouldn't consider it unsafe, but equally I am not foolish enough to think that what has happened before could not happen again. Can I give you an example? Colchester up fast crossover- I noted that two timbers were without Pandrol keys. Six months later I noticed they were still without them. Now I'm not qualified to know how many keys need to be missing to represent a danger, but it is clear that they had been like that for at least six months. Fortunately that crossover is restricted to (IIRC 25 MPH).. however if it did jump the dirt, it would be only feet away from oncoming 90MPH expresses. As an academic point, is the above safe? (I ask that out of genuine interest). EDIT: I should add this was from 2018. I add that in case the poor sod responsible for it in 2020 gets the blame.

Sorry Joseph, I have no idea what point you are making there. I am saying that whether there are 0 deaths or 10,000 per year on the roads should have absolutely no relevance to rail safety whatsoever.

That's all I ask, Phil, that genuine lessons are learned. Though I would take issue still with one point (sorry, not intentional)- a passenger on a train that comes off the track isn't going to really be bothered whether it's a team that deals with the fixed bit or the moving bit that got it wrong. We want to know that all the different teams and companies are doing their job properly. That's all.

I don't know, Phil. I don't catch trains in France or Germany. As far as I can tell you are telling me that as a rail passenger on NR metals I have no rights to voice concern over the safety of the network- that is not acceptable. I don't demand anything, except that where something goes wrong it is learned from and not dismissed as you have done. The average death rate on UK roads is around 1,500 to 2,000 per year, which is 1,500 to 2,000 too many. But I fail to see what that has got to do with rail accidents. In fact, this is precisely my point- dismissing rail accidents on the basis that there are more road accidents is my concern. Aviation workers don't dismiss accidents on the basis that there are more car accidents, so why are you suggesting it's acceptable for rail to do so?

That's my point. There are more people killed on roads than air crashes, yet every air crash is thoroughly investigated and the cause identified so that it doesn't happen again. I would question whether that's being applied by those involved in operating trains and the infrastructure they run on.