Right Away

Straying off topic; "Teddy Bear" was often bestowed by Southern men on the Ivatt Class 2 2-6-2 tanks, also "Mickey Mouse".

Thanks for that Bagnal. It's not an issue which couldn't be altered if so desired; one of those tiny niggles which needn't have occured with a little more attention to research. A relatively expensive model (although Bure Valley Models are currently offering them at £138), it should be accurate in the respect of allocation.

The illustrations of Hornby's R3638, WC No 34019 Bideford show it carrying a 71D shed plate - Fratton 1950-1954? (That would have made the timbers of Langston Bridge creak a bit before she dropped into the Harbour!) As modelled in its final guise, the locomotive would have been shedded at Brighton, Salisbury, Feltham, Eastleigh and Nine Elms (BR Database Info). Would any member know if the production models have a feasible shed code.

Oops- just seen this post! Take a look at one I posted on the Hornby page:

Thanks for the info. Strange that at that price it doesn't appear on their "Bargain" tab; but all is revealed when the item code is searched!

Lord Rodney retained its "piano front" as its smokebox was never extended. Lord Collingwood received an extended smokebox when fitted with new cylinders and 10" piston valves as modified by Bulleid.

Having eventually got down to the task, I can confirm that "Glue 'n' Glaze" has made a satisfactory cab spectacle replacement. Not knowing how the product would perform, I first made a "practice run" by filling some holes which I'd drilled in plastic sheet. Satisfied that it was feasible, I went ahead and worked on the engine, from the inside of the cab (to minimize any potential errors). Thanks for bringing the product to my attention.

Once again, confidence takes a bashing! A real shame that a delightfully modelled locomotive should be victim of such poor production practices.

Thanks for getting back, 34D. I will definitely look in that inductor direction. The decoders fitted in the locos concerned are MX617N , MX622N and MX638D I have MX622N decoders fitted in the Hattons "P" 0-6-0T and Hornby A1x 0-6-0T (2 of each) which produce very smooth and quiet running, with CVs 9, 56 and 58 having default settings - 55, 55 and 255 respectively. The motors of these two small classes are obviously different from those of the Bachmann locos involved, so I can't really judge them accordingly. Meanwhile, when I eventually establish the cause, I'll post it for all. Thanks again

This might be a useful tip when encountered with inserting tiny screws in recesses which are difficult to access - locos etc. My usual fix is to wrap a small piece of masking tape around the screwdriver tip to hold the screw. On a recent occurrence, this did not work as there was insufficient space. I had a tin of "Tacky Wax" handy, and by simply dipping the tip of the screwdriver it, the screw was held for fitting.

I have never satisfactorily got to the bottom of setting up Zimo decoders in some Bachmann steam locomotives to give quiet running. Despite a previous request on the forum a while back, the motors emit a growl when operating - something they never did on "pure" DC. The running however, is perfectly smooth throughout the speed range - from the minutest crawl to running speed - it's just the annoying grinding sound which I can't seem to filter out. The available settings within CV,s 9, 56 & 58 are vast when considered together, giving an immense but somewhat confusing selection to adjust. The system is a Lenz LH100 and the engines concerned are Bachmann BR Std 4 2-6-4T, BR Std 4 2-6-0, N 2-6-0 and C 0-6-0*, all well run-in. *The C is quiet when fitted with a Lenz Silver 21 pin decoder but that is required elsewhere! My only quiet Bachmann with a Zimo chip is the H2 4-4-2, that runs smoothly and quietly. (It has a "stay-alive" capacitor but I wouldn't think that attributes to its actual smoothness.) I'm hoping that maybe some new insight is out there as to systematically adjust these CV's to acquire the desired smooth and quiet running. Thanks for any assistance.

Not certain if this is of help but I had issues aith an "H" when new and resolved it as in the attached link. https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/133623-Hornby-h-class-motor-gear-binding/&tab=comments#comment-3142862

Never had to open a Railroad version, but with the Hornby coaches I have had to work on, I prised the lower bodyside away from the solebar with thin plastic strips (credit cards or the like can be used). Wedge the sections apart and gradually slide the strips along the length of the coach until the parts unclip. Gently does it!

For anyone in the market for some BR (SR) bargains, Model Railways Direct have Bachmann's green 2EPB Unit No 5771 for £99.99 and C class 0-6-0s in pre and post Nationalisation liveries for £59.99 among some other discounted products in their sale which runs until June 3rd.

Thank you Oliver, most helpful. Also thanks for support from the other members.

The original posting was never intended to waste anyone's time but for some inexplicable reason has been received as such. I was unaware that a simple request for information should meet with such unwarranted sarcasm. Receiving comments of this nature is not conducive to the supposed camaraderie of the membership which, itself, is reliant on a friendly approach.

The request was to quickly ascertain whether a definitive list of these abbreviated meanings has ever been made available by Rails, that members may be aware of.

Apologies if this has been asked before ...... but I am having difficulty in deciphering the abbreviations in parenthesis at the end of items' descriptions on the Rails of Sheffield EBAY website. Some items may be classed as "NEW" but it would appear the many descriptors relate to a certain condition. For example: (UP) (UV29) (OS) What on earth are they meant to mean to a prospective buyer? Thank you for any help.

Would any member know whether Hornby's latest version of the Drummond M7 (No 30129) is fitted with a similar motor/drive train to their H class tank or does it retain the older power unit. My reason for asking is that the running of my H (No 31518) is far quieter (almost silent) compared to my older M7 (No 30055). Thanks for any response.

Thanks John, I did wonder if it may have been a motive power issue; perhaps it was deemed more advantageous to retain those servicable motor fitted 0-4-4Ts on the likes of the Three Bridges - Tunbridge Wells road.

Like John K, I have had a trusted Lenz system for some years which continues to do all I ask of it flawlessly. There are quite possibly systems out there now with maybe friendlier user interfaces but until mine decides to call it a day, I'll stick resolutely with it.

I have read that Push and Pull working on the Steyning line in Sussex was abandoned in March 1961. For some time afterwards the service continued to be worked with the same Push-Pull sets but with non-motor fitted locomotives. Later, 3 car sets were rostered for these workings. Motor trains continued to be employed in some other locations on the Central Section for a few more years. Could anyone throw some light as to why the operation of the Brighton - Horsham (incidentally, a double track line) service was altered in this respect. I'm thinking that perhaps the onward stock workings from Horsham to Guildford may have a bearing on this. Thanks for any answers.

My own position regarding the understandable furore over the current pricing of the Bachmann R and R crane is to some extent tempered by an experience some years ago when modelling a German DB locomotive depot in 2mm scale. The Fleischmann breakdown crane looked superb for "N" scale and was a must have; it too was costly. However great it looked, and it did look quite splendid on the breakdown road, it spent a great deal of its time motionless (as would the prototypes). Staged engineering work brought it out occasionally but it generally became the most expensive piece of scenery I had ever purchased! It is with this former experience that I am personally unable to justify buying the new Bachmann crane. I do appreciate the extensive assembly time for models with this degree of fine detail and the associated costs that this incurs. I would not at all wish to dampen the expectations of those who await release; it's their business and their finance affairs - each to his/her own. I don't think in this instance Bachmann are being over-greedy and the cost of the model, although high, will be met by those who desire what will undoubtedly be an icon of RTR production. However, one does wonder if our insatiable appetite for detail might to some degree be detrimental to the hobby in the long term.

I have a question regarding the marshalling of the Maunsell Restaurant Firsts (as modelled by Hornby) ie as restaurants, running in both pre and post Nationalisation eras. Quite simply, would any member be aware that in order to cater for Third/Second class passengers wishing to dine, would they have been generally coupled to an Open Third/Second?

Agreed, the 2 cylinder Moguls had a neater looking appearance. However, I would risk suggesting the blunt front end and inclined cylinders (necessities brought about in order to house the inside engine of the U1/N1 classes) would make a very interesting distinction in model form.