Chuffer Davies

Hi Tony, I can't disagree with anything you have said but as someone who universally uses plastic centred wheels I feel I can hopefully provide a balance to your statements. I agree with Mr Gee that Ultrascale wheels are built to a very high standard and are not subject to many of the issues that you have mentioned. Gibson wheels by comparison have improved significantly since the new owner took over the business but they are still not perfect. Eccentricity remains a problem with Gibson wheels albeit minor by compartison to before. I would definitely steer away from using them in combination with a rigid chassis because the inevitable outcome of combining the two will be problems with maintaining electrical continuity between wheels and track. If you build a compensated or sprung chassis then the eccentricity in Gibson wheels is imperceptible under normal running conditions. and wont impact electrical continuity. Whilst I could be frustrated by the problem with the tyres coming loose on Gibson wheels, and whilst I wish the new owner had modified the design to avoid it happening, in reality I have never had this happen on a finished model only whilst I've been building them. Typically it happens to me when I am soldering electrical shorting wires to the tyres which causes them to expand and separate from the plastic centres if I'm not fast enough with the iron. If they do come loose it is any easy repair with some epoxy resin so its not the end of the world when it happens. Like Tony I fit and refit wheels during the build process but I haven't had the same issue with wheels becoming increasingly loose on their axles. I think there are two things to understand here. Firstly it is critical you remove the sharp machined edge to the axle by taking the corner off with fine wet and dry. It doesn't need much, certainly if you can see the difference you've gone too far, so just enough to be able to feel the difference is sufficient. If you leave the sharp edge this can then cut into the plastic when you fit the wheel on the axle. IF this happens then you will have problems! Secondly the plastic has a memory. If you remove the wheel and then quickly refit it to the axle it will feel looser, but after a few minutes the plastic will return to its original size and will once more grip the axle more firmly. As a rule I always fit the shorted wheel permanently to the axle with Locktite to avoid disturbing the shorting wire. It is the wheel at the other side that gets fitted and refitted during the build process. This wheel is only finally fitted with Locktite during the final assembly. I have only once had a wheel which has been fitted with Locktite slip on its axle and only because the wheel hub itself had cracked/split. There are at least two significant plus points for using plastic centred wheels in my opinion. Firstly the wheels are narrower than an equivalent Markits's wheel. In EM and P4 this can be the difference between fitting the wheels inside unmodified splashers and also avoiding the front crankpin from hitting the back of the crosshead in an outside cylinder locomotive. Mr Wright's solution to the crosshead problem is to change the position of the slidebars in their cylinders to gain more room. The second is a visual benefit. The flat centre drilled axle of a plastic wheel looks far nicer than those horrible nuts used on Markit wheels. Markit wheel nuts are one of my personal pet hates but I know that many are not at all bothered by them. As to Tony's comment about rust, I'm not sure how to respond... Ultrascale wheels have n/silver tyres so this will not be a problem. Tyres are not the only steel parts of a typical model. As well as the axles there are also buffer heads and I use steel handrail wire. These steel parts are not unique to locomotives and other roilling stock can be equally effected. Damp is definitely the enemy of model railways particularly of wooden base boards which swell in damp conditions. This can in turn lead to track misalignment at the board joints and uneven track if the track bed starts to swell. My advice is to avoid damp locations for your model railway altogether. So in summary, the use of plastic wheels whilst not quite as simple as using Markit wheels, is still a practical way forward with a bit of care and forethought. If you want to keep things simple and you model in OO then Markits is the way to go, but if you want to model in EM or P4, or you dislike Markit wheel nuts then plastic ccentred wheels may be the way to go. Regards, Frank

How about a 2 car (both 12 wheelers) Pullman? Two of the Yorkshire Pullman cars originated and terminated at Halifax and traversed the Queensbury lines through Clayton hauled by an N1 or N2 locomotive carrying the express head code. I hope Headstock wont mind if I report that he is currently assisting the Clayton team in bashing a couple of Hornby Pullman cars into shape for our Clayton layout. A loco plus two on a 30 foot layout should well and truely look lost in the scenery. Frank

I can confirm that you are correct. Frank

Have you checked the file sizes of the images you are trying to load? Frank

Yep they work fine... Frank

(Photo courtesy of John Chivers). Is this any good? Cheers, Frank

I had the exact same thought.. :-)

Hi Clem, many thanks for your kind comments. The UJ attached to the gear box in the loco is a superb Markits product. Exactoscale did make a unit (see picture below) but I found it to be quite rigid (because of the plastic sleeve that surrounds it) and only suitable for the flexible joint in the tender. The Markit's UJ is full length in the Q2 but I have shortened them slightly in my J7 and J1 models to fit the available space. Knowing that I will have to build a number of models this way I have made it easier to do as follows: - I've designed replacement tender frames (EM or S4) for LRM tenders. These have a built in gearbox to take the drive from the motor to the drive shaft. The frames have been designed to be built either rigid or sprung using CSBs. - For any non standard tenders I have also designed a gear frame only solution that allows any set of tender frames (EM or S4) to be converted to accept the motor and drive shaft. - I now have a couple of alternate High Level RRC+ gear frames that I can install in my loco's. As I build new prototypes I will add further gearbox frames to my collection to suit as necessary. In this way I have eliminated most of the problems with installing this type of drive system, the only problem being that each installation needs some sleeves to enable gears with 2mm centres to be attached to 1.5mm drive/motor shafts, this also being the inside diameter of the small ball races used in my solution. I turn these sleeves up in a lathe as I haven't found an alternate source as yet. I'm sure we can sort something out if you want to have a go..... Regards, Frank

I have at last had a successful test run of a model I have been developing over an extended period for Shipley MRS's Clayton project. The Q2 was my first attempt at designing my own kit of etches and was initially all but completed about 3 years ago. At the time of completion I was unable to test its haulage abilities on Clayton although it did have a test run on Retford where it proved capable of hauling Roy's longest goods train. It was fitted with a Portescap 1219 unit but the motor was upgraded to a 1230 unit because of the anticipated demands that would be placed on it. 18 months ago we were at last able to run trains around Clayton and I was then able to give the loco a proper haulage test on the 1:50 gradient. The test was disappointing to say the least with the model slipping to a halt with 18 wagons where as the target was a minimum of 30 wagons. Followers of WW will know that I have been experimenting with locating motors in the tender of my models and it was apparent from the failed test run that the Q2 was a candidate for conversion. Having put this off for several months I have finally bitten the bullet and performed the conversion. The LRM frames in the tender were replaced with some etched frames of my own design that include a vertical gearbox to transfer the drive from the motor to a shaft running down the centre of the tender's frames beneath the footplate. The Portescap unit was removed and the back of the loco's frames were modified to receive a gearbox I've designed based upon the High Level Road Runner Compact+ unit, the difference being that my unit has been designed to accept small ball races to support the worm's shaft. Having dealt with the mechanical changes the next job was to exploit the space now available in the boiler and firebox by packing it with lead. This necessitated an amount of disassembly in order to gain full access to the back of the boiler. Having inserted as much lead as I could the model was reassembled. The loco is now 5½oz heavier than before coming in at a total weight of 14½oz, hopefully it will now be capable of hauling the load for which it has been built up the 1:50 gradient. Regrettably we currently have no access to the layout and so I am only able to test the loco on a yard of track on my work bench, but at least I can finish it off and get on with something else.

Hi Andrew, I've got a coil of 145 deg solder you can have to keep you going if you want to call over and get it? Frank

Little did I realise when I posted my original question with regards the Chiver's Pigeon Van kit that I would stir up so much debate. Long story short appears to be that I have in my possession an inaccurate kit of a prototype which probably never ran on the Queensbury Line despite one of the most popular recreational activities of the population living next to the line was Pigeon racing. I will contact Andrew (Headstock) for advice on how Pigeons would have been transported on the line circa 1930 and then I will decide how to proceed. I may have a Chiver's kit for sale shortly! And I thought building accurate models of locomotives was complicated. Who would have thought? Chuffer Hell! Frank

Hi Gordon, Can I ask please; do these wheels run true? Did you machine the edge of the printed wheels before fitting the steel rims? They are really impressive and I'm hoping at some point that you will allow me to exploit all your hard work so that I can fit the correct profile wheels to the LNER loco's that I am scratch building (sort of) for Clayton. Regards, Frank

Thanks Andrew, I'll email you to discuss the inaccuracies of the kit in the hope that they can be corrected. Whether or not we can then justify running it on Clayton is a different debate. Frank

Hi Tony, We had the identical situation when we first exhibited Hungerford at the host club's exhibition - Wakefield. At the time all the large locomotives on the layout (King, Castles, 28xx, etc.) had been built by the then late Mike Bradley and were fitted with X05 style motors and Romford(?) gears (steel worm and brass pinion). The trains on Hungerford comprise heavy kit built vehicles and are of prototype length. The layout performed well on the Friday night but part way through Saturday morning Mike's locomotives started failing with stripped gears and by the afternoon we had run out of spares. In sheer desperation I purchased half a dozen Portescap units (Ouch!) and through most of Saturday night I replaced the gears in the failed locomotives. This included having to file out any milled brass frames to create a large enough opening to accept the gear boxes. We got through Sunday without further incident but after the show I commenced on a programme of work to replace the Romford gears from the remainder of Mike's locomotives. In several cases I completely replaced the chassis with Perseverance kits. These locomotives have given great service year on year ever since without further incident. A testament to the quality of the Portescap units. Its such a shame that the later units make such a dreadful noise. I'm sure the original gears would have given excellent service on the average home layout but under exhibition conditions they couldn't cope. Not an experience I would ever want to repeat. Frank

Sorry my mistake the kit if from Chivers not Parkside. This is a restored example of the prototype: https://www.nnrailway.co.uk/portfolio-items/lner-4-wheel-pigeon-van-byp6843/ Any advice on how to improve on the basic kit would be appreciated. Frank

Whilst our club rooms are out of commission due the the Corona virus restrictions currently in force in Bradford, several of our members, including myself, have taken on the challenge of building a Parkside GN Pigeon Van. As I have never built any rolling stock other than locomotives up until now I am effectively a complete novice. Looking at the kit I’m guessing there must be options for super detailing the under frame. Can anyone suggest either a complete brass replacement for the under frame or at least any source of brass super detailing components? I initially looked at using Bill Bedford sprung W irons but on further examination I noted that the leaf springs are inboard of the W irons so is there another of springing the underframe anyone could suggest? Thanks, Frank

Hi Tony, the prices I gave related to units with Chris’s super quality coreless motors from High Level. If you are happy to go with Chris’s iron core motors, which look to be from the same source as those used on the DJH units, then you can save a further £12 - £15 on the cost. Please note that I have not at any point suggested that I would not use the DJH units if they were suitable for the loco I was building at the time, but for the models I need to make for Clayton, being smaller locomotives, the HL solutions are more suited to my own needs and of a quality I feel personally able to recommend to others who have not tried them. As you have said, this blog is all about sharing ideas and encouraging less experienced modellers to have a go with the best possible chance of a successful outcome. But as always I believe it is important that people are given balanced arguments on which to arrive at their decisions. Frank

Hi Tony, Gear boxes are in the £14 to £18 range. If you need an additional extender then that's a further £5 - £6. So for a motor/gearbox assembly the cost ranges from £45 - £53.50 . I would potentially use a DJH solution if I was building large locomotives, for the reasons you have previously suggested, but the locomotives that ran on Clayton were much more modest. I would rather use a High Level solution to fully hide the drive system rather than use a DJH pre-assembled unit which protrudes into the cab or can be seen under the boiler, and save some myself £25 in doing so. My Yorkshire surroundings must be rubbing off on me at last..... Regards, Frank

Hi, Further to Mick's post I thought it worth mentioning that Chris Gibbon of High Level has sourced two new coreless motors for use with his gear boxes. They are a 12/19 (£27) and a 13/20 (£29.50) , these have 8.5mm mounting centres and a 1.5mm drive shaft. The 13/20 has enough power for the largest of 4mm locomotive, and the 12/19 is also a very powerful unit. Coupled with Chris's gear boxes these are now my first choice drive units for the loco's I'm building for Clayton, unless I have a suitable 2nd hand (quiet) Portescap unit available. I've been on to the High Level site this morning and according to the information some of Chris's gear boxes still utilise final drive gears without grub screws. Like Tony, unless you are an experienced modeller, I would avoid using these, but there are plenty of alternate configurations available where the final drive gear has a screw to hold it on the axle. I can't imagine a scenario where one of these motor/gearbox combinations can't be completely hidden within the boiler and firebox of a model without protruding into the cab or being visible under the boiler. Frank

I think we might be starting to go off topic with all these discussions about sound effects. Sound chips add significant cost and the original premise was that Signalnorth didn't want to have to rob a bank to implement DCC. Have we managed to provide the advice originally requested or have we put Signalnorth off DCC altogether? Frank

In which case you have my sympathies. If I've made a similar mistake its usually because I haven't read the instructions. Even worse it is when I've written the instructions in the first place. Cheers, Frank

Did you read the instructions?

HI, You will have gathered by now that there are lots of possibilities and as many options as there are contributors to this thread. Before you make a final decision can I encourage you to look at the the Digikeijs DR5000 command station which you can buy for around £150. This comes with a 5 amp power supply as standard and is about as flexible a system as you could possibly want. We (Shipley MRS) spent a long time investigating alternative systems for use across the club's various layouts and this system not inly ticked all the boxes we felt it was also incredible value for money. It is easy to set up so is good as a starter system, but it can also be used as a full function heavy duty solution so as you become more knowledgeable it will still meet your needs. Whilst this does not come with a controller/handset as standard it does include its own wireless interface that can be connected to a tablet or a mobile phone which, as long as you have one of these devices, will give you a free handset to get you started. I would recommend down-loading the free Roco Z21 mobile software. If you are into computers this system also comes with a USB interface for both Wndows and Apple devices. The computer then gives you a whole new set of options to look into as well as allowing you to use the computer as another handset. Later on if you so wish you can buy a proper full function handset such as the Roco Maltimaus. This plugs directly into the command station, or you can opt for the wireless version if you prefer. Regards, Frank

Did all the wheels turn freely before the coupling rods were added? If the wheels turn freely without the coupling rods and there are no specific tight spots then you might open out all the coupling rod holes by a very small and equal amount using a broach (ideally) to see if this cures the problem. Good luck, Frank

It does isolate the controller by disconnecting the feed into the switch from the output., unless of course the switch is faulty. Frank