MikeCW

Well spotted Garry. The wiper plastic plate for insulation isn't needed if a Dublo 3-rail collector shoe is used - so I discovered when, prompted by your question and comment in your previous post, I went out to the shed this morning and had a closer look at my lash-up in daylight. I was initially going to fit a Marklin skate so needed an insulating plate to keep the phosphor bronze "turn ups" on the underside of the skate clear of the locomotive chassis. I abandoned the Marklin skate option as the installation was getting unnecessarily complicated, and decided instead to use a precious Dublo collector which I had put aside for my next "City of London" conversion. (The best part of 20 pounds asked for a second-hand Dublo collector!?) I'd already installed the insulating plate when I made this change. When I looked at the Dublo collector and the pattern of ridges and channels on the bottom of the "Barnstaple" chassis, I couldn't see any correlation between the two, hence the installation described above, with the plastic plate still in place. I should have had more faith in the Dublo designers and pattern makers. I discovered this morning (as you and David obviously know) that the ridges each side of the plastic plate, (20738) in the second photo in Post #646, are of two different heights. The standard Dublo 3-rail collector sits on the edges of these ridges and is held in alignment by a higher ridge hidden in the shadow of the top left driving wheel in the same photo. And in that set up, the paxolin plate on the bottom of the collector holds the metal parts clear of the chassis as you noted. So the plastic plate is now gone, as is the plastic tube, and all is held in place in workmanlike fashion as the people at Binns Road intended. And I flagged this in my Post #646 in case I lead some poor soul to unnecessary complication and effort. Mike

Thank you Ray I have a personal preference for binning the wipers. As with the Bo-Bo in the previous posts I prefer a "genuine" 3 rail locomotive i.e. without wipers. My preference would be to replace the insulated driving wheels with uninsulated ones but, rather than going to that expense, as well as the faff of re-quartering a sweet-running chassis, breaking the insulated bush in situ seems an easier option. Doing away with the wipers also made what felt to me to be a tidier job overalI. I thought too that leaving both plastic plates, which comprise the "sandwich" which holds the wire wipers, in place on the bottom of the chassis, and mounting the 3-rail collector onto this sandwich, could result in the body of the 3-rail collector being very close to the top of the third rail. This clearance was made even tighter as I had to replace the central fixing bolt of the 3-rail collector with a longer bolt which could go up to the top of the West Country chassis block. This replacement bolt had a dome head, which I ground down but is still not flush with the collector housing like the original. I held the new bolt to the collector with a nut on the insulated face. Because the nut was large and might have shorted out on the chassis, I turned it down to a circular rather than hexagonal shape. Edit: It has been pointed out in subsequent posts that, if a standard Hornby Dublo collector is being used in place of the wiper pick-ups, the whole wiper installation can be discarded. There is no need to fit any insulating material between the collector and chassis as the chassis is cleverly designed for either 2 or 3 rail operation, and can accept Dublo wiper pick ups for two rail, or the collector assembly for 3 rail, with no other modification. All is held in alignment by cast-in lugs on the chassis bottom so there is no need for the plastic tube either. What is needed is the extra-long bolt to hold the 3-rail collector in place, and the fittings for the top of the bolt as shown in the second-to-last photo. As described below, it all works just fine, but involves unnecessary work. I kept one of the two wiper "sandwich" plates to provide an insulated mounting face for the 3-rail collector, and opened up the central hole to allow the collector bolt and circular nut to pass through and into the hole in the chassis (which I assume is there for the 3 rail collector on "Dorchester" chassis). You can see that the hole in the plastic plate doesn't precisely align with the hole in the chassis, requiring some inelegant bodgery. I further insulated the shaft of the new bolt with shrink wrap and plastic tube as below. When fitted to the "Barnstaple" chassis, I used both the "L" shaped tag and "H" shaped insulated plate which came with the collector off the "Montrose" donor. I have yet to shorten the red wire which was originally attached to the wiper pick-ups on the bottom of the chassis. One other small addition I may make is to put a notch and pin where the collector plate sits on the bottom of the chassis. At the moment it's held in fore and aft alignment only by the tension of the nut on the top of the chassis. That will probably be enough but I'd be happier with a more secure arrangement. So, that's the way I approached the job, certainly not a ten minute exercise, but a reasonably straightforward one. Mike

On a different note I'm converting a West Country "Barnstaple" to 3 rail . So far this has been a straightforward job using an ex-Montrose 3-rail collector. A couple of challenges lie ahead. I'll bridge the axle bushes on the insulated driving wheels by the "brass pin" method described above. I'll also look to find an uninsulated wheelset of the right size for the trailing truck as another path for power from the outside rails. (Without turning this into a major project I'm stuck with the plastic bogie wheels as they are a representation of the BFB rather than spoked style.) As with such conversions, simply diverting the power feed to the insulated motor brush, from the discarded two rail wiper pick-ups to the newly-installed third rail collector, results in the engine running in the "wrong" direction. The simplest way to remedy this seems to be to turn the motor magnet. I've done this with open frame motors in the past, but I have no experience of Dublo ringfield motors and need some help. The magnet has a red mark on the bottom. Do I simply rotate the magnet so this mark is on the top? Or do I need to extract the magnet and turn it "back to front" so that what was the rear face of the magnet is now at the front? Or both? I could work it out by trial and error but want to minimise the time the magnet is out of the motor - though I have read conflicting opinions on how susceptible ringfield magnets are to loss of magnetism, compared to the conventional cube type. Any advice gratefully received. Mike

Garry I've never owned a Co-Co. As a teenager, I was in the process of discovering interests other than model railways by the time it made the retailers' shelves. My interpretation of the previous discussion and the catalogue pages is that the only difference between Catalogue Numbers 2334 (Deltic Co-Co) and 2232 (Co-Co) was the paint schemes. Is that right? Mike

David, I happened to have the Foster book handy. The reproduced Meccano factory drawings are headed "Deltic Diesel Electric Loco" or "Deltic Loco". The servicing leaflet reproduced in the Appendices is titled "Co-Co Diesel Locomotive". Foster refers to the model variously as "Co-Co" or "Co-Co Deltic" or "Deltic". But, and here's your confirmation, on page 158 Foster writes: "The original all-green body of the 'Co-Co' diesel electric locomotive continued right to the end of the Hornby Dublo production No 2232 and 3232 and while the 3 rail sold 300 in 1964, 550 remained in stock at the end of the year. These locomotives were always referred to as Class 3 in the Meccano Magazine whereas the 'Deltic Co-Co' was always called Class 5." The first sentence is a convoluted one which I don't find that easy to follow, but the implication of the quote seems to be that the Meccano magazine referred to the two paint schemes of the Co-Co as Class 3 and Class 5 respectively. So maybe the Class 5 designation was a Meccano rather than a British Railways term? Mike

Thank you David. Another small brick in the wall of knowledge! I was aware of the power-based "Type" classifications in the pilot diesel programme but didn't know precisely the timing, or the reason, for the change from "Type" to "Class" numbering in later years. Mike

David, was it Class 5 or Class 55? I know little about British diesels but the occasional model I've noticed seem to be referred to in "double figures"; Class 20; Class 40; Class 58 etc. Mike

Aah Brian, that smell of rubber! For three years in a row, I think 1961-63 when I was 13-15, I worked for the two weeks before Christmas in a local bicycle, pram and toy shop. First job in the morning was to sweep the footpath outside the shop. Does anyone still do that? The owner of the antique shop next door complained that I raised too much dust! Norm, the bike shop owner, worked in a small workshop/storeroom out the back, repairing bikes and doing repaints, all by brush applied enamels. For an extra 5 bob he'd hand apply pin-striping. His wife and adult son ran the shop, though Norm would come out for specialised discussions with customers about bike options, My job was to restock the shelves, run errands, wrap parcels and do the twice-daily postage run. I would help out on the counter at times, usually on late-opening nights on Fridays and Christmas Eve. They had a primitive adding machine at the counter which, for some strange reason, they didn't like used; so when a parent brought their child in to choose a dozen farmyard animals by Britains or similar, I had to add up by pencil and paper all those 1/2d, 1/7d, 11d, 2/3d, 9d etc etc, with a hawk-eyed matron standing over me. In the store room were Scalextric sets, the first generation of battery powered Japanese-made trucks and machinery, red and yellow Triang boxes, a small number of blue and white and red and white Dublo boxes, dolls and doll prams and cots, bicycle parts ( brakes, dynamos, dynamo hubs, bells, handlebars, handle grips etc - all British made), tyres hanging from the rafters and, throughout everything, that smell of brand new rubber. For years that smell could take me back in a flash. I'd like to be taken back for a day and spend it going through those boxes! I just hope that children today can still enjoy the excitement we felt on visits to such places as these, and those so well described by Garry in his post #613. Mike PS Dinky Toys were also common on newsagents' shelves as I understand it. Indeed, I read about a Dinky Toy collector (or did I see him on Antiques Roadshow?) who was on holiday in Wales(?) and, in a small town, discovered a newsagents with a large stock of unsold Dinky Toys, which had been in the shop for years, and all for sale at their original prices. I believe that he bought the lot!

Wow! Perhaps it was a Liverpudlian chancer who pinched my 2-8-0, and not a Kiwi wharfie! Made in Liverpool and stayed in Liverpool! Mike

Hello Garry I think I got my first Dublo (Duchess of Montrose, 2 suburban coaches, a circle of track and an A3 controller) in 1954/55, when I was 7 or 8 - I'm a post-war baby boomer. They were new and Mum and Dad must have faced some significant financial choices to buy them for me. I suspect now that they ordered the items during the year, and paid a deposit and maybe made a couple of instalment payments. Not only was Dublo expensive out here in NZ in the 1950s (though not as pricey as Marklin), but strict foreign exchange controls, and a system of licensing of imports, heavily restricted supply. (It meant of course that a retailer with an import licence could act like a mediaeval monarch and bestow his favours - ie selling an imported item - to those he liked and knew rather than anyone who fronted up with a couple of pound notes.) The local retailer was a bicycle, pram and toyshop in a neighbouring provincial town, a 25 minute bus ride away. He also had a wide range of second-hand items on which I would spend my birthday and Christmas postal orders to increase trackage and rolling stock. A by-product of this scarcity, as well as the pre-container international freight system, was "in-transit risk" - we would call it local theft. In the later 50s my parents ordered an 8F 2-8-0 for my major Christmas present. Months later the shipment arrived from the UK, was broken down and distributed to retailers including the local one mentioned above. When his allocation arrived and the shop owner was sorting out the pre-ordered items from those which would go on the shelves, he found the shiny, blue-striped box for the 8F filled with stones, the locomotive almost certainly pilfered at the waterfront. So I had to make do with the 0-6-2T. I wonder if that watersider's son ever found out where his new locomotive had come from. I was chatting to a slightly known acquaintance at a local model railway exhibition recently and, when he asked how my "scale" layout was coming along, I told him that I had been recently preoccupied with Dublo restoration and modification. He got quite peculiar about this, as though I had declared membership of an outlawed political party or sinister religious cult. "That's just nostalgia!" he said dismissively, and even with a touch of anger. I agreed it was indeed about nostalgia, but also about craftmanship, and the satisfaction of repairing older mechanical items (just like clocks, toys, scientific instruments, or even vintage motor vehicles). I still don't think he got it. "A case of "Nowt so queer as folks"? Mike

You're right about the transfers David. I've seen a couple of HD locomotives in BR mixed traffic black with the red boiler band transfers so askew I wondered how they passed quality control. Perhaps they were applied on a Friday afternoon or Saturday morning, and Theresa Mullane and Morag Galloway were so engrossed in a discussion about the new nightspot called The Cavern, that insufficient attention was being paid to varnish transfer application. Thanks for the information on the green-painted wheels. I've not examined an original closely, and the photos in the Foster book seem to show (IIRC) both green and black wheel centres - or at least indistinct colours. I understand too that factory repairs can result in later chassis being put under original bodies (like a replacement black-wheeled "Silver King" chassis going under a blue "Nigel Gresley" body)? Mike

I didn't try for a precise prototype match, but used what I had on hand to give what to me looked a reasonable match to the original Hornby Dublo colour on the top of the hood. On this well used example the grey varied in shade depending on how worn it was and therefore how much of the green plastic of the body moulding was showing through. Depending on how long the spray gun was wielded in the Binns Road factory, and therefore how thickly the grey colour was laid on, perhaps the models varied in shade, very slightly, between batches? I rootled around in my boxes of model paints, a few of which are obsolete colours now out of production (I find the occasional ancient tin whose contents are well past use) and found Humbrol HB 6 Sea Grey Medium which looked close to the colour on the model. After spraying the first coat it looked a bit light in shade so I added a few drops of black for the second (final) coat, The last step in the painting process was a coat of household polyurethane satin to seal the transfers. Though modern varnishes are much clearer or "whiter" than the old ones, which had a distinct yellow/brown tint, the varnish coat still subtly deepens and softens light colours such as greys. Hope this helps Mike

And in addition to the Class 20, in the last month I've done a straightforward repaint of an 0-6-2T, using Dennis Williams (Dublo Surgeon) transfers to replicate a post-war Dublo issue in Southern malachite green. I've yet to fit the replacement stainless steel handrails The photo cruelly shows that the "Southern" on the tank side is very slightly out of level, not obvious on the model. The shade of green too isn't quite right. A Southern modeller I know gave me a couple of samples of model paint which claim to be malachite, one Humbrol acrylic and one Railmatch IIRC. They were very different(!) so I mixed up a brew which looked close to the Humbrol version but is, probably, a bit too close to an olive shade rather than the "hard" blueish shade of malachite. But in real life the shades of paint varied, even when supplied by outside paint companies rather than mixed in the paint shop, so I'm happy with 2594 as she is. Mike

I haven't given a progress report on the Class 20 Bo Bo since post 533. Christmas in the Southern Hemisphere corresponds with spring growth, and work outside on our property and preparing for a family Christmas has taken up a fair bit of time. But the Class 20 is now done! The body of this old 2 rail item was in poor shape - heavily rusted handrails, grey painted roof and running plate heavily worn, and decals just starting to come off. But there was no structural damage apart from a missing section of one of the cab window surrounds. As this is painted grey (on the model), it needed repair. So I cleaned up the break and welded in a section of plastic rod which, when thoroughly dry, was sanded to square it off and blend in with the window frame. The result, when painted, is quite acceptable. One of the couplers had been ripped away. This 2 rail engine had the metal couplers insulated from the bogies on which they were mounted, achieved by "sandwiching" the coupler between two plastic plates. The top one of these had a round projected which went down through the coupler mounting hole to provide a plastic lined, insulated tunnel through which the fixing rivet was driven. This top plate was lost. Only the bottom plate remained. The replacement coupling (from The Dublo Surgeon) therefore had an over-large central fixing hole for this plastic top plate - too large for secure fixing using the rivet. As no insulation was required on this conversion to three rail, I soldered a washer on the top to provide a suitable fit for the fixing rivet. The illustration shows the untidy soldering job and the bottom plate. I retained this as, on the face away from the camera, are two lugs which act as stops for the ears on the coupler. Incidentally, the coupler rivet was still in situ and I didn't want to start hammering it out from the powered bogie, so used the wheel puller which featured in previous posts to push it out. Painting was principally by Badger Patriot airbrush - my fast-diminishing stock of Humbrol BR Green enamel for the body work, and medium sea grey, a tinlet of model aircraft paint I had around, for the roof and running plate. The first coat of grey looked a bit light so I added a touch of black for the final coat. I brush painted the running plate as masking it off looked like a lot of work with those projecting panels and doors on the side of the hood. The buffer beams are Humbrol Red. They really should have another coat. Tansfers were PC/HMRS Pressfix. These were about 25 years old, and just starting to lose their adhesive "bite" so I treated them like 'methfix" transfers and they stuck really well. A coat of satin polyurethane varnish and she was ready for handrails. I took a leaf out of Garry's book and used stainless steel wire, 0.8mm diameter, bought from the local hardware/home improvement chain store. It came in a 3 metre coil and I had to straighten it by putting one end of a length in my 6 inch bench vise, gripping the other end in a pair of hefty pliers, and pulling it really hard - all the time praying that the wire wouldn't break and cause me to rocket across the workshop into various bits of very solid machinery. I re-used the original split pins. Being nickel plated (?) they were rust free. Bending the split pins flush with the inside of the body was the usual struggle. In fact. I had several attempts to get the body back on as the spine of the chassis kept fouling split pins which weren't properly flattened. I think that the tails of the cab handrails are still preventing the motor bogie from swinging to its full extent. I may have to do some further trimming of their ends. The locomotive is still on its original traction tyres. They are no longer concentric - like the tyres on a car which has been sat in a shed for 40 years. I have a new set which I will fit when I have a decent sized track to run it on. Like Garry, I don't like traction tyres at all, but wasn't going to go to the trouble of obtaining (or fabricating) replacement wheels for such a common-or-garden locomotive, So there it is. I can't say that I'm an enthusiast for the Class 20. I know that they have a following and, indeed were one of the most successful of British Rail's pilot diesels. But they simply don't appeal to me in the same way that a steam locomotive (or even a Woodhead electric) does. But, another Dublo item saved from the scrap line, and that's got to be a good thing! Mike

What a great record you have in those photographs Garry. Like David I don't have photos of my earlier, much more modest, efforts at creating a model railway, which I now regret. I was given my first 35mm camera (an inexpensive Hong Kong Made job) in about 1960/61, but Kodachrome was expensive for a lad just starting high school. I didn't do much modification of locomotives. Even second-hand Dublo was pricey so I think my parents would have been dismayed if I'd taken a saw to a locomotive to turn it into something else. Although the Dublo A4 body shape doesn't have that distinctive "hump" on the top of the boiler casing, my recollection of contemporary reviews in the model press is that, on the first Triang version, the shape of the front, when viewed head-on, was all wrong. But I'm no A4 expert. ( I can see the beginning of your collection of a model of every A4 in BR service in the third photograph!) When you reverted to three rail for the layout I've enjoyed seeing on YouTube and this forum, did you undertake a massive three-railing exercise, or was there a sell and re-stock policy for the motive power? I well remember those first articles on weathering which appeared in the model press around that time. It was pre-airbrush days of course, as well as a time when the last few steam engines worked out their last years of life in filthy condition in the North West. So neither the painting technology of the time, nor peoples' immediate memories, didn't encourage moderation and subtlety in this early weathering era! Though Silver Fox (?) coming out of the tunnel in the last photo looks just right. On that score, I admire the superb work of many those who model 0n30, 1/48 scale on 16.5mm track, typically US logging and industrial narrow gauge set in the 1920s or 30s. Some of the results are breathtaking. But the weathering of locomotives often goes well beyond what would be expected of hard-working, shoe-string budget operations. Though done with great skill, the result is something which looks as if it's been on the scrap line for years, and dangerously unsafe to steam up. Mike

And by some strange distortion of perspective, the 0-6-2T he's holding looks to be an "0" rather than "00" model. Mike

Very nice Ray. I am now inspired to find some Dublo or Wrenn Pullmans to be hauled by my recently acquired "Barnstaple", which has taken its place in the "to be three-railed" queue. For me there is also something fascinating about working overhead wiring on a layout, and steam locomotives running under the catenary, You have probably provided the information before, but what brand is your overhead (that is if it's not scratch-built of course). Mike

A few years ago I dumped/recycled several hundred railway magazines, most of which hadn't been opened for years. But before doing so I laboriously went through them and put aside, to keep, those with articles by Peter Denny, Frank Dyer, David Jenkinson or with some item or content of particular appeal. By chance, two of the kept magazines feature descriptions of Gavin Wilson's Highland Railway; the Railway Modeller for August 1964 (written by Gavin Wilson) and, perhaps surprisingly for such a late date, the Model Railway Constructor for March 1975 (written and photographed by Brian Monaghan). There may be other articles of course, but those are the two I know of. Mike

Off Topic Warning. A boyhood friend of my late father's was a what was called a "Rehab Farmer", the name given to returning ex-servicemen who applied for farms, often in the remote "high country", which had been roughly cleared and broken in by the Government, and were then allocated by ballot to qualifying ex-servicemen applicants. Life was initially very tough for them, and their families, physically and financially, but the Korean War saw wool prices rise to "a pound for a pound of wool" and life became very much easier. With access to overseas funds, many bought new cars unavailable to most NZers under the then exchange control rules. Dad's friend bought a maroon Wolseley 6/90, a thing of beauty and luxury in the grey 50s. Truth to tell, it probably wasn't as well suited to the rough, water-scoured, gravel roads of the high country, as the pre-war American Ford V8s and Chev 6s that most farmers favoured. But as a status symbol ................! He must have bought it about the same time as I was given my first Hornby Dublo train. Mike

I see that you and Wolseley are supportive of this method Garry. It's not a technique I've heard about before but it looks to have the advantages of simplicity, permanence, and no risk to the quartering of a sweetly running chassis. When you refer to a "pin" I assume that you mean a short length of brass rod, about the same length as the thickness of the driving wheel boss, driven in to the insulating bush at right angles to the face of the driver? To save me some trial and error, can you give me an idea of the diameter of the rod. I assume it has to be thick enough to firmly bridge the space between axle and driving wheel, but I'm not sure how far, if at all, the pilot hole one drills for the rod cuts into the axle and driving wheel. The crude sketch should explain the question. In "B" the rod is simply a tight fit between the axle and wheel, (which is my interpretation of your post quoted above), but not so tight that it compresses the plastic insulating bush on the opposite side of the axle, and cause the wheel to lose concentricity.. In "A" the hole cuts into both axle and boss That might give a more positive electrical path but would be a challenge (for me anyway) to avoid breaking a drill between the hard steel of the axle and the mazak of the driver. Drilling pressure might generate heat and distort the rest of the plastic bush and also cause the wheel to lose concentricity. (A photo would be appreciated but I suspect that your locomotives so modified have had their wheel bosses painted to conceal the pin.) Any help or advice gratefully received. Mike

Hello Ray. I've sometimes wondered why stud contact never took on on the UK. The obvious reason I suppose is that it never had a commercial manufacturer/sponsor of the influence of Meccano, Trix, Rovex etc, but it has a lot of advantages for larger layouts (rather than finescale "shunting planks" which don't really appeal to me that much). For those of us who stick with pre-digital, traditional model railways, electrical reliability and simplicity (of both layout wiring and locomotive and stock construction) as well as nostalgia are pluses for three rail - and stud contact gives us these plus more prototypical appearance. I recall that Peco provided a stud contact strip to use with their fibre-based "individulay" track, a kind of zig-zag ladder of phosphor bronze strip. Back in about 1974 I decided, inspired by Gavin Wison's Highland Railway layout, to use stud contact, and built a Gem 4-4-0 with a Marklin (sorry, can't find an umlaut to stick on the 'a') skate. It ran well on plain Peco track with their stud strip, but we were left to our own devices to modify pointwork, and peer pressure and laziness persuaded me to go two-rail. I posted a pic of the late Gavin Wilson's Highland Railway in the TT3 thread during the ballast or no ballast discussion. I've posted a few more (from the August 64 "Modeller") below. (Edit: He used mainly small, dome headed wood screws as studs, each one wound several times with fuse wire which was then carried on to the next screw and the process repeated. Those post-war days of austerity when modellers made do.) Hornby Dublo stud contact. That would have been, and would still be, a great system! A final thought re the comments about Metric and BA threads, According to my source on thread specifications (for my vintage motorcycle restoration), BA is a metric thread - 0BA is 6mm diameter with a 1mm pitch, and as the BA numbers go up, the diameter and pitch reduce proportionately. Apparently somewhere along the line the neater metric scale was converted into thousandths of an inch, so we've ended up with something of a hybrid - a bit like 4mm to the foot?! Mike

The painted track looks really good Garry. ( David Jenkinson would have approved. ) Because of the consistency of the painted trackbed running through the scenery and infrastructure, the permanent way flows - seen to advantage in your first photo looking along the track from a high viewpoint. It's getting perilously close to so-called "finescale"! Fine, perfectly executed, ballasting might be marginally better, but IMHO, there is a risk, in such a small scale, of less than perfect execution pf ballasting spoiling that realistic impression of clean, well built, prototypical permanent way. Mike

Hornby Dublo Bo Bo. Thank you all for your supportive comments and questions. There is always something to learn and I would never have got this far in my recently rediscovered interest in Dublo 3 rail without both the spur and the info from the folks on this forum. A couple of comments before "Part 2". My preference was to do away with wiper pick-ups. They work I know, but in this instance a practical reason for dumping them was that the factory installed pick-up unit was in the place where I wanted to fit the skate, so I had to shift it anyway. And fitting new wipers seemed more of a faff, with more chance of unreliability, than de-insulating the insulated wheels with metal bushes. (Fitting wiper pick-ups is my least favourite job when building locomotive kits.) With the Bo Bo there are no quartering concerns so the bush replacement was straightforward. With my previous 2-rail "City" conversion to 3-rail I discarded the wiper pick-up unit and replaced it with a salvaged HD 3-rail pick-up. I left the insulated wheels in place to avoid quartering challenges, but replaced the bogie, pony truck and tender with uninsulated "Montrose" items, so there is plenty of electrical continuity from the outside rails. I'll come to tyres, couplings and screw threads in this saga, which is getting as long as a Peter Jackson movie. Having refitted the now non-insulated wheels, my next task was to fit the Marklin skate. (Note: the following photos were taken after the job was done, so the bogie sideframes are in place. They were, of course, not refitted until the skate was fitted.) Two points to note on the above photo. First, the 2 screw holes - one on the bogie centre line and one offset - are the fixing points of the two-rail wiper pick-up. They are tapped for 6BA machine screws. Second, the bogie floor isn't flat. There is a central, longitudinal ridge which stands a millimeter or so from each side. This is more noticeable as I have cleaned up some of the casting imperfections on each side with a burr in my Dremel. I thought that I could use the existing tapped holes, and the "ridge", both to fix the skate and to lock it in place on the bogie centre line. But first, what non-insulating material to use for the skate mounting? Remember those old modelling articles from the 50s and 60s when Guy Williams and others used blocks of "Tufnol", and later "Paxolin" as insulating material. Not having any "Tufnol" to hand (and as far as I recall never having seen this product in the flesh) I pondered an alternative. I had plenty of copper-clad material and thought that I could make a block by stripping off the copper and bonding several pieces together with Araldite. The copper peeled off satisfactorily using needle nosed pliers, and I scratched the pieces with cross hatching to give the epoxy a "key" and laminated four layers. After 24 hours I cut and filed it to shape as here. To make things a bit clearer, herewith a rough sketch (not to scale) with principal dimensions. You will see from the sketch that there is a channel filed top and bottom. This is not dimensioned on the drawing as it was a matter of trial and error. file and fit, file and fit again. The skate sits in the top channel; the bottom channel fits over the "ridge" in the bogie floor. The photo is of the top of the mounting block. (Hence the faint "T" marked on it.) The hole near the centre is tapped 6BA to fix the skate. (But see the "Edit" in the second paragraph below.) I had intended to fit a captive nut in the block but it took a thread sufficiently well that to date there has been no need. And if the bolt protrudes through the insulated mounting block, no problem with short circuits as it will simply go into the hollow bogie mounting column. The countersunk hole to the rear is clearance for a 6BA bolt to pass through and screw into the former fixing hole for the 2-rail wiper pick-up. The head of this bolt has been filed to reduce its height and it sits flush with the surface of the channel. During assembly I put a small square of plastic tape over it to ensure there is no contact with the copper of the skate. (Edit: on re-reading the comments on "Episode 1" I noted that Ray uses 8BA screws to hold the skate in place. That would be better than the 6BA bolt I used as I recall that I had to ream slightly the hole in the skate for 6BA clearance, and the "fatter" 6BA bolt head won't go through the hole in the skate shoe. And even with its head reduced in height, it can be a bit of a struggle to manoeuvre a 6BA bolt under the skate shoe and into the hole in the skate bottom plate. 8BA next time I think!) Here it is in place. What looks like poor filing in the top left is in fact deliberate, to relieve a point of pressure where the soldered connection to the skate was preventing it sitting nice and square. You will see that the shape of the block, with channels top and bottom, lock both it and the skate in place with the no need for more than one machine screw or bolt in each instance. The finished article, yet to be painted. The 6BA bolt which holds the skate in place has had its head filed down (and the slot deepened to compensate) so that it gives plenty of vertical movement of the skate, allowing it to compress well past the level of the wheel treads. In the top photo it looks as if the front (right hand end) of the skate, might compress or rock into the bogie frame and cause a short circuit. The clearance above the axles also looks tight. Both are an optical illusion. There is plenty of clearance at full compression of the skate, comfortably beyond what it would compress in "normal service". Finally, the wiring. The wiring from the two-rail pick-up was discarded. The grey wire - the existing wire from the "live" unpowered bogie - was moved and soldered directly to the motor brush spring, making the two bogies, both now with uninsulated wheels, electrically common to the outside rails. The brown wire, the new wire from the Marklin skate, was soldered to where the grey wire had been. With luck and some squinting, the photo should make it clear. And all now works satisfactorily. A three rail Hornby Dublo Bo Bo. In the final instalment, which might be a few days away as I'm yet to finish the new paint job on the body, I'll cover final fettling, couplings, traction tyres and body work. Thanks again for the comments (and apologies for the length of a story about a common and pretty inconsequential model). Mike

I've been off air for a week or so as our 8 year old lap top computer gave up working and it was cheaper to buy a new one and transfer the solid state hard drive from the old to the new machine, rather than repair it. That seemed symbolic of the comments passed on this thread about the mechanical fragility (or built-in obsolescence) of the current range of Chinese-built model locomotives versus the old-school engineering of 60 year old Hornby Dublo products. Anyway,I've caught up and read with interest the discussion on Spamcans, Wrenn chassis, de-insulating wheels etc. While this is old hat to the regulars on this thread, I thought some of the casual "browsers" might appreciate a report on my three-railing a two rail Bo Bo. As is well known, the 2 rail version of the Dublo Bo Bo was the failure of the Binns Road locomotive range. The combination of traction tyres and the fore and aft rocking motion of the motorised bogie under load resulted in unreliable electrical pick-up under "normal" operating conditions i.e. rarely cleaned track, minimal locomotive servicing, and carpet fluff and other contaminants on the layout. As a result, there are plenty of second-hand two rail Bo Bos around at reasonable prices. My starting point was a sad looking Bo Bo picked up on the local internet auction site. And yes, I get satisfaction out of using old, well cared for tools. The screwdriver with the darker handle was my late grandfather's, a Gallipoli veteran of the Great War. In brief the three-railing exercise involves three steps: removing the insulating bushes from the insulated wheels on one side of the locomotive and replacing with metal bushes (or otherwise bridging the electrical gap; removing the two-rail pick-up and fitting a three-rail alternative; and making the minimal, consequential wiring changes to the motor brushes. I was originally going to turn up some bushes to replace the insulated ones but decided that the precision required to get a press fit would mean several failures, and so, to save time and blood pressure, I opted for a set of four from the Dublo Surgeon (Dennis Williams). The three rail pick-up skate in the above photo is Marklin Part No. 7164. This is a short pick up which, end to end, is practically the same length as the rubbing points on the shoes on the standard Dublo pick-up. (Longer Marklin skates can cause shorts if you are using the standard Dublo turnouts.) I bought mine from Gaugemaster for 3-4 pounds. http://www.gaugemaster.com/item_details.asp?code=MN07164 After removing the body I unsoldered the wire that connects the two rail pick up to the motor brush. I then unscrewed the whole unpowered bogie from the plated steel spine. Note that this bogie is insulated from the spine, which itself is "live" to the powered bogie. Power from the uninsulated wheels on this unpowered bogie flows up the centre post to the tag, which is clamped to the top of the post, but insulated from the spine by the shouldered screw and fibre washer in the top right hand corner of the photo.This is an unusual electrical pick-up arrangement, where one bogie is live to one rail, the other bogie and spine is live to the other rail. (When we are done, everything will be live to the two outside rails except the centre-rail pick-up and the motor brush to which it connects.) Finally, not shown in this photo, I unscrewed the two rail pick-up itself - the black plastic block shown still in situ between the wheels of the bogie. Before removing the insulated wheels, I checked the gauge of each wheelset to ensure that, when I pressed them back on, they would be in the same position. Keeping the axle ends flush with the wheel boss should ensure this, but I wanted to check progress when I came to pressing them back on. Wow! the wheels were spot on to the NMRA standard which I use on my "scale" model railway, and which is pretty much the RP25 standard used by Bachmann et al today. Hornby Dublo standards were certainly "fine" for the 1940s and 50s. Next I pulled off the insulated wheels. Where possible I used a wheel puller - a gift from the family of an old chap, a former engineering officer in the merchant marine, whom I knew in his retirement until he died a few years ago. The family kindly gave me his taps, dies and a selection of small modelling tools, knowing I would both use and care for them. It's not possible to get the legs of the puller behind the wheels in all cases as the gap between bogie chassis and wheel back is too tight. So even leverage pressure using two small screw drivers will ease them out a millimeter or two. It doesn't really matter if you don't use a puller and just lever them off, trying to keep them as square and straight as you can. The bushes may distort but they will be binned anyway. The wheels came off with the plastic insulating bushes in place. To drive these out I found a 2.8mm diameter nail, cut and smoothed off, to make a punch of the right size. Resting the wheel on top of the slightly open jaws of the vise, I tapped them through and ensured that the wheel bores were clear for Dennis Williams' bushes. Pressing in the metal bushes was straightforward. Start them by thumb pressure, or a very light tap with a small hammer, then press them home in the vise. The next step, which I didn't photograph, was pressing them back on to the axles, I did this the same way, putting the bogie, with axle and undisturbed wheel in place, and the wheel with the new bush at the other end, all very carefully lined up in the vise to ensure all was square, and pressing them nearly home. A check with the standards gauge, and a final squeeze to seat them back in place. The one difference was that this time I remembered to put the soft jaws (aluminium angle) in the vise. The sharp eyed engineers among you will be about to tell me off for the small scars on the wheel bosses caused by the serrated jaws of the vise when I pressed in the bushes. Mercifully these are hidden by the bogie side frames. Next: Installing the three-rail pick-up. Mike

That could be the Ebay Global Shipping Programme, and not necessarily the trader him/herself. The GSP system, as I understand it, is that Ebay contract a shipping/freight forwarding company who take responsibility for customs duties, clearance fees and the like. An Ebay seller can decide whether to sign up for the Ebay GSP, which apparently makes life easier for them, or take responsibility themselves for the postage to overseas buyers. The problem with the GSP is that every country has a different customs regime and there is a degree of "averaging out" in the GSP charge, as well as a profit for the freight company, and no doubt for the auction site too. I don't know how much of the cake the seller gets. For shipping to a country like New Zealand, where there is currently no tax or duty on anything much under £200, it is grossly uneconomic to buy from sellers who are part of the GSP. When I'm browsing the offers on Ebay I simply won't bother to look at any item where "shipping and customs charges included" or a similar phrase indicates the seller is a GSP member. I know other potential buyers do as well. (Some sellers are apparently waking up to the lost sales opportunity this represents.) If you Google the Ebay Global Shipping Programme you'll find a few frank opinions of its merits!!! Another problem is that some traders, in or out of Ebay, will either insist on, or automatically use, the most expensive tracked/insured /signed for postage option. I collect childrens books of around the time of the First World War. From the UK they can be from around £10 up to £50 per copy. One bookseller will only send books overseas at the most expensive postage option. I asked for basic airmail postage on a £15 book, but he wouldn't budge. While this might make sense for a Shakespeare First Folio or a Gutenberg Bible, it's a dumb option for me to pay 150% of the cost of a low value book in postal charges. I politely told him why I couldn't buy from him. I think it pays to let sellers know, courteously of course, the commercial effect of their decisions. Mind you, we've all been spoiled by Hattons' postage charges! Mike