Methuselah

Mine is on it's way. I ordered the DCC sound option. Do I need to remove the decoder and fit a blank to run it on DC - or will it just run on DC anyway automatically....? I don't want to risk damage....

Thanks for the help - much appreciated. 😊

I've also only just found this thread. Most impressive Mike. I wonder if you can advise me please....? I ended up with both versions of this model, so I though that I'd retromod the first unlined version back to it's NER configuration. I'll have to remove the duckets and vestibule connections and repaint it in crimson etc. However - I need to source the correct NER bogies. Do you know if these are available anywhere please....? TIA.

NER Dyno' Car Question ;- Just a quickie ;- I have ended-up with two of the Rapido Dyno' cars, The first one is of course unlined, so as I don't need two LNER versions, I thought it'd be interesting to return the unlined version to the as-built NER configuration in lined NER crimson. Livery aside, I'll need to remove the gangways and duckets - as well as fit the earlier NER bogies. Can anyone here suggest where I might be able to source the correct NER bogies please....? TIA

LOL - thanks Mikkel. I'm guessing that most will be OK if I constrain the gradient to 1:100.....but I need to dig out some more kit - which is all rather buried at the moment. All the locos will have to use the gradients - even the smaller Tenbury Branch locos....but of course, they won't be needing to pull a dozen bogie coaches or more. You may wonder at some of the oddball locos that will appear here, but the non GWR/LNWR-LMS are really just meant to run on the line out into the garden....that will also have a gradient, so the same potential for problems. I'm still trying to find my digital scales - and I've ordered a digital angle-finder too. My next mini-test will probably to try and quantify what rolling-resistance value to attach to the various types of coaches. I'm ignoring the added resistance of curves, as I can make all the gradients straight.

Tractive Effort......in practical terms. I have searched the forums here for an existing thread on Tractive Effort, and other than some mentions in other threads have not found one on this specific subject. The 4mm scale, OO gauge diorama that I'm building necessitates gradients down to and UP from a lower storage level - or else I wouldn't be writing this. As a corollary of deciding what maximum gradient to allow, it follows that some sort of assessment of what it takes to pull a train - and what the locos are capable of - naturally follows, to ensure that I don't create a massive problem for myself..... I should say from the outset, that this is purely a practical, empirical exercise - so no formulae, calculators or slide rules allowed....! This is not an engineering dissertation - it's simply a practical exercise. I am starting - no pun intended, from the premise that no run-up is allowed, and that a start from stationary must be made - either on the level - or at two pre-set gradients. Having picked-over whatever I can find on the internet, two approximate benchmark gradients seemed to stand-out. Firstly, that serious problems started to occur at steeper than 1:50/2%, and that few problems seemed to occur at 1:100/1% or shallower. Whether this assumption is any good will be put to the test in a later series of tests. Thus the Loco Tests will be at;- 1) LEVEL. 2) 1:50. 3) 1:100. For simplicity the track will be standard Peco Code 100 (As that's what will be laid on the hidden gradients anyway.). The track will be cleaned after every test. Tests indoors at room temperature. Bearing in mind that the aim is to test what the locos can START - only the maximum drawbar force is being measured. In practice, all the locos ended-up slipping - so this is ignored. Only the MAXIMUM force is relevant. Interestingly, the maximimum TE recorded is always AFTER the loco begins to slip, though the difference between just before and after it starts to slip is small. This may be at variance with 1:1 loco performance - but I'm merely reporting what happens in this model test scenario. As a matter of interest - all tests were carried-out with the locos running FORWARDS. A comparison between the loco's PUSHING & PULLING was made - and the results were identical. (The Test Gauge will measure both tension and compression.). A Digital Force Gauge was used, with a range of 0 - 20N. (2.039432426Kg). In practice, thus far, the sample batch of locos have struggled to get to 1.00N, so for the sake of simplicity, all results will be given in Newtons. A simple free online converter can be found here ;- https://www.unitconverters.net/force/newtons-to-kg.htm Bearing in mind the simple, empirical nature of these tests, it's worth underlining it's simply not relevant to start discussing the power of the locos - it matters not. In fact, there are a host of variables aside from the power of the motor, such as number of wheels, type of metal the wheels are made from, weight etc etc. All these peripheral factors are ignored - only what is delivered to the drawbar matters. The plan is to carry out three series of tests ;- 1) Test some locos. 2) Test some sample scale-length trains - to see what it takes to start them, as per the locos on the Level, 1:50 & 1:100. 3) Test to confirm whether the T.E. of locos in (1) is actually enough to start trains of that rolling resistance (2) or less. (I'm deliberately ignoring the fact that weigh, is technically separate, as it adds to the rolling resistance - it's just simpler.). 4) Test the efficacy of adding weight to locos. This won't all happen at once, but from time to time, as I get the time. I have a lot of locos and they are a mixture of kitbuilt, scratchbuilt and RTR. In the case of RTR - assume they are standard unless any mod's are specifically mentioned. Below is an initial test of a totally random box of locos. The results give a taste of what can be expected as more locos are tested. Of course, individual examples of a model will vary, but even in this small sample, a pattern is starting to emerge, and, not surprisingly, weight is a noticeable factor. The range here is from 0.35Nm up to a nice round 1.00 Nm. My guess is that, the likes of Garratts aside, few UK steam-profile locos are going to have a drawbar force above much above 1.00Nm. (Older diesel-profile models may not be much better, but obviously, more modern examples have both bogies powered, so would give much better results - but as I have none - it's a moot point.) Kernow GWR SRM * 4-4 RTR. 0.22Nm. MR 4P Compound. 4-4-0. SB**. 0.35Nm. Jin brass GWR4500. (Compensated.) 2-6-2T RTR. 0.37Nm. Bachmann GWR 4575. 2-6-2T RTR. 0.44Nm. SECR Wainright C-Class. 0-6-0. SB**. 0.51Nm. Bachmann N-Class. 2-6-0. RTR. 0.58Nm. Brass LNWR G2 0-8-0. Kit. 0.70Nm. Hornby BR 8P 4-6-2. RTR. 0.75Nm. Hornby West Country 4-6-2. RTR. 0.77Nm. Bachmann LNWR G2A 0-8-0 RTR. 0.86Nm. H'Dublo 8F. 2-8-0. RTR. 0.88Nm. H'Dublo Coronation 7P/8P 4-6-2. RTR. 1.00Nm. (**SB=Scratchbuilt.) Interestingly, The HD 7P/8P Coronation was a bit of a reluctant runner, but it came-out well ahead. Both this and the HD 8F are notably heavy. The centre wheelsets are flangeless, and I'm not even sure they actually touch the rails......so these two might even be operating as 4-4-2's..... I will also be adding a column for loco weight - excluding tender. I was tempted to break this down further to ascribe the weight per driven wheel. This is not really practical, however, because many locos have flangeless wheels and hardly any are compensated/sprung, so this would very much muddy the waters and complicate what is intended to be a fairly straightforward survey of what locos can pull - and what is needed to pull realistic length trains. Finally - remember this is really all just empirical observation - not science. Theoretical formulas have no place here - only actual results.... I shall return to this when I have got some more results * PS;- I have added the newly-arrived Kernow GWR Steam Railmotor just out of interest. However, mine is a DCC version running on DC for the test. In this mode, it is pre-programmed with s soft-start/weigh & inertia simulation. When it started to slip, it kept 're-booting', so the small 0.22Nm may not quite be it's best performance. I got the impession that it needed more weight over the power-bogie, but since these models are not really likely to have to pull much - it won't be a problem for most users. In my case though, again, the gradients will be a factor. PPS ;- I still havent found my digital scales, but will add all the weights as soon as I do.

NER Dyno' Car Question ;- Just a quickie ;- I have ended-up with two of the Rapido Dyno' cars, The first one is of course unlined, so as I don't need two I thought it'd be interesting to return the unlined version to the as-built NER configuration in lined crimson. Livery aside, I'll need to remove the gangways and duckets - as well as fit the earlier NER bogies. Can anyone here suggest where I might be able to source the correct NER bogies please....? TIA

Like many folk, I have a mixture of kit, scratchbuild and RTR locos. The RTR are what they are - an instant solution - and all the modern stuff seems to run very well. There is no doubt however, that the kit/scratch metal locos are far more robust. My biggest beef with RTR is that, despite spiralling prices - and their somewhat delicate nature, the manufacturers clearly don't feel any responsibility to customers to hold a decent stock of spares - a practice that would be deemed totally unacceptable in most other expensive products. In one example, I will need to scan and 3D print an unavailable part on a loco that's only a few years old.....

Thanks - Very nice - I think they have to be the prettiest locos ever created. There is - or was, an etched version, but I have been trying to find one of the old K's versions, as they are probably easier to make. Failing that, I'll have to kitbash one of the old Triang Dean Singles as a last resort.

Many Thanks - I'm using a Mac, so perhaps that page isn't Mac-friendly.

I can't see the Armstrong 4-4-0 on the CSP website.....or a phone number or eMail address..... 😶

I seem to recall that K's did a GWR Armstrong 4-4-0 tender loco in their 'Milestones Of Transport' range. Has there been any mention of that model being produced again....?

I knew Bob Albutt very well. His original shop on the Coventry Road was really focussed on model aircraft and boats & cars. The trains came later, although Bob did have a 3.5" live-steam railway in the back garden of the shop. Bob had owned the closed shop next door for years, but he had that modernised and moved all the r/c stuff etc into there, and the old shop became dedicated to trains, run, primarily, by Peirce/Piers, who was very keen on US HO. I don't think the train side was ever a real success, though Bobs Models did attend some model railway shows. Bob also started an offshoot called Tornado. This was mainly focussed on coin-in-the-slot r/c boats, and later Dodgems. This was mainly run by the late Derek Hughes. As far as I'm aware, that is still in business, though I think Bob may have already sold his interest in Tornado by the time he died. Bob also opened a shop in Solihull, that his daughter, Julie ran. After Bob's death, the old shop was closed, and the Solihull shop carried on, doing a lot of die-cast and kits, but as you said, sadly closed about ten years ago. Bob was generally a quiet, private, patient sort of chap, but had a heart of gold. Back in the day, his shop was probably the busiest in Brum.

Thanks Tony, Fifty-plus year old memories can be very diaphanous in nature...!

True - though it's no reason not to try. I'm not sure why some youngsters now seem to be shrinking violets, but it's very much the Curates Egg.......if young folk are daunted by personal contact - it's because all they have used for contact is the internet. I lay the blame firmly at the feet of the schools for this absurdity. All that being said, clubs can be very cliquey. I've never really been a club-type, though I'm more than happy to get together with a few like minded chums once in a while. I like some company - but I'm just as happy on my own - both have advantages. I remember when the Warley show was a much much smaller affair, and was an annual event in Quinton at the Quinborne Community Centre - I'm guessing late 1960's....? Only returning to model railways a few years ago, I have attended Warley for the last two years, and the cost of parking alone is absurd. Last time, I actually also paid to go into the Bike Show next door too, since I was there anyway. I spent more time looking at bikes than trains.....The Warley show can't cater for everyone, and I'd already decided it'd be my last attendance. Why ? - because, ironically, I can gather more information from the web..... Is the model railway hobby about to expire......? No - it's just evolving. Less retail stores, even more transaction online, more 3D printing, more You Tube, more live video calls/streaming etc.... This is all transient detail, I think an interest in history, machinery and creativity are at the heart of any type of modelling - but it's not the endgame for railway modelling - nowhere near.

Just saw that the Hattons model railway shop is closing........there is an anouncement for those with pre-orders etc.... They do strees that they are not insolvent. https://www.hattons.co.uk/closure?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=closingdownannouncement&fbclid=IwAR0CtIg2mfqv0syifTe_x9NjlYJLkugDQtVpc8jeCROt4fg6hupT0QwjY2M

Thank you Ray. Quoting from the history earlier in this thread ;- 'Designed and built by the North Eastern Railway, at the railway's York Carriage Works to diagram 10IA at a cost of £1500, the dynamometer car entered traffic in March 1906 in the NER's Crimson Lake livery with the running number 3591. The vehicle's first working was on the 6th March 1906 behind R class locomotive No. 2109.' I'm really focussed on the GWR & LNER, but I like to create set-piece trains from other pre-grouping companies too. The NER loco's seem to have been green - very much like the subsequent LNER livery. Frankly, I had no idea that the NER coaches were Crimson Lake....! A colour-change is no biggie, but the lining-out promises to be challenging. There is also a shortage of transfers available for some of the more obscure pre-grouping companies. Hopefully I can dig sufficient info' up.

I have ended-up with both versions of this coach. I'm considering converting the first version into the original NER configuration. Livery aside, the details to change seem to be the removal of the duckets and alterations to the bogies. What are the correct bogies - and where might they be obtained I wonder....? Is there any known information source for the coach as built.....drawings...........and livery....? Any info' gratefully received.

I've ended-up with both the original unlined (Argh...) and the newer lined versions of this model. I was thinking that it'd be interesting to convert the first version to it's as-built (NER...?) configuration. Where might I find suitable guidance/drawings/livery etc...? I think replacement bogies would be required....? Who might make these....? TIA.

Ditto. Yet another Americanism creeping in - that and the wretched 'Train station'. Arrgghhh.....

Good Luck with the impending house move - and also with the new diorama. One of the old Hams Hall steam engines is kept but a few miles from Tenbury and still steams-up occasionally. ;- ....and this at Bromyard, just up the road from Tenbury ;-

Thank you for that fulsome reply. As a returnee to railway modelling after a very long gap, I'm keen to make use of others knowledge and experience so as not to waste time on ineffective solutions. The HL products do seem to be widely recommended, so I shall try some of these for sure. One small query regarding the Portescaps ;- Is it possible to identify the later noisy Portescaps visually - or can this only be determined from testing them...? S.

Very useful thank you.

Motor Gearboxes. Tony, Rightly or wrongly - the Portescap RG4 still seems to be very sought-after. Justified ? Now that unit is no longer available, what are your recommendations for alternatives ? Are coreless motors preferred ? S.

As you point out, the limiting factor as with so many aspects of model railways is space. One annoying visual result of the immediate sharp curve inside a tunnel or other scenic break, is coaches lurching across the track. I was planning tunnel mouths as scenic breaks - which never existed in the real locations. I've since decided that I can't live with this outrageous fiction, and will use a profusion of trees etc to bury the tracks exit from the visual stage. There will be four of these artifacts, but owing to a space restriction, there is no space for the ninety-degree turn required on the most visually critical exit. Instead, the track will go through the trees, then continue through the wall, into a covered panhandle in the next room, before returning to the main diorama. Fortunately, the room next door is only a boiler-room and utility. Where there's a will, there's a way....