Regularity

There is a risk of buffer locking with tight curves, period. The coaches will be pushed round the curve at some point, with bufferlock followed by derailment. This problem is exacerbated in 00, not because of the gauge, but because of the amount of side play permitted by the wheel standards (aka as slop). The tension-lock couplings are not just couplings, but also take the buffing forces, hence the curved face to them. Ideally, the couplings would be mounted slightly further back, and have shorter links, to reduce the amount of slack.

I) fit a small camera and connect it to a small screen, e.g. car rear view camera kit. (Not a bad idea, regardless.)

Nice, but I expect that the driving wheels would have been closer together - still a bit of a track straightener either way!

Ideally, you will fit something between the coaches (I.e. within the rake) that has the buffers touching and compressing the springs very lightly. You can twist some wire to do this, so that it looks like a screw coupling from all but the closest range.

I wonder how much they actually set progress back, at least for 4mm scale.Oh, and some of them went on to upset the 7mm “family”, too.

No.Partly because a still from the video for SOS (that white miniskirt! Actually just a long t-shirt and a belt) is preferable...

Aha. Realistic modelling, even to the extent of buying multiple units to avoid engine changes!

I would have to ask my friend who did a PhD in “shockwave and detonation physics” (do some maths, write some computer programs to simulate an explosion using the maths, then blow something up to see if your maths was right. Cool! He was awarded his Doctorate, so I presume the subject didn’t blow up in his face, so to speak...) Unfortunately, I lost touch with him about 20 years ago, so would have to hazard a guess. In which case... Do you want the radius in prototype terms (chains) or scaled down to, say 4mm scale. And if so, am I to use “universal 00/H0”, where I can express the radius in inches, finescale 00/EM, expressed in hands, or P4, expressed in feet?

Also a Dublo 8F, I seem to recall. Yes, they were an improvement, but like the articles, they focused on the wheels and the track, rather than the whole picture. Now, I do understand that, as everything else would be the same regardless of gauge, e.g. flush glazing, finer handrails, etc, - in fact, in many cases it might be more work, to cope with narrower than scale back-to-back, oversized flanges, etc, but by essentially saying, “The only thing that’s different is the track and wheels,” they managed to position themselves as a re-wheeling exercise, rather than about making a finescale approach even finer.

Just as long as it’s better than the bilge I churned out as a teenager...

For A-B-A, you need the USA and North America part of RMWeb.

Practice makes perfect, or at least gets one closer to perefection! I take it we are talking about the book? By the way, I would shake the hand of anyone brave enough to take my daughter off my hands...

For consideration, may I suggest 33E? The goods shed road comes off the loop, and curves slightly less. The road which serves as access to the kick-back can also be part of the yard, maybe for local coal traffic not for the gasworks. Also, I suggest you tighten the curve on the backscene, rather than chop off the engine shed: the important thing is not to have a corner, and believe me I know that having too generous a radius can eat up the scarce space.

I thought D2 was “Helvellyn”? (OK, not pre-grouping, but undoubtedly something the MR might have turned out without grouping and nationalisation...)

No excuse for not trying, though.I was more amused a few years back with the S4 Soc selling a handgun of Bachman class 25s pre-fitted with Ultrascale P4 wheels, as a “starter” engine. Firstly, the only diffuse thing about fitting Ultrascale replacement wheel sets is the lengthy wait for them, circa 9 months I am told, so a 9 month and 20 minute job, then. Secondly, if you feel that this simple task is beyond you, then maybe S4 is not for you. Thirdly, the misshapen front end was a much bigger fault than the track gauge. Put it on a layout, and the layout is diminished. When the latter point was raised, an officer of the Society actually said, “Ah, but think how good the track will look without the loco.” Quite. So you don’t need one, then... All academic now, given the superlative SLW model which is also available in EM and P4. (And given the quality, dirt cheap despite what the moaners say.) Careful... you are talking about a man’s daughter. To the man. (My wife has read it, and has not raised any alarm bells.) Also - and I have not read it so this is based on hearsay - isn’t “50 Shades” only loosely related to fiction?

Usually account deletion happens only when the user requests it: most simply say, “removed a/c XXXX” and are registered as a guest. As to the abrasive ness of “other parts”, I think it varies, but possibly if you Model pre-grouping you have some nostalgia for different times when Society was more deferential, and the “lower orders” more repressed (oppressed?) by their so-called betters. As CJF once said, nostalgia is based on a polite agreement to overlook the faults of the past. To counter that, the North American part of RMWeb is just as relaxed, possibly even more so. Like many with an interest in the subject, I am relatively ignorant of subject matter, so there is a lot of information exchange and it is a minority interest, so fewer people means we all run along rather than rubbing each other up the wrong way. Also, though, until recently, there was very little RTR to suit the Pre-Grouping era, at least not without some modification, and hence this part of the forum has more active modellers rather than box-openers. It always strikes me as slightly amusing when some people fly off the handle over a minor imperfection on an 00 model: I mean, there is a big error in that the track is to the wrong gauge. As CJF pointed out in the mid 70s, whilst still at the helm of Railway Modeller, the great advantage of 00 is that having accepted the gauge discrepancy, it is easier to overlook a few other errors, too, without getting too worked up about it. On fiction, my daughter writes “fan fiction” and I believe she has over a million followers. But she won’t tell me what is her nom-de-plume!

Oh, I don’t know: I can see the remnants of a “Guinness for strength” logo, so maybe it worked too well?

Quite possibly the most incendiary remark ever made in the Pre-grouping forum. I shall watch respectfully (i.e. from a safe distance) to see if there is a fireworks display!

I’ll set ‘em up, and you can bowl them... Actually, if we had put a match to the over-engineered bomb-proof 00 layout that occupied the room, I suspect we might have earned grateful thanks. The layout itself was fine, but there were two major flaws. (1) No one had any stock for it; and (2) No one had any stock for it. Now, I know that I have just stated a tautology, but for any layout it’s a big problem. For a club layout, disastrous. It became a test track that was re-wired every other year (I think rewiring layouts was the Hon Sec’s real hobby) and otherwise a large lump that was simply too heavy to dismantle to create some space, as the prospect of reassembly was too daunting. It did solve one problem: there were no complaints from the various followers of various lines/eras about other “sections” being given preferential treatment. At another club, I remember the layout wiring being installed by a member who was also a signalling engineer for BR. Everything was done in heavy-duty wire, and every circuit was duplicated. It was a nightmare when the original wirer had left: whenever the new guy made an alteration, there was the possibility of a strange short circuit. In the end, it had to be stripped and re-done, during which several weeks there was no running facility for members... I don’t get involved with clubs anymore! Societies are a different thing, of course.

Close to getting stoned, I suppose.

Cons Too much track?Normally I would agree with you and go down the “less is more” route, but in this instance you are trying to convey a sense of the importance of the town served. More track joints across baseboardsMan-up and bite the bullet! If your boards are well made and you use an accurate way to repeatedly re-align the boards at the joint, and you lay your track well, thus will not be a problem. And you don’t have to solder the rails to nails or pcb sleepers. I didn’t, and neither has anyone in my circle of modelling friends. And we all work to scale standards. Less opportunity to disguise baseboard jointAlways tricky. There are various ways to try to reduce the impact, but the truth is that most of us wish we do better. May have to abandon clever perspective ideas about slightly different levels for goods and passenger linesAs it would nearly all be within the station area, there would be little difference and no ballast shoulder. Better to make sure the running lines have stone ballast, and the rest varying grades form mostly stone to mostly dirt. May have to abandon remains of broad gauge train shedI think you could keep the whole thing! I like what you have done with the various suggestions. Is that still a bay platform, or just a headshunt for the engine shed?

Fans of Deltics, Greeley pacifics, Ivatt atlantics, Stirling singles, and from a passenger comfort perspective the HST, all wish they could, too.

With a couple of co-conspirators, both now pushing up the daisies - or being loaned by upstairs to torment the downstairs - I once managed to clear a clubroom. The N gauge mob in the other room had never been so popular... we were on fire that night. Sheep puns are best herd and not scene.

Just like a class 91.

The tank cab and bunker castings on my Terrier were of substantially different lengths. The chassis was so poor as to defy description, and nothing fitted. Still, the D-shaped axles meant the quartering was easy.