7007GreatWestern

At the risk of sounding like Monty Python's fames 'Argument Sketch', the following is provided in a spirit of information sharing and friendly collaboration rather than contradicting Olddudders for contradiction's sake..... I would argue that the ability to run at very slow speeds through pointwork is absolutely essential if model locomotives are to resemble real practise in the steam era. Attached is a page from the Plymouth Division 'Appendices to the Service Timetable' for 1945. I thought it might be useful to select the sections pertaining to two of my favourite post-war GW layouts, Granby and 'A Nod to Brent' but sadly I couldn't find the information for Granby! So, attached is the relevant information for Brent. A perusal of the header of this document reveals the following instruction:- "The speed of light engines or trains entering or leaving all Bay, Engine, Carriage, Avoiding Lines and Goods Loop Junctions must not exceed 10 miles per hour except where restricted to a lower speed in the following list or elsewhere." I haven't seen too many model railways that don't have at least one Bay siding, Engine shed, Crossover or Goods Siding, so I respectfully stand by and expand upon my original point; The negotiation of pretty much all steam-era pointwork (excepting high speed Mainline junctions) requires slow, stable running and excellent electrical continuity. Looking at the original video shared by Jenks465 of this parish his model is probably, if anything, exceeding that speed limit!

Buffering up to both carriages and wagons was and is always done at a crawl and requires great concentration and skill from the driver. Also, it should be remembered that goods trains in the steam era spent large amounts of time held at signals in running loops or refuges. Re-starting a heavy unfitted freight from a standing start demands a chassis capable of slow running, if you want your models to replicate reality. Whether the railwaymen 'wanted it' or not was irrelevant - it was determined by the signals and track occupancy. Any cheap nasty 'toy train' can zoom around a layout at full pelt. The ability to run smoothly at low speed is the hallmark of a well designed and assembled chassis. That's why we 'have a fascination' with crawling....

Hi Duncan. Thank You so much for going to the trouble of finding that for me. That drawing will help a lot to understand the general layout. Thanks once again, Andy.

Thank You Duncan!

Dear All, I hope this question is appropriate and that I've posted it in the correct part of the forum! Does anyone know how I can obtain scale drawings of the station building at Bewdley? Clearly there is always the option of getting the Severn Valley Raliway's permission to measure it in person. However, if anyone knows were I can access pre-existing drawings I'd greatly appreciate it. Ideally they should be 7mm, but any scale will be OK. Thanks in advance, Andy.

Right you are! Didn't spot that one!! Anyway, it does appear to be one of the rarer liveries and was a portent of the 'economy green' livery introduced in the 60s with the later 'ferret and dartboard' coat of arms.

You are correct - a tiny handful of locos emerged from Swindon, probably in 1956 or 57 in unlined plain green with the original 'Cycling Lion' emblem. I have only found photos of three examples, one of which being Churchward Mogul 5311 which is shown in colour in Keith Pirt's 'Steam Colour Portfolio - Great Western Region Volume 1' . David Maidment's 'Great Western 0-6-2 Tank Classes' shows 5664 and 6639 also in this livery, albeit black and white photos!

Gotta say......my first impression is that looks rather wonderful! Captures the graceful lines and handsome proportions of the prototype, to my eye anyway. A couple of features I've not seen on a OO gauge RTR model before - the anti-splash sheet behind the slidebars/crosshead (red) which stops oil thrown from the motion getting onto the wheel tyres and railhead. Also, the support brackets for the running plate (green) seem to be represented. Early impressions very good indeed.

Re: Modified Hall. Does anyone know if Bachmann are planning on re-positioning the decoder socket on this batch of models? For those who don't know, the decoder is in the loco body and not the tender on older Halls and Modified Halls. To install the decoder, the body has to be removed, a ballast weight withdrawn and the decoder circuit board slotted into the vacated pocket. Then it gets really tricky! The socket is on the opposite side of the motor, so the harness wires have to be fed through a very narrow channel around the motor. If the wires aren't perfectly 'flush', it's then really difficult to get the body back on. Re-locating the decoder to the tender would really help!

Left: Dapol Large Prairie Chimney Centre: Chimney of 4160 on West Somerset Railway Right: Hornby Large Prairie Chimney It looks like the cap of the Dapol chimney is a separate part. That would make sense if it's turned copper.......

Wow! Respect! Was that on a heritage line or back in the 50s/60s on the 'proper railway'? There is a commonly held believe that the fireman is just 'the dumb guy who throws the coal in'. Having read all the Harold Gasson books about footplate life on the GWR I knew there was a lot more to it than that. When I eventually had my chance to work on preserved locomotives , I was astonished just how much is actually going on on a steam loco footplate. You can't afford to 'day dream' or switch-off for a minute. The driver may be carrying all the responsibility, but the fireman has to know almost as much as the driver as events unfold minute by minute. Here is what you inner monologue might look like: "Is the pressure gaining, steady to falling? What's my water level? Is that reading accurate or is it being affected by the gradient? Has that injector picked up or we just wasting precious water onto the ballast? Is there an adverse gradient soon? I need to build my fire a minute or two before we get there....What aspect is the next signal? I need to shout it to the driver... How's the fire looking? Is it looking thin in places? Do I need to drag some coal forward. How much water is left in the tender? Have we got enough to get to the next water column?............" On and on it goes. You have to have your wits about you all the time. Obviously, the more experience you have it becomes more automatic and easier. That said, the footplate is no place for 'the dumb guy who just throws the coal in'. I hope this is of interested and apologise to anyone who feels it's inappropriate or off topic. Andy.

I agree with you entirely Mike, but my point is that a loco with its firehole doors permanently closed is no more and no less realistic than one with the doors permanently open! I think the ideal solution here might be for manufacturers to fit a small switch to the underside of the chassis so that those on DC who don't like firebox glow can switch it off. These days I have moved over to '0' gauge where most ready-to-run models have firebox glow which is switchable on DCC. Someone posted on this thread that the firebox glow on the 94xx isn't switchable even on DCC. If so, that is an unfortunate omission......

Several people have derided the 'firebox glow' feature on this and other recent models as a gimmick. Some have questioned how much demand for it and suggested it is merely to justify raising the RRP. I find that a strange conclusion to draw given that most reviews of this model have concluded that it is excellent value for money! The fact that it has sold out so quickly seems to suggest a very large number agree, whether they were 'statistically surveyed' or not. Others have questioned it on grounds of prototype authenticity. I have enormous respect for Stationmaster Mike, one of the most authoritative contributors on RMWeb, but on this issue I disagree. I was fortunate enough to fire locomotives on over 30 occasions at a certain well-known steam railway. I've fired a 'Hall', 'Manor', large prairie and a pannier as well as some locomotive from other railways. Before you are let loose on such machines you do a considerable amount of learning, and the principle source of learning is the 1957 British Transport Commission 'Handbook for Railway Steam Locomotive Enginemen'. It explains with great clarity that the firehole door has a far greater role than merely allowing coal to be added. To explain, coal is far from being just a dumb 'black rock':- Coal has multiple components which can burn to produce heat: solids which burn on the firebox grate and gasses (hydrocarbons) which are liberated from the burning of 'volatile matter' in the coal. The volatile gasses must undergo a separate combustion process above the fire bed if they are to produce heat and contribute to steam production. It's at this point that the firehole doors play their critical role. To get the volatiles gasses to burn airflow is needed above the firebed and it is the firehole doors, along with the so called 'flap', that the fireman uses to control that airflow:- So the firebox door is kept open above and beyond firing coal. The question is by how much and how often? How much the door is opened is judged by observation. Firemen are trained to continually check the exhaust coming from the chimney as it is the best way of gauging the correct door opening:- If the smoke from the chimney is black, the volatile gasses are passing out of the chimney un-burnt and potential heat is being wasted to the atmosphere. The fireman then opens the doors a bit more to allow more secondary air. If the exhaust is 'clear', then the doors are open too much and the fireman should close the doors a bit or maybe completely. When the exhaust is the classic 'light grey' that we all recognise, the fireman knows that the firehole doors are set correctly and will leave them as they are. Moving on to 'when' the doors are opened or closed. It is true that the firehole doors must be kept close as much as possible when the loco is being worked hard, as the flow of (cold) secondary air will then hit the tube plate, cooling it and inducing stresses. The doors should also be fully closed when entering a tunnel to protect the crew from the phenomenon of 'blowback', a situation where the normal direction of the flames towards the chimney is redirected and instead the fire comes out through the firehole door into the cab. These incidents are mercifully rare but men have been mamed and killed by blowback. However, most of the time a loco is neither being worked hard nor is blowback a risk. Much of the time a train is coasting and the opening of the firehole doors depends on different considerations. For example, if the boiler pressure is at or near 'blow off' and there is not scope to cool the boiler by using the injector to introduce cold water, the firehole doors will typically be kept open to lose some unwanted heat! As you can see, even something as apparently simple as the firehole doors play a complex role in the safe and efficient operation of the locomotive. It is over twenty years since I worked on steam, but my abiding memories are of that incandescent mass at your feet, just inches away. So much of your day working a locomotive depends on it. With a strong, hot, white fire a lot of your problems go away. But if your fire is weak (too thick, too thin, uneven, clinkered...) you are going to have a hard day on the footplate! A good fireman can look at his fire and read it like a book. He knows exactly how strong it is and how to maintain it. Sadly, I never reached such a level of expertise! I respect the opinion of those who consider firebox glow a gimmick. They are entitled to their opinions. But for me, that orangey flickering glow is part of the visceral experience that is steam. It means the loco is 'alive'. A loco without a fire is dead! And at night time, more than any other time, it is and essential part of 'the magic'......

Hello 57xx, As you may know, we have 'been here before' with Heljan, as recently as two years ago. In fact there is at least one RMWeb thread dedicated to the issue of Heljan's gears and the difficulty in sourcing spares:- It seems a veritable 'cottage industry' of aftermarket Heljan gears sprang up, coordinated by Jim Snowdon (sometimes of this Parish) and manufactured by Ultrascale:- Heljan have suffered considerable 'repetitional damage' from this in the past and as recently as March this year they made public statement on their Facebook seeking to allay customers' fears:- https://www.facebook.com/heljanas/posts/Heljan-spares-gaugemasterwere-delighted-to-report-that-our-spare-parts-service-i/3034541133275399/ Buoyed by their reassurances I bought a Heljan 43xx this October, confident that Heljan's problems with their nylon gears were behind them and that satisfactory after-sales support was now in place. Now admittedly the nature of the gear failure is different here to the previous incidents and we are not talking about a recurrence of the same problem. I am however watching Heljan's reaction to this with interest a some concern. FWIW, I would also be prepared to participate in a 'group order' to commission Ultrascale to produce replacement brass gears if Heljan and Gaugemaster don't get their act together. However, I imagine it's going to be considerably more difficult to replace the gears on steam outline models because of quartering, notwithstanding the issues 57xx is encountering just getting to the gearbox!

I fiddled with CVs 5 & 6 in attempt to give me a very high speed curve for exactly the same reason as you - to try to get the loco from a standing start, up to a reasonable speed and then back to a stand in a very short distance. Most of my locos (OO) use Zimo decoders and I have always been able to achieve this using CVs 5 & 6 alone. However, I'm using ESU Lokpilots in my Heljan 43xx and 61xx and I'm finding my NCE Powercab can't change these values on the ESU decoders! I think I read on another forum this is a 'bug' on some ESU decoders. I did find a 'workaround' however - I simply switched from 128 to 28 speed steps. Now my locos accelerate far more quickly! There is a button on the NCE that switches the appropriate CV in the decoder to achieve this. Because it is an attribute of the decoder, not the controller, the loco 'remembers' that it is to run in 28 step mode when power is removed.

Hello Adrian, Thanks for posting the above video of your sound fitted Heljan 43xx. I'm not generally a fan of DCC Sound but the sound project on your mogul is among the better efforts that I've heard. You mention that it is running on a Loksound L sourced from DC Kits, but what sound project is it? DC Kits seem to supply their own sounds as well as Legomanbiffo.....

This is RMWeb at its very best - someone actually sharing real hard-won experience to make life a bit easier for others. Take a bow 57xx! You're a star!! (no pun intended). Andy.

Outstanding work 57xx! That's possibly going to help a lot of us. I'll certainly feel more confident dismantling and working inside the 43xx should it be necessary. Thanks so much!!.

Thank You GWR57xx for posting this - it came in very useful when fitting a decoder to my 43xx yesterday. In case this is useful to anyone I'll post my experience. I was in the unusual position of NOT wanting DCC sound and also NOT being confident about possibly invalidating a warranty be removing the factory fitted ESU adaptor board. For a while this appeared to leave me no choice but to stump up £150+ for a Loksound 4 or 5 L. Then last week I stumbled on the fact that ESU have released a non DCC-sound equivalent decoder earlier this year to little fanfare. It's the Lokpilot 5 L, product code 59315. It cost around £70 and the ESU literature claimed it was 'mechanically compatible' with the Loksound units. I paid for Royal Mail next day delivery though it actually turned up two days later, no doubt due to Royal Mail's well documented problems at the moment. Removing the tender top was easy though I found I had to release an additional screw to the ones shown in the diagram above. The screw in question is located near one of the tender's rear steps. The decoder is then an easy push fit and asymmetric decoder pins prevent it being inserted the wrong way. When refitting the body you need to try to line up the tender front handrails with the corresponding holes in the tender running plate, just like many OO gauge tenders. And the performance? The first thing I did was to try to drive the loco on DC. It didn't respond and I feared the worse. Next I connected an NCE Powercab. To my delight the loco pulled away smoothly, its low speed performance being significantly better on DCC than DC. I haven't figured out the problem with the loco not responding to DC - maybe the appropriate CV isn't set correctly (CV 29?). At the moment I'm simply relieved that this model/decoder combination is working - I have read bad reports elsewhere on RMWeb. The moral of this tale is that there IS a less costly, plug-and-play, non-sound option for this loco though there is surprisingly little literature or discussion that this option even exists. I hope this helps, Andy.

"apologies for bouncing this topic . did you have any joy with the chimney....?" Sadly no, Mr Webster chose not to reply to my helpful and well intentioned PM. As a result I bought my 45xx from Masterpiece Models instead, which is exquisite. There are manufacturers who value informed feedback from knowledgable customers........and then there are others who simply see them as a nuisance. "The 45xx is based upon the old Lionheart version so will carry an according price as do the 64xx and 74xx panniers which are similarly more expensive than the pure Dapol 57xx," With respect, I think you'll find the new Lionheart 45xx isn't based on the old one at all. The old one was soldered brass construction. The new one is die cast. Andy.

Unfortunately I can't find my copy of O. S. Nock's book on Stars, Castles and Kings which describes some outstanding performances by Stars in the pre-War era. The following is from a far more recent source however:- "The Stars had proved that they were quite capable of handling heavy loads at speed, as demonstrated by Old Oak Common allocated No. 4013 Knight of St Patrick, with Driver Morgans on the footplate. On 8 April 1914, the Wednesday before Easter, it hauled the midnight Paddington to Penzance service, comprising nineteen bogie coaches, from Bristol to Exeter in even time. On the following Bank Holiday, Monday, 13 April, the same locomotive, again with Driver Morgans in control, hauled the 6.27pm service, comprising seventeen bogie coaches, from Weston-super-Mare to Paddington, again in even time." Waters, Laurence. Great Western Star Class Locomotives (Locomotive Portfolio Series) . Pen and Sword. Kindle Edition. I highly recommend Mr Waters' book. Picking up on NoDecorum's point..... "Who needs four cylinders anyway?" "Apparently, the GWR did. The Stars were reckoned one coach better than the Saints. There is also the question of Halls having to be driven without maximum cut-off and with regulators partly closed in order to avoid excessive vibration. " The Star and Hall used the same boiler, the Swindon Standard No1 which could be an outstanding steam raising unit. Unfortunately, I think it is widely agreed that the 'Hall' steam chest and passages didn't make optimum use of the available steam compared to the 'Star', 'Grange' or 28xx. The vibration you mention is the phenomenon of 'hunting', a two-and-fro pull at the drawbar causing a distinct shaking especially in the leading coach. It was quite common in the two cylinder designs (the 'Counties' were notorious for it) but not in the four cylinder machines (Stars, Castles, Kings). The 'Stars' may have only been rated at one coach more than the Saints 'on paper', but the operating authorities and loco crew knew the gap between them was great than that.

That may be historically correct but it isn't particularly relevant! These products are intended to have separately lighting in the cab and vestibule, both of which are independently switchable. At the moment I have one Dapol auto coach which allows this, and another which doesn't respond to any switching of either set of lights. These are identical products with almost identical product codes. On paper, only the livery is different yet they are behaving differently! The suspicion I have is that this is one of the 'Lightbar only' models (ie Not DCC fitted) in a DCC Fitted box. I can't prove it though and the problem might be something else entirely.

Hello Norman and Henk, Thank you both for your responses. Yes I'm aware that F1 and F2 work the lights - that feature works ob my original auto coach (7P-004-009D) but not the second, which seems strange. Henk - the reason I went to Dapol directly is that I asked some more detailed questions that I felt the retailer probably wouldn't know.........because they aren't answered in Dapol's product instructions or marketing literature!!! My questions were as follows:- These particular models are 'Lightbar and DCC fitted' - but I can find no reference to which DCC decoder is fitted (Dapol Imperium?), what interface it has (8 pin? 21 pin?) or where the circuit board is located. It seems strange to me that these details aren't in the instructions. The written response I received from Dapol didn't clarify anything. I see that Dapol have outsourced their servicing to DCC Supplies in Worcestershire I'll try them. In the mean time, any insights from RMWebbers will be appreciated.

Dear RMWebbers, I would appreciate some guidance concerning the Dapol O gauge auto coaches. Several months ago I bought one of the 'Lightbar and DCC fitted' models. (7P-004-009D) The DCC fitted option simply allows you to switch on/off the lighting in the vestibule and the driver's cab using Function Keys on my DCC controller (NCE Powercab) It works well and I'm pleased with it. Last week I bought a second (7P-004-008D). This is also 'Lightbar and DCC Fitted'. However, this model behaves differently. The vestibule lights come on when DCC is applied and they remain on regardless of pressing the appropriate function key. The cab lights don't come on at any time whether the appropriate function key is pressed or not. I've contacted Dapol asking this and other technical details. Their response was frankly useless. So, it's over to you guys. Any suggestion welcome!

According to the Wikipedia entry for Manchester Exchange, the answer is 'Yes'! :- "Between 1884 and 1943, the Great Western Railway operated a competing passenger train service from Chester General station via Frodsham, Warrington Bank Quay and Eccles to Manchester Exchange." I don't recall ever seeing any photographic evidence for this however.......