Keith Addenbrooke

@Jack374’s photos look great - good advert for the Code 70 track too, Keith.

I think @doctor quinn could be right. Try Roundhouse model 1373 - I’ve had a quick look online. I believe it was for an HO 50’ tank car and I think the series of numbers offered included GATX 56054. If the long central section of the ‘belly’ is a separate part (between the support stanchions towards either end), that would fit the design I’ve seen in photos. Afraid the tank cars I have are all shorter Type 21 cars (8000 gals). Hope that helps, Keith.

Thanks Andy, you’ll make a proper modeller out of me one day, I’m sure 😀. They’re all packed away for now though, so I can get ready for work tomorrow, Keith.

Thank you @AndyB and @woodenhead - interesting and thoughtful responses. I actually had a bit of free time this afternoon, so reduced my freight car kit stash by two: I found a receipt in one of the boxes dated 1989 - for an American Hobby Store. The grain elevator is unfinished. The track is the rather nice Peco Code 70 American HO, ideal for this type of use. Keith.

When I were 'lad - Introduction They say nostalgia ain't what it used to be, and who am I to argue? Memories of times past, when life was simpler and days were longer, trousers were short and knees were grubby, pockets were for train spotting books and paper railway timetables; those memories can all have a significant influence over us when it comes to our modelling choices. I wrote in my previous post about the desire to recreate childhood memories. I'd like to take that thought in a different direction this time. When I was going through my modelling crates to pull together items for a small display at our local 009 Society Group gathering last month, I found myself feeling rather overwhelmed by the amount of stuff I've got (and my collection isn't large). Having written about the value of 'settling for less' and the benefits of a clear out at the start of this series, I hadn't appreciated just how much I've still got tucked away in the crates under my modelling tables. For me, that afternoon unpacking and then repacking stuff away wasn't the fun I wanted it to be. Some of the magic of the hobby: the joy that came with the innocence of fresh discovery when I was still a boy - it just wasn't there. I'd lost the simplicity, buried it under all the accumulated 'stuff' of middle age. I even wondered (briefly) about ditching the lot. It's not the same for everyone, but for me it was another significant moment. It has meant continuing the clear out, not only to fit the space I have for modelling and storage, but enough that I can also create enough space to recover a sense of excitement when I make or buy something new - I don't just want to be wondering where I'm going to put it! From what I read elsewhere on RMweb, many of us have a stash to keep us going for a lifetime and beyond: I think I've seen it called something like our Stale ("Stash Above Life Expectancy") - quite possible in a piece by @Phil Parker, a reputed expert in the field. But if when I get something new I guess I want to feel some of the buzz I did when I first got started, and I'd never had one of 'those' before. So I'm trying to limit myself to the next ten structures I genuinely believe I really will build (and enjoy building): Freight car kits are more common in American HO that some other modelling genre's, and I've drawn another line for now with the ones I've got queued up - again, all ones I really want to build (and have already been holding on to for some time): My list of 'builds in progress' has also come under control - although there's plenty still to do on all of them: But, hang on, what are those Walthers' platforms for, and isn't that an OO station kit? When did I start that? Do I still need them? No, I don't need them, but one day I still want to finish them. So they pass the "keep or cull" test - I didn't say it had to be logical. The platforms were bought cheap as they go with a large HO station I've built, but don't expect to ever put on a layout. I started the platforms when I was considering a modern Continental Project in H0 earlier this year, but unfortunately glued the key components in place before realising they'd no longer go back in the box once I'd done that. The Ratio OO kit was started in 2020. In the past I've written extensively about my interest in GW Branch Lines (although this kit is of Castle Cary, which isn't a branch line station). After getting involved in Narrow Gauge modelling (the subject of my next blog post) and picking up other long-standing interests, I didn't think I'd go back to tension lock couplings or steam locos without working lights any time soon (if at all). Which means I have quite a few 'bits' with nothing to do: Why don't I get rid? I think because this odd collection of pigs, sheep, level crossing gates, signals and signs still evokes that elusive feeling of nostalgia coming alive again that I'm after, even if they're not on a layout. I just don't want to throw them away. TT:120 The announcement on 6th June 2022 of Peco's TT:120 range came as a genuine surprise across the hobby. It certainly caught my attention. I found it exciting to be at the start of something, and it brought back a lot of childhood memories from my earliest days in the hobby in N-Gauge (very different in the 1970s to where it is today). That connection was perhaps best summed up in a discussion on an early TT:120 thread about what might be produced first in r-t-r that tried to compare the 'green field' opportunity of UK TT:120 with the limited selection we had in 1970s N-Gauge UK outline. In my case the choice of GWR branch line models for Peco's initial range of affordable laser-cut building kits was another attraction, so it was an easy decision for me to embrace TT:120 and begin a small project: Starting with some second-hand Auhagen kits from the 009 Society Members' online Sales shop, I made a start - and soon confirmed that I did not find the details too small (I now do with N-Scale): I scaled back my initial foray into Continental TT (1:120) as I couldn't source the coaches I wanted - wagons and locomotives were easier to get here in the UK - demonstrating the size benefit over H0 (this train is on one yard length of track): But why isn't UK outline TT:120 still top of my project list? I think for me the bubble burst over the amount of debate about the merits or otherwise of TT, in particular after Hornby entered the market (nothing against Hornby, it was the debate I wasn't prepared for). As someone not used to following Trade announcements, I was simply unaware of all the discussions that would ensue. I just wanted to play trains. I still intend to complete the "Moorbach" diorama I originally planned, and continue to follow developments in TT:120 modelling with great interest (I still feel it is the ideal scale for today - that logic hasn't changed), but admit I'm no longer so sure when I'll take this interest further. As I write this I do feel some of the 'mojo' may be returning, so perhaps there's something cathartic in blogging after all, or maybe it's just the photos of what I have already made - straightforward and simple - that can still connect me to the world I'm looking back in search of? We shall see. Once again, thank you for reading, Keith.

A very nice model - and perfect for this type of layout of course, Keith.

One for @benjy14 I think. Agree it does look rather like a museum-sized layout scene, Keith.

Thanks Bernard - that's really helpful. Simple Code 75 track and points may work with my rolling stock. Good point about choice of code to suit choice of prototype (applies to many countries of course but hadn't been flagged up here, so worth mentioning). At the moment I'm just looking to rry some ideas, but my space would be more suited to a branch line (your simple Rode layout is a good example of the kind of concept I'm increasingly thinking about - having tried to squeeze in something bigger without success). I've only seen a few pictures of Weinert Mein Gleis points - they have the Wow! factor for certain. Thanks again, Keith.

I've been waiting to a suitably sunny day to try and get an end-on photo of a wheel passing through the frog of a Code 100 point. I'm guessing Tillig Code 83 mentioned by @Ian Morgan may work for rolling stock with deeper flanges as the Elite range has more prototypical 'rail only' frogs, not solid cast metal or moulded plastic. I think this would fit with @EmporiaSub's comment with a problem on Code 83 points, so wondered what the clearance on my Code 100 points might be. I don't know if anyone knows how much the frog rises (it's not much, but 'not much' can make all the difference with finer rails). These are the best photos I can get: The final photo hasn't come out very well, sorry, but hopefully makes sense (I'm not being deliberately artistic!) While the Tillig range looks tempting, even at the higher price, I also note their turnouts come without over-centre springs to hold the tie bar and the toes of the switch rails in place - suggesting they're designed only for use with turnout motors? Don't know if this helps much, as I don't have any Code 83 or Code 75 for comparison, but at least it gives me an indication of the clearance on Code 100 points to help my thinking. Keith.

Thank you. It would make sense of the markings on the van - I note the home station is identified as Goerlitz. When I try and find out about a "Breslau" class I'm being pointed towards a later 1930s DRG type of Om open wagon (with brakeman's cabin). I wonder if it's possible the KPEV had earlier used the "Breslau" class differently? Keith.

Another addition. I've owned several locomotives and pieces of rolling stock by Roco - and have been delighted with them all - but this is the first high end "Roco Professional" piece with extra detailing I've had: Note that the brakeman's cabin still has unglazed windows - as explained by @rekoboy on @BillB's thread here . I bought it as I was rather taken with the idea of a "Butter wagon": I'm not sure I understand the classification though: per earlier posts, the 600 000 series number fits my understanding of Private Owner wagons for the end of Epoche I but in Bavaria rather than Prussia, and this doesn't seem to have any PO markings. G could be used for covered wagons (Gedeckte Güterwagen). A Waermeschutzwagen is an insulated van as I understand it (which makes sense). Please feel free to clarify. The wagon came with standard hook and loop couplings, which I've replaced with spare Profi couplings - I don't know how durable they may be over time, but I do like European close coupling: Keith.

This is as good a photo as I can get - I'm not sure if the original printing wasn't very clear, or if it's just the limits of my camera (which is better than my eyesight anyway). Either way I can't read this, sorry: I've been trying to clarify when the red wheels / underframe livery was introduced. All the sources I've found agree it was a practical choice to shows cracks and defects more easily than black. I think it became a standard around 1926 (early Epoche II), and had been used in Prussia since 1914 (so would be OK for this loco), but originally dated back to the very first railway locomotives in Germany. Is that correct? (I'm not at all sure on this one), Keith.

Thank you - some fascinating photos in the link, and a wonderfully evocative short written piece accompanying them (I confess I auto-translated it). I agree it would have been a surprise to see anything other than the Nürnberg location for the white Fleischmann box van in the set - whether or not it is an authentic livery. Keith.

Thank you - an interesting choice for Fleischmann to include in the set, Keith.

Thanks Bill. You're quite right - there is a builders plate printed* on the side of the tank but I couldn't get it legible even under magnification yesterday so didn't get a photo. I'm busy today but will have another go when I get a chance, Keith. (* printing details such as this shows the age of the model - today we'd probably expect a raised plate, especially on a higher end model )

Here's what I think I've found out about these wagons - please correct my mistakes and complete my gaps to help others as well as me, thanks. A. already identified by @BillB as a Steel open wagon for Saxony which also appeared as item 5860 in the 1989 Fleischmann catalogue, identified by @Vinedusk. The designation Omk was for a 15 tonne (payload) open wagon. I think 'O 'meant "open / offener" and 'm' meant "more than / mindestens" 10 tonne payload (or: at least 15 tonnes), the 'k' denotes doors fitted for tipping and the bracketed 'u' is "unusable" for military equipment). B. a Bavarian lidded wagon offered separately as Fleischmann 5864 in the 1989 catalogue. Km is: 'K' Klappdeckelwagen with 'm' the payload (as above). C. a longer wheelbase wooden open wagon marketed separately as Fleischmann 5862 (this one), as 5863 with Bavarian crest, or as a Prussian wagon without the brakeman's cabin as 5861. In the livery of the railways of the Grand Duchy of Baden, or Großherzoglich Badische Staatseisenbahnen (G.Bad.St.E). Designated Ommk, the 'mm' signifying a payload of at least 20 tonnes. I note this particular one is also labelled as a Spezialwagen. D. a Prussian (K.P.E.V.) box van which sold separately as Fleischmann 5866. Gm is for a covered goods wagon (Gedeckter Güterwagen), with a 15 tonne payload. E. is a private owner wagon with Bavarian crest. I think the running number 601 990 would have been appropriate for a private owner wagon. I think the 'Nurnberg' directly above the running number refers to the period of introduction that began in 1909 with the introduction of standardization and the start of the transition to that system - rather than the home of the wagon (which is on the white label below the running number). It was in the Fleischmann 1989 catalogue as item 5865 (with 5866 also in the set and 5867 a white Private Owner box van with brakeman's cabin). As I noted at the start of this post, this is only what I've found out using basic internet searches (in English) so there will be every chance I've got things wrong, or missed things out, and I'm happy to be corrected, Keith.

Wagons As mentioned in my opening post, the set includes a selection of wagons, and I'd be interested in finding out more about any of them. There is a certain amount of novelty in a set such as this, which I'm happy to accept. A. B. C. D. E. I don't know if the final wagon E. is a model of an actual one, or a well executed Fleischmann special edition - either way I think it looks the part. All have NEM coupler pockets, unlike the loco. Fortunately for me I quite like the Fleischmann Profi couplings so I'm happy to keep the set as bought (spares are available still as well). No comment really needed on the quality of the models - suffice to say in my view they stand up to comparison with many models of today. Keith.

Locomotive: I'm not sure if it would be classed as a T16 or T16.1 - the cabside plate says T16 but I don't know if the variants would be noted on the locos themselves? It was either built, or at least based, in Altona (Hamburg Division). It would became a DRG Class 94. (The hair on the smokebox isn't visible to mewithout maginification - which is why I didn't remove it!) I don't know when 8167 was built, or whether it would have been in this livery from the start. Questions I'm pondering: 1. When was the red wheels / underframe livery introduced? 2. Is this a T16 or T16.1 locomotive? 3. Was it built or based in Altona? In some ways this thread sits alongside those of @BillB here and and here for modelling purposes, as well as my own preliminary Question on which Code track to use? To answer Bill's question on couplings from his thread: (The flat return spring behind the coupler mount is just about visible. No NEM pocket) Light are non-directional but clear (lightbulbs not LEDs on a model of this age). I run DC so that's no problem, and the body is removed for lubrication by simply undoing a couple of screws. Contikits are my first choice supplier for Continental railways, and this is up to their very high standards, Keith.

I recently enjoyed a modest win on the Premium Bonds*, which I put towards a set that caught my eye: a 1989 Fleischmann train pack commemorating 80 years of the standardisation of wagon design in Germany from 1909. As railways pre-dated German unification, and given the federal nature of German government anyway, my guess is that a common approach across the industry to facilitate interchange traffic and servicing would have been a game-changing development in the advancement of railway traffic across the whole nation. The set I bought seemed to be in mint condition, and I'm still running in the loco when I get time, but it is all in perfect condition, so was a bit irresistable! I'll post some pictures of the locomotive and wagons separately below, to make it easier for comments. With sets such as this, certainly in the UK, it'd be common to include a variety of wagons (and loco) that may be of more interest to collectors than an authentic train as seen at the time. With that in mind, it gives me plenty to ask about...Keith. (* for anyone unfamilar with Premium Bonds, they are a UK National Savings and Investment scheme which doesn't pay interest. Instead, there is a regular prize draw. Like many of my generation, my parents gifted me some Premium Bond certificates when I was born, and they still occasionally pay out small amounts, such as now 🙂)

Thanks Bill, I've just taken some photos to show exactly that, as I thought it might be helpful to others - I'll post them in a new thread now over coffee. Keith.

I actually have the set (bought 'as new' in perfect condition only recently) so I too can confirm this is the same wagon. I was already thinking of posting a thread to find out more about the contents of the set - I'm hoping I'll have some time this afternoon. Thanks, Keith.

Very impressed with the stonework - looks excellent to me. As for the question about precise siting, would it be an idea to mock up the loco yard scene so you can see how the whole picture might look when complete, in case it helps you decide? Just a thought. Hope that's OK, Keith.

If it's a vote, I say #2 the middle one, Keith.

Thanks. Just to clarify in case I've misread your post, my photos compare Code 70 with Code 100. I don't have any Code 83 (I had some a while back I got from @F-UnitMad but it has since been passed on to another RMwebber). Afraid I don't have any surplus good Code 100 now, the bits I've kept have previously been cut and pinned in an unfinished layout from way back, sorry. Keith.

Introduction - Part 2 One of my favourite layouts on RMweb is @ian's HO scale "Die Ercallbahn" in the German Railways Forum. Drawing on childhood memories of the Marklin 3-rail AC system, Ian has brought those memories to life once more, creating the kind of system layout I'm sure many of us dreamt about when growing up. I find it tells such an absorbing story that the first time I saw a video of the layout in operation, I was surprised when the doors of a small railcar didn't open on arrival at a station! The reason I'm referencing this grand opus here is because of the way the system has grown. It began as a test track with just three points and a small branch line station several years ago. It didn't just happen. I spent my formative years pouring over pictures and track plans for American basement fillers, never imagining I wouldn't one day have my own, but I completely overlooked the bit about it taking years of planning, building, and investing to create an empire. I'm reminded of a famous experiment in psychology by a team led by Walter Mischel at Stanford University in California in the 1960s: "The Marshmallow Test." The test is very simple: a child is invited to wait in a room while the adult supervising them pops out for a few minutes. On the table in front of the child is a sweet treat - a marshmallow. The child is told they're welcome to eat the sweet if they want, but, if it is still there when the adult returns, the child will get two marshmallows (not just the one). This tests the child's capacity to understand (and practice) delayed gratification: What's the connection? The team went on to show that those children better able to demonstrate self-control at a young age, could be shown (statistically) to be more likely to enjoy greater success in later life. In my case, having put off for years the task of building a model railway, partly due to the distractions of life, and partly due to a sense I'd still get round to it one day, I thought I was being just like one of those children, putting off the good to wait for something better later. I didn't realise I was making the same mistake again - all the child has to do if they want to receive the better treat is to wait. But if I want to have a model railway, I can't just wait. I need to get on and actually build things...(which I am now getting more practice at): My personal favourite American HO scale basement empire was Bruce Chubb's original Sunset Valley layout, featured in a six part series in Model Railroader magazine in 1979. Chubb even noted that: "it didn't just spring up overnight. It evolved little by little, piece by piece, idea by idea." (Model Railroader, March 1979, p81). Bruce and his wife Janet began making structures and freight car kits while he was on military service with a young family, with nowhere for a layout. Some scenic modules were completed, and then placed in storage at the home of Janet's parents (MR, May 1979, p87). Returning to The Marshmallow Test, the Team observed some children put a lot of creative energy and effort into not eating the first marshmallow. They weren't actually just sitting there. The prize, the goal, required effort. Bruce and Janet Chubb took their creative energy and invested it in a future layout. They took their dream and converted into a plan, with a strategy to get there. I get that now. As railway modelling wasn't that important to me for many years, my dreams remained dreams. I enjoyed them as dreams, but my trains sat quietly waiting in their box. As I explained in my previous post, it's time for me to look at it all in a different way... Chapter 2 - Continental Modelling: "But what about now...?" While I never had a Marklin model railway, Die Ercallbahn also speaks to my childhood dream in another way too. My own first (unfinished) layout was in British N Gauge, very different in the 1970s to where it is today. I'm sure I was not alone in casting envious glances at Continental layouts, mainly German, with their steam hauled express trains headed up by models of enormously long prototypes with too many wheels, all bright red and shiny beneath their black boilers, or electric locos gliding almost silently past on their way to imaginary destinations I couldn't pronounce, in lands of great cities, huge forests and romantic castles. Interest in American Model Railroading is a given for me - it's inherited - but Continental Modelling is the stuff of dreams, and after re-entering the world of actual railway modelling through my small H0e layout, I've been drawn back to ideas for a Continental layout several times in the past couple of years. In my previous blog, I wrote about how I've often keep running into the problem of space constraints, trying to fit too much into into spaces that are too small - grand ideas that didn't survive contact with reality for long. For example, I tried the Glacier Express of the Furka-Oberalp in H0m, but I wanted this: when my space ended up looking like this: I tried N-Scale, to run those long express trains. But they'd still benefit from an exhibition space, not a portable table in a spare bedroom: I also found the details and couplings on American stock too small in N-Scale. It all meant that project idea folded too. Looking back now, the post I wrote a year ago when I closed down that project shows just how disappointed I was. It was the correct decision, but not a happy one. I'll cover my experiences with TT (1:120) in my next blog post, but after I returned to HO Scale following my N-Scale idea, it wasn't long before the European railways I'm interested in (Austrian / German / Swiss) caught my imagination once again. I was still inspired by mainline trains, developing grand ideas once again - this time inspired by YouTube videos of prototype mainline operations, and I had a look at some superb HO Scale models. Could I squeeze in a layout after all? Inspiration doesn't make for a bigger house. And when reality bit once again this past Summer, it looked like my Continental dreams were going back onto the shelf. I just kept an assortment of unbuilt kits I'd bought and will enjoy making: But then I had a small win (£100) on the Premium Bonds, just as I was rethinking my ideas (my previous blog post). How about I apply the learning described in my previous post to my interest in Continental modelling as well? My Premium Bond winnings went on this - a Fleischmann Train Pack: Stepping back in time: this set was sold as Epoche 1 and the loco numbering pre-dates the DRG. I have everything to learn. But the sheer childlike excitement I felt when the parcel arrived from Contikits and I unpacked the set has made it all feel worth it. So now, if I take heed of the lessons I'm learning, maybe my own dream can still become a reality. I have my other interests to follow too, but it looks like I can fit a short branch line train into just about 2': And that's the point of this story. With a bit of luck (my Premium Bonds win) and some more careful thinking, maybe I can still give my child inside what I used to dream about. Isn't that one thing a hobby is for? Thank you for reading, Keith.