Mick38

I have a rake of Dapols toplight coaches and very nice they are too, but when plcaing them on the track, a pair of couplings, complete with their nem pockets, simply fell off. I cannot find any way to re-attach them - can anyone help please? there appears to be nothing to fix them to.

Granville Manor has finally arrived! What a pleasure. It came in a box twice as large as necessary, extremely well protected - it would have survived even if it was made of glass. Runs beautifully. Also pleased to see that the cab handrails extend up to the roof, unlike earlier models. So congratulations Accurascale, from one very pleased customer (in Australia).

Good to hear of some Manors actually being delivered. Here's hoping my "Grantham Manor" might arrive before Christmas! Talk about delayed gratification...

I saw a selection of code 83 turnouts  for the first time at a retailers recently, and not knowing they were North American types, I was immediately impressed by the very large radii turnouts, which look far more authentic than even the "large" radius ones available in code 75 or 100. I wonder if there is any chance that larger radius turnouts could be introduced in those codes for British main line layouts?

Thank you everyone. I didn’t understand “cyberman”s suggestion at first, then realized he meant only the bottom bit of the flange was removed. I’ve done this, just a few strokes on an oilstone is all it takes, and now have no troubles at all. A little bit of extra weight helps, as well.

Not a bad idea! Easily reversible too.

The floating centre axle on these coaches are very prone to derail on facing points. As I have no tight curves, I am tempted to centralise and fix the centre axle. Has anyone else tried this?

I note that Duke 71000 has asked if there is any prospect of a home and distant on the one post being produced? I have several of these signals on my layout, including a junction; they work very well and I would welcome a twin signal. Any thoughts, Dapol?

Peco recommend removal of the wires connecting the point blades to the frog, when the frog polarity is controlled by a switch, as in a Tortoise motor application, which I have always done. But why is this necessary? I have just watched a YouTube presentation showing this done, followed by making new soldered connections to the outside rails, which negates the need to sever the existing connections in the first place, surely.

The only reason I can think of for removing the existing links, is to avoid any possible shorting between  the (idle) switch blade and the adjacent running rail. But that risk remains when the extra wiring is added. So what’s the point? (Sorry about the pun). I have never encountered shorting in this case.

Why did GWR  place the drivers controls on the right hand side of the cab, where they couldn’t see the signals? The Fireman’s job was pretty “full on”, it would have been easy to miss one.

 (The Fatadder) Very impressed with the Comet version - makes my effort look like the rubbish it is. As I lack the skills to complete a kit, I wonder if you could make one for me? Please?

This is my faux slip coach:

Well! Thank you one and all for that amazing compendium of information. I have improvised an end piece to a third class brake coach to make an approximation of a slip coach, but of course the side details are all wrong, and it would be great to have a r-t-r version.

Good luck with your 180 degree curve! My track popped up when expansion won over the restraint of being glued in place. I would certainly recommend no longer than two meters soldered up, and allow for the inevitable expansion at the rail joiners. Nice to hear the clickerty-clack anyway.

I am curious to know how slip coaches were handled after being dropped off. Were they simply attached to the next available “up” service?

As most slip coaches appear to have been “toplights”, I wonder if Dapol could be persuaded to include a double ended slip when the corridor toplights are announced?

I am curious to know how GWR slip coaches were handled after being dropped off. Were they simply attached to the next available ‘up’ service?

As most slip coaches appear to have been “toplights”, I wonder if Dapol could be persuaded to include a double ended slip coach to their upcoming (hopefully) corridor range?

Since my original posts on this topic, things have moved on, and I have had very acceptable results from a cube camera mounted on a bogie flat wagon. The Chinglish instructions were appalling but there is a website that spells them out in plain English. The YouTube clip of my existing layout can be viewed on 

It depends on the degree of realism that you want to achieve. After initially using code100 for the straightforward parts of my layout, I decided to use code75 for the station area, and had no more difficulty with it than previously. I am not a particularly experienced modeller, and my trackwork is far from perfect, but the only problems I have had with derailments were due to obvious defects, which I rectified. The appearance of the finer track is far superior. See my recent "Drivers Eye View" clip on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTImHLP78qY which ruthlessly exposes shortcomings in the tracklaying.

Extremely good news - these are the "shorty" versions of the GWR toplights at 48 feet overall -  to date I have had to make do with the Graham Farish versions which do not appear to have been modelled on any particular prototype that I am able to identify. These promise to be very authentic. A full rake of six will set the bank account back a bit though!

321210920_Grafarcoaches.pdf

And a second far superior video of the improved layout is at : https://youtu.be/DTxi9M0drxg or search for MMR0 Ambledean Drivers View.

Thanks

I had a shot at this many years ago, using a “spy” fountain pen, mounted on a wagon chassis and as the lens points sideways, I fixed a mirror at 45 degrees so that it could “see” forwards. The recordings were downloaded and reversed left - to - right, and suitably edited. The quality wasn’t great and it was a tedious business to constantly re- position a back scene, but showed what could be done. Search YouTube for: MMR0 Original Ambledean Railway. Incidentally, it did highlight some dodgy sections of track!

Interesting thoughts there. I have a Hornby 2-8-0T "Heavy Goods" loco which will only run at a crawl even after expert servicing (and then only on full power). So out of interest I calculated what its scale speed was. Answer - 3.5 meters in 30 seconds, which equates to 20 mph almost exactly. So its unlikely the prototype would ever run much faster. Nevertheless, I feel that it is disappointingly sluggish.

As an aside, I recently rode on the London to Glasgow service. 450 miles in four and a half hours , including 13 stops! Average speed 100 mph. I was suitably impressed, living as I do in Australia, where our trains are woefully slow.

Sound advice, thank you.

How’s this for an idea? I have a Hornby Dean Single with extremely poor pulling power; also I have a spare Dean Goods with tender drive. What if I separated the goods loco and tender, use micro plug and socket to connect to the Single, and voila! A far more powerful loco. As far as i can see, the tenders are almost identical. Any comments please?

Problem now identified as poor soldering of wires at the DPDT switches. While there was apparently full voltage at the motors, there was insufficient current to operate them. There is nothing wrong with the motors, thankfully. When I applied full 12v direct to the tortoise contacts they both worked fine. Thank you for your comments.