DK123GWR

To collate information from everybody's favourite carpet-based model railway YouTube channel for the benefit of readers here (who may not be part of that channel's target audience) there is a setting in the app which allows you to change the PWM frequency, with settings ranging from a default of around 60Hz to a maximum of 8kHz. His opinion (clearly backed up by the video) was that at low frequencies locomotives were noisy but very controllable at low speeds. At high frequencies, locos ran much more quietly, but at the expense of low speed performance. Knowing that you prioritise smooth low-speed control I imagine that you will prefer the default lower frequencies, but for those running mainline layouts with high speeds a higher frequency may be more suitable. 17:35 for reference.

I think its a partial misunderstanding. I believe that GWR originally placed an order for some 801s, which were later converted to 800/3s when electrification was left incomplete. Of course, the original 800 orders and the 802s were always planned to be bimode.

Over-engineering would come at a cost though - in terms of both money and weight (therefore energy consumption and money). If a manufacturer is given a spec, they have no choice but to trust that it is correct.

I thought the minimum radius for an 800 was R3...

GWR have 57s from the sleeper service too.

https://www.gwr.com/travel-updates/live-network-updates The blanket cancellation surprises me. Would it not be better to reallocate some HSTs and run a reduced service on all lines rather than no main line services and a near-full service in the West Country?

What's your source for this? I think it would have made the news but I can't find anything. Also, RTT is still showing 80xs running out of Paddington all day.

Not just something that affects 'fringe' hobbies, for want of a better word. At 18, most people who still play football are rather good at it. The rest have slowly dropped out over the years - some because of changing circumstances or a desire to persue something new, but others realise that as the pool of players contracts it is often the weaker players dropping out. This means that if they wish to continue playing, they have little choice but to play in teams and leagues where the standard of play is generally above theirs. Fortunately, I have always been a weaker player, and I think that's why I don't really care about how good (or not!) I am. My view is that if you enjoy something - go ahead, regardless of your ability (unless you want to run the country of course). You never know, you might turn out to be better than you imagined. That was my experience with running. I was awful at it when I was younger - probably the second worst boy in my tutor group over 1500m in year 7. If I weren't so stubborn, I'd have been walking around at the back from then on. However, I always kept running to see if I could do slightly better than last year. By year 11, I finished 11th overall in my half-year group over a mile-long cross country (over 100 people). I could never have imagined that at the beginning of year 7. Soon after starting Parkrun later that year I was regularly finishing ahead of the person who had always represented my tutor group in the 1500m, the longest race at school sports days. Above all, my message is that you should stick with anything if you enjoy it. If you turn out to be good at it that's a great bonus. If you don't, just do it for fun. If a human life is ultimately meaningless, it may as well be fun.

Know anyone with a broken O Gauge A4?

I have found that refusing to buy something on ebay unless I am able to collect it on foot or by bicycle is a very good curb on impulse purchases (and it makes them pretty much impossible during lockdowns when you're at your most vulnerable). For items of larger value, the price alone is enough to put the brakes on while I consider whether its really worth it.

Sensible, but it might require proper planning rather than the half-baked mess of electrification we have on the GW at the moment. The loco change would have to occur at Swindon (for services via Bath) or Bristol Parkway (for trains to South Wales). This would require the installation of suitable facilities to stable both diesel (68s geared for 125mph?) and electric locos (a suitably geared 88 derivative?), and would probably make non-stop services impossible. At least there would have been a need to install loco stabling and changing facilities at Swindon for Gloucester trains, otherwise the decision not to complete electrification would have meant no new trains running until these could be put in place, although this would presumably be an issue at Parkway where electrification to South Wales and Temple Meads was postponed. On the other hand, perhaps this would have forced them to complete the project as planned.

A random idea which experts will probably tell me is completely impractical, but here is my imaginary HST replacement, instead of the class 80x. As the BR Mk3 was probably the most popular rail vehicle among passengers to be used in this country, why not replace them with a very similar design (in terms of ride and passenger comfort) but updated with modern safety systems, passenger information systems, and control systems suitable for the new motive power. This would of course have to be bi-mode, and given that the most powerful bi-mode design to date appears to be about as powerful as a single HST powercar when on diesel (1,800hp for the proposed class 93) two working in multiple would most likely be needed. As a result of the doubled locomotives, the power produced when operating on electric would probably not need to be as high as the 5,438 of the class 93, although 3,500-4,000hp would be more powerful than the class 91, and allow a single power car to equal the power of an HST in the event of a failure. They would of course be streamlined and geared for 125mph, with potential to regear to 140 mph if required in the future. The main issue that I can see is weight. Adding the electrical equipment to an HST would of course add a lot of weight. Would it be possible within current technology to increase power sufficiently to counteract this difficulty? Presumably reducing the power on electricity (relative to the class 93) would create additional room for diesel power. Any feedback on the concept would be most welcome, but hopefully it would at least be more popular with the general public than the real-life HST replacements.

Is that just so it can use tight radius curves? I don't really see the point otherwise.

I have to agree with the consensus here. If we're discussing iconic passenger trains (in the modern era at least) the HST is undoubtedly the champion - the world speed record holder which revolutionised British passenger transport. Similarly, the Westerns and the Deltics are iconic thanks to being synonymous with the fastest and most prestigious trains in their regions and to their numbers - common enough to be seen but uncommon enough to retain a level of novelty. Outside of the passenger world, I can't believe we haven't mentioned the humble 08. Distinctive, functional, and reminiscent of a steam loco, recognisable to any child as 'Diesel' and omnipresent in their day. An enourmously successful locomotive with almost 200 remaining in service or preservation, surely this has to be recognised for the 'general appreciation by enthusiasts or the general public' which the first post mentioned as a key criterion. One of my earliest railway memories was seeing an FGW 08 out of the window of a train and being so struck by it that I immediately wanted one (if only they did a RailRoad FGW version, I might have stood a chance of getting one).

Yes, the loco worked on DC. I currently have nothing available to move it into.

Having had a chance to try again today, it can't be caused by movement of any mechanical components as the short occurs instantaneously (i.e. before the motor is able to move).

It is an X03 or X04 motor (I can't tell the difference) and both brushes are insulated.

I have just fitted a decoder into a Hornby Hall class. The loco now runs well in a forwards direction, but in reverse shorts instantly without moving. I have checked around the wheels, and there does not appear to be anything fouling the mechanism (such as the infamous track pins). Any suggestions of what might be causing this behaviour? Thanks in advance for any suggestions.

https://www.britishpathe.com/video/road-rail-line Is this it?

I've just remembered something I found in Peru in 2019 which might be suitable for this thread. Walking through Hidroelectrica, near Machu Picchu, there was a set of shops which straddled a railway line. At the end of the row of shops, on the opposite side of the line to the Urubamba River, was Restaurant Bailon, where we stopped for lunch. Accross the line from the restaurant was a gate, and going through the gate was a siding. It was at roughly 90 degrees to the mainline, and a small vehicle (presumably some sort of shunting tractor or maintenance vehicle) was parked on it. There was no phycial connection to the mainline, and I wondered if and how the vehicle was able to move out of the siding. Then I realised that left on the front of the vehicle, there were two ski-shaped objects and a post with a beam on top. I don't recall whether there was a corresponding hole in the ground, but I did reach the conclusion that the aparatus was probably a kind of turntable which could be constructed when needed to access the siding. Unfortunately, while I took photos, my camera died before I got back to the UK and I haven't yet been able to retrieve them, but I'm hoping that if anyone else has been to the area this might be enough to jog their memory. I have tried looking online, but unfortunately it appears that the 'typical' British visitor to Peru is not the sort of person to spend their lunchtime pondering how a railway siding is worked. I can at least assure you that whether the turntable was real or not, the herd of over fifty schoolchildren and their teachers walking down the railway definitely was. There seems to be an expectation that pedestrians will use the line - speeds are low and horns are well-used - but I still imagine that a few readers here will twitch uncomfortably at the very thought of it. Here is a google maps link to the restaurant: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Restaurant+Bailon/@-13.1764708,-72.5598272,16.44z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x916d9b651ba3c5f1:0x9a0cb70d04816808!8m2!3d-13.1750054!4d-72.5569265

At that angle, the ends might be arriving on the platforms.

At least they won't fit onto the train (unless, of course, it's bigger on the inside).

Further to this post, I have found a locomotive with broadly similar dimensions (wheelbase around 30cm too long for the UE chassis, total length around 2m too long for the 08 body - although this includes external walkways). It was built by English Electric for 1067mm (3.5ft) gauge railways in New Zealand - the DE class. The body of the loco broadly resembles a class 20, but pre-dates it by 6 years (and is also a year older than the class 08) Perhaps EE at the same time as developing the class 08 for BR and the DE class for NZR, EE decided to produce a locomotive to evaluate the suitability of diesel power for trip workings in the UK market. This used a very similar mechanism to the DE class (660hp diesel-electric with a top speed of 55mph) but was externally styled to resemble the shunters it was already producing for BR. The locomotive was found to be reliable in service, although often underpowered for its role. EE adressed this issue with the 1000hp class 20, the most powerful of the type 1s, and the experience gained from this prototype is often credited for the 20s' relative success among type 1s. I might make a proper attempt at this if a RailRoad 08 body also fits. Given how early the loco would have been introduced, I believe that it would have worn a black livery in its early years, so it would be relatively easy to repaint. I also have a RR 08 in an awkward livery (DinoSafari) which I have been meaning to do something about for a while. This could allow a Hornby Thomas with a broken chassis to be partially de-Sudrianised and used dropped onto the very good chassis under the 08 for use on a future layout. Who knew 2 minutes of boredom could be so dangerous? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_DE_class_locomotive

Anything you like. All class 06s were withdrawn by 1981, long before privatisation (and therfore Virgin Trains). Virgin did have a few loco hauled trains, so if the 06 did survive long enough it could perhaps be used to shunt the coaches (air con mk2 or mk3) although I'm not sure whether this would fit your space. Perhaps you could imagine a Virgin-owned FOC, in which case modern freight wagons might be used. However, as most modern freights are fixed-formation they don't usually require shunting, so working out why it is necessary at your location might be another part of the challenge. That said, if the 06 is still in use post-privatisation, that suggests that the need for shunters has not declined as much as it did in real life. Perhaps the survival and growth of Speedlink style traffic could be the reason for this.

Not unless I can find a suitable RTR chassis for it. I'm not yet at the level of being able to fit valve gear in places that aren't designed for it.