DK123GWR

10 minutes ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

 

I've seen worse weathering, primarily from a comedian on eBay who reckons he's a professional.

 

Mike.

If people buy the stuff and he doesn't have any other jobs then technically...

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/A-Hornby-6-CAR-HS125-INTER-CITY-SET-IN-BLUE-LIVERY-VERY-NICE-LOOKSEE/203052938994?hash=item2f46e5f6f2:g:zxUAAOSwUfhfFHFv

An example of very common (and perfectly understandable) madness: HST power cars with Mk2s (HSTs with one Mk3 and a Mk1 buffet are also everywhere). Is there any particular reason for the phenomenom of most HST sets containing no more than 1 Mk3? Were older coaches cheaper when these were first produced?

2 hours ago, Harlequin said:

Hi Newbie ,

 

There's a section of the forum for track planning questions here: https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/forum/66-layout-track-design/ You might like to post there to get the attention of the people interested in layout design. (Or ask a moderator to move this one.)

 

Here are a few things:

It looks like you might have used R1 curves in the inner circuit. Is that right? If so, be aware that most ready-to-run locos and rolling stock require at least R2 radius. (Some of the small 0-4-0s might be happy on R1 and 4-wheel wagons can work.) What do you intend to run?

 

The two circuits look a little odd in the way they change spacing - as if they can't decide whether to be double track or separate lines that just happen to be close together. But maybe you've got scenic plans that would make sense of that?

 

The journey from the inner circuit to the fiddle yard (and back) seems a bit awkward.

 

Welcome to RMWeb!

Good advice in general, as a lot of modern stock will not run on R1. If you want to use modern stock you should definitely stick to a minimum of R2, and even if you aren't right now then it will ensure you don't run into problems later on. However, if you are certain that you will only run old stock (perhaps because you intend to use this for 'dipping your toe in') then you will likely be able to get away with R1 or even less as old locos are far more tolerant of tight curves. My Lima class 47s from the 1980s managed R1 curves when that was all I had - and my Hornby Hall of a similar vinatge would have done if my tracklaying had been better (getting the rails into the fishplates would have helped), and I have seen videos of a Triang (I believe) 9F running on even tighter corners. Of course, it will still look much better if you use the largest radius possible as all set track curves are tighter than you would be likely to find on a real railway.

According to Wikipedia: "British Rail Engineering Limited's Derby Litchurch Lane Works built 52 Mark 3 DVTs to operate with Mark 2 and Mark 3 sets in push-pull mode with 86, 87 and 90 class locomotives on InterCity West Coast Main Line services from London Euston to Wolverhampton, Manchester, Liverpool and Glasgow allowing the retirement of the 81, 82, 83, 84 and 85 class locomotives"

Did introducing DVTs allow this, and if so how? If it were the case that two locos were needed on each train (one at each end) before DVTs then I would understand, as this would effectively double the number of locos available. However, further reading suggests that it was standard practise for a loco to run around its train at each end of the line. Please forgive me if I'm being dim and failing to read the article properly - its getting a little late here so I'm not at my sharpest. Thanks in advance for any information that you may be able to share.

39 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

Aren't they the same thing?

I assume that 'bubonic plague' refers to the Great Plague of 1665, while the Black Death was an earlier outbreak of the same disease in 1348.

1 hour ago, Trojmiasto said:

I need to know if there is a bargain on manners first before I just start using them frivolously...

Fancy a bargain?

Good morning, Trojmiasto. We are writing to let you know that we have an amazing price on all good manners. From now on, all good manners cost nothing! Thank you very much for reading this message. Please enjoy this opportunity and enjoy the rest of your day!

In all seriousness, I don't know whether this is a bargain as it is outside of my interests (or whether it's been covered before). It's an older model, but anything DCC fitted for under £100 strikes me as worth mentioning.

http://herefordmodels.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=340_350_354_351&products_id=12238

http://herefordmodels.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=340_350_354_351&products_id=12247

The N15  is available pre-owned from Hattons, but for slightly more.

3 minutes ago, Trog said:

Why do so many of these eco-twits have such an obsession with reopening the Great Central?

It appears a viable alternative to people who know very little about rail travel, and appeals to older people who want to 'reverse Beaching' and go back to 'the good old days'.

https://www.opentraintimes.com/schedule/H05429/2020-07-13

I assume that this a Network Rail train given that it doesn't actually go anywhere, but what is it for?

Similar services appear once or twice each day on Open Train Times and is usually cancelled (though not yet cancelled today). The train is described as a diesel loco with tonne load and leaves Kingsland Road for Temple Meads, where it reverses and runs via Bath to Chippenham. It then reverses and runs back to Temple Meads. It then reverses and runs to Westbury, before reversing and heading to St Andrews Junction for a crew change (with stops of under a minute for 'other operating reasons' at Clifton Down and Avonmouth). The train then travels to Cardiff Central, where it reverses, and begins to travel around Wales for most of the early morning. After a crew change at Newport, the train heads to Hereford for another crew change (booked on the URL - Up Relief Line?). It then reverses at Moreton-on-Lugg and returns to Hereford for a much longer stop (70 mins) for 'other operational reasons' on the DRL. The train then passes back through Wales and the Severn Tunnel, before reversing at Weston-Super-Mare and finally returns whence it came.

43 minutes ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

The outcome of Packham’s legal proceedings isn’t going to stop the “anti-brigade”.

 

Have a read of this clap trap.....

 

https://theecologist.org/2020/jul/09/struggle-stop-hs2
 

 

 

.

"There are so many massive reasons to oppose it: the ecological devastation that building the line is wreaking; the vast slug of carbon that is going into the atmosphere from its construction, and that it is planned to run mainly on fossil power."

I may be wrong, but I would be willing to put money on the fact that the author, or at least many of their supporters, are also opposed to using nuclear power. Some of them are probably opposed to wind as well. I want to drop fossil fuels as soon as possible but it becomes very hard when so-called environmentalists reject every practical alternative, often with little or no scientific justification.

39 minutes ago, St. Simon said:

Not yet, they are not approved to use the GW OLE yet, nothing is apart from Class 80xs and Class 387s
 

Simon

Why do they need to be approved separately? 25kV AC through OHLE is 25kV AC through OHLE isn't it?

20 minutes ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

Depth, depends how brave you are, I suspect the Peco could be got down to 25mm from underside of well to rail top with some shaving of the ribs on the underside: the limit is the depth of the location for the pivot, unless you are prepared to redesign this.

25mm is workable. Do you know what it would be without modification? I'd be willing to try and take it off, but how much difference would it make?

22 minutes ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

Since you can do something of a pit, but not much, I might think of cross kitting the Peco and Airfix. The best aspect of the Peco is the bridge deck pieces, designed to take rails and supply power. If all that could be 'adjusted' as required and installed on the Airfix overgirder bridge, turning on the Airfix base, and the resulting mash up sunk in a DIY shallow well you might have a goer within your restrictions. Just an idea, totally untested, and I haven't seen the Airfix unit since I was about 10 y.o..

I like the idea but I'm definitely not confident enough to try it out (I'd probably end up having to buy another turntable after ruining both of the originals).

26 minutes ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

'Adaptor plates' for code 100: there are none on the Peco unit. The flange on the edge of the well is slightly high for code 100 track rails laid direct on the same board the well is sunk into. But this doesn't matter. To eliminate the hump in the rails that would result as the rails are pushed up on the edge of the well, take your old soldering iron now used for plastic cutting etc., and meltypush the ends of the approach rails into the polystyrene until all is level. (Bodge it in short.)

That's odd. The image used on Hatton's website says that 'Adaptor plates are included for Code 75 and Code 100 rail'.

7 hours ago, DavidCBroad said:

1) 16.5mm track gauge

2) Long enough to turn an A4 (and maybe a Standard Class 9F in the future). I believe that any turntable with a deck of 250mm or more should do the job

3) Surface mounted

4) Functioning electrical connections

5) As cheap as possible

6) It would also be nice to have closely spaced exit roads, but this is a secondary consideration

 

The Dapol / Airfix does not meet 3) or 4) as it needs a pit and has no electrical connections, its my go to to create a turntable as you can shorten the deck by deleting of the four rectangular panels  to bring it down to around 65ft, big enough for 9F and I'm sure I have turned my son's A3 and A4 on mine. Electrical connections and indexing have to scratch built but its the solution I used for a visible turn table and its just awaiting motorisation. 

 

The Peco 75ft is just too big for most layouts,  It needs a pit,  A lot of work and it just gobbles space.  The Hornby is just as big, ugly, crude, cheap and doesn't have many outlets but its ready to use and its what I used as a temporary measure.

 

There are some smaller turntables for 7mm narrow gauge with 16.5mm track but they are too small for a 9F, but ideal for BLTs with smaller 4-4-0s and 0-6-0s.   

 

 

 

 

It is frustrating that the Peco turntable is so deep. It seems to do everything else well and is relatively cheap so I had considered putting a whole and fitting it. The trouble is that I have no clearance under the baseboard so it can't be deeper than 12mm unless I build up the ground level and make a whole in that. The issue is the 31mm depth, which would see the turntable sit 19mm above baseboard height The turntable would fit but the route leading up to it wouldn't. However, I have just realised that the 31mm must refer to the depth from the bottom of the well to the top of the guard rails (for packing purposes). Does anybody know the depth from the bottom of the well to the top of the rails?

To save a separate post later on, how many adaptor plates are included for code 100 and are these available separately?

I believe (though maybe I'm confused) that one of the layouts at the WoR Virtual Exhibition was a BR blue GCML layout, and that they had looked at the traffic flows on alternative routes to see what might have been able to use the GCML. The only problems are that I can't remember the name of the layout or whether it was another closed line instead of the GCML.

https://www.world-of-railways.co.uk/virtual-exhibition-layouts//charwelton-into-the-80s

And here's their thread:

1 minute ago, Ben Alder said:

I'm afraid that if #5 is your priority then you are limited to the Airfix/Dapol kit of a GW turntable. To get prototypical fidelity there is the Peco one and London Road Models and Metalsmith, the latter two having to be assembled and  considerably more expensive. South East Finecast do two kits of turntables but need work on the electrics, as would the Dapol one.

 

It's in bold because the first 4 are yes/no conditions which need to be met for the turntable to do its job, whereas 5 and 6 are to determine the best of the options meeting these criteria, with 5 being more important that 6 (as long as there are exits at least as frequently as on the Hornby R070).

I've pondered a few options on turning locos for a while, but I have decided that now is the time to install a turntable. I would like suggestions for a turntable which is suitable given my criteria:

1) 16.5mm track gauge

2) Long enough to turn an A4 (and maybe a Standard Class 9F in the future). I believe that any turntable with a deck of 250mm or more should do the job

3) Surface mounted

4) Functioning electrical connections

5) As cheap as possible

6) It would also be nice to have closely spaced exit roads, but this is a secondary consideration

The following are not important:

1) Scale (H0 vs 00)

2) Motors. My points are still manual and are likely to stay that way for some time. As a result, I have no issues with a manual turntable.

3) Prototype fidelity

Thanks in advancee for any advice.

Would you rather:

Enter an auction at £72.00 and 3 days left?

Buy it now at £120.00?

Buy it now in a box for £140.00?

Enter an auction with the price at £2,648.00 and 5 days left?

5 minutes ago, AY Mod said:

The 12.15 time feed is a dead easy comp to stand a chance of winning a Hornby Dean Single.

 

https://www.world-of-railways.co.uk/virtual-exhibitions/virtual-exhibition-2020

Is there a specific subject line needed to enter?

What proportion of seats on heritage lines and railtours should be 1st class? I am imagining that for most railtours the answer will be very high in order to justify a premium price tag, whereas on heritage lines it would be very low in order to maximise capacity. I am talking mainly about using BR Mk1s, with perhaps some GWR coaches if they are available cheaply. I am looking at a rake of 2 on my heritage line (representing 4, unless I end up with a B-set) and a rake of 4 for railtours (representing roughly 8). Any suggestions for suitable formations?

27 minutes ago, rab said:

So they're Hammant and Morgan, but home made,

and they're not sure who the maker is?????

And the brand is listed as Hornby.

20 minutes ago, corneliuslundie said:

Just try telling Americans about Middlesex!

You should also inform them that the county council's former meeting place now serves as the highest court of appeal for 13 nations and several other territories across 6 continents.

Because I feel obliged to keep the thread on track, here's some relevant news:

https://www.constructionnews.co.uk/hs2/hs2-announces-500-new-jobs-30-06-2020/

1 hour ago, DavidCBroad said:

Some of that era chassis had a plastic pickup mounting which clipped into channels in the mazak chassis with a couple of pairs of lugs. They didn't carry power.  The Fowler had several varieties of chassis so it's feasible yours has parts from different incompatible vintages.

It shares a coupled wheelbase with Thomas and the Jinties so probably shares the same pickups as contemporary iterations of these 0-6-0s 

I've found them now. I don't know whether its what you were referring to but there were a pair of clips on the lower (plastic) chassis which I had assumed were part of the way the plastic and metal chassis parts were clipped together. I've managed to insert the pickups and connect them to the motor. The electrical side is now working.

It's one formerly working model which has been out of use for a long time due to a broken right hand valve gear and sticking driving wheels (which turned out to be the pin connecting the broken valve gear to the central driving wheel, which had moved out of position and was catching on the chassis). I just need to find a replacement for the X1282 valve gear (I can only find one, and that's from a slightly suspicious ebay seller) and then it should be ready to go.

Can anybody help with this? Further reading seems to confirm that there is some sort of socket on the side of the chassis, but I still can't work out where they are.

I am trying to reassemble the remains of my old Fowler 4P no.42308, which I believe is R.055. From the service sheet it appears that there are contacts which clip into the sides of the chassis. I can't see anything on the model that would suggest how to do this. Does anybody have experience (and preferably photographs) of how this works?

Thanks in advance.

8 hours ago, relaxinghobby said:

 

 Hornby chassis was a special for the Toby model I believe.

 

 

I think that must be the case as none of the obvious models seem to share it. It surprises me but I'm not complaining as the standard 0-4-0 would never run as well.

10 hours ago, PatB said:

Dunno about its family connections, but the Toby chassis is powerful, controllable and smooth. Mine is anyway. 

As for an oversized body, he's already at least S scale. How much more oversized do you want? 

I agree that its a good chassis for a little loco. As for scale, I would imagine that the standard 0-4-0 would have been the obvious option for a standardised chassis, but if for whatever reason they were more committed to keeping the correct number of axles on Toby than the class 40/37 then they did have an option available.

11 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

I think that they used a chassis from the continental range.

 

Same one as the Spanish 0-6-0T possibly.

 

 

 

Jason

On the service sheet the Electrotren models have only three spaces for wheelsets, not the four that Toby has.