HLT 0109

'Morning All. Job done (subject to testing)! I had a look on the Bachmann website and found a link to both Branchline and GF service sheets - but both produced the sheet for GF version. It is possible they are identical in design but it would have been good to see a statement to that effect. I had a bit of a moment - having removed the bogie, there was no cardan shaft! Fortunately, I had seen a little earlier on my desk, what looked like a bit of spru from a Kadee coupler pack, that I had decided not to throw away . . . It looks to me that, in reassembly, the trick is to tighten the fixing screw for the bogie sufficiently to restrict the fore-and-aft pivot of the bogie, whilst not stiffening its lateral turn, I am thinking that, in coming to an abrupt stop, the bogie pivoted backwards, taking the housing for the drive shaft forwards sufficiently to release the shaft. If I have got it right, perhaps the problem will not recurr. Testing to be done with body removed. Thanks to everyone. Harold.

Peter, Yes, that is what I was suggesting. During my playing, I wondered what would happen if i inseerted a ray number between two existing ones - or even if it would let me do it. It worked perfectly - I put my new ray between 4 & 5, numbered it 5 and all subsequent rays numbers increased by one. I thought I might have to reprogram them all. Hope it gives you a good result. Harold.

Many thanks Gentlemen. A bit late to try now - a job for the morning I think. 34C - I will have a look on the Bachmann site for the other MUs you mention - the only one for the 108 appear to be the 2mm version attached to my post #3 Harold.

Phil, Having removed the body, I am faced with the business end shown in the attached photos - one rather shaky image. Harold.

Thanks Phil - let's see how I get on. Harold.

Thanks Phil, I did print off the service sheet - just after a made the post! I attach a copy - but I see it is a Graham Farish document and therefore probably correct for a 2mm version and perhaps not for a 4mm. There does not appear to be a Branchline version. Although i can identify from it, the shaft you refer to (Part no 4), I don't find the document clear as to how to access it. It looks as if I have to remove the PCB (part no 3) but on mine everything is enclosed in a black box - possibly the unnumbered box drawn to the right of the PCB - and I would be concerned about which screws to remove (the drawing does not show them). The presence of the sound decoder and speaker wires will no doubt complicate things. I would like to think I could do this myself but perhaps leaving it to the professional would be best. Harold. GF_cl_108_v2.pdf

My six-year old class 108 DMU has lost drive from the motor to the power bogie following a derailment at a point set against it. The train is sound fitted (Loksound v4 with SWD sound) and all soounds work but the train does not move. If the sound is switched off, the motor can be heard responding to the throttle. I removed the body hoping to see what the problem was but stopped short when all I could see was the motor cover and I have no instructions for dismantling. the decoder seems to be taped to the side of the motor cover and the speaker slotted in at the end of the cover - between the cover and the loco body. Does anyone know what will have happened and how I could fix it? Thanks, Harold.

Gentlemen, I too have been playing with my turntable - and I must confess that I do have a misalignment problem with a 180 - not noticed it before as the TT is on a lower level so not readily visible from above. Clearly it has not caused a problem as I have been using it regularly for five years. However, those looking for the cause might try this: When my TT misaligned by 0.5mm or so, I discovered that, if I pushed sideways against the deck at the offending end, the whole bridge lifted slightly at that side - ie in its natural position, it was slightly tilted. When pushed as described, the track aligned. Thus, in my case, it appears to be a phyisical problem of the socket in which the pivot of the bridge sits, being slightly oval - at least that is what I think. I must say, that the misalignment is not the same with each ray - and the closer the alignment after a 180, the less sideway rock there is with the deck. I tried a work-around. In Peter's problem with ray 3, if the bridge position is programmed to be (say) 0.5mm short of where it should be at the cab end then, after a 180 there will be 0.5mm less of a misalignment with the other end - possible sufficient to prevent a derailment. It is not a perfect remedy but may be the "least worst" solution. Interestingly, although the bridge normally turned clockwise when asked to do a 180, it did occasionall turn anti-clockwise - didn't affect the outcome. All testing was done with the Heljan controller not my NCE stuff. I said previously that I do have two rays opposit one another - rays 5 & 9. Until today I have not programmed ray 9 but used ray 5 when wanting to access the other end. Today though I have programmed ray 9 (which is only a mis-alignment amount away from the opposit end of 5) and it works. Regarding the number of the ray at 180 from a programmed ray, I suspect there isn't one. The Heljan instructions say that rays 1 & 2 are the opposite ends of the calibration point (which is why we have to start at 3. If I am correct (and my experience with my rays 5 & 9 today suggest I am) there would appear to be no reason why the non-cab end of ray 3 can't be 4. Thus each cab end would be an odd number and the others even. Harold.

Peter, I think it worth doing what Pete suggests - ie " Have you tried marking one out and then rotating the bridge 180° to see if one or both sides re-align?" At least you will have an indication then as to whether it is a software or hardware problem. Also, as you have other rays from the TT, does the mis-alignment happen at each of them (as ianjeffrey asked)? For example, having set the exits so that alignment is correct for the cabin end of the bridge, if you do a 180 at each of them, does the fault recurr? I had a close look at mine this afternoon while doing a 180 using the Heljan controller rather than my NCE powercab. As you suggested, it turns clockwise with each press of the Go button. There is a small difference in alignment but I have never had a derailment as a result. Like yours, the alignment is correct at the cab end but after a 180, the bridge stops about 0.5mm short of the correct position. I don't have "a straight ahead" exit at that spot so didn't check the other end - but I do have one in another position so will check tomorrow. Looking at your photos, in the first one, the rail on the left of the picture appears to be already slightly out of position, and on the second photo, the discrepancy seems greater on the same side - but of course, it is the other rail. If the problem is only at ray 3, you could bend the left approach rail slightly left (pictures 1 & 2). If you don't want to refer the problem to Heljan, is there any mileage in bending the errant ends of the rails to make then align?!! A bit drastic and needs careful thought that it wouldn't cause problems in other positions - might be easier than moving the whole of each rail. Just had another thought - if you were to reprogram the exit so that the alignment at the cab end was correct for the left rail in the top picture (or even a tiny bit short) then after a 180, the alignment in the second picture would be closer - possible sufficient not to cause a derailment. I hope some of this is helpful. Harold.

Peter, I have had this turntable for five years and never experienced the problem your photos show. Has the problem always been there or has it developed over time? When you press Go twice, does the bridge continue to turn in the same direction or reverse its direction? Before I had the Heljan, I had the Hornby turntable and gave up on it because it never aligned properly if the direction of rotation was changed, but I have not had the problem with the Heljan one. I don't see how the problem can arise from your programming, since the 180 degree turn is preset. I think it woould be well worth contacting Hejan in Denmark about it - I created a problem with mine when something was dropped onto the bridge and they were most helpful. I used email to contact them and eventually sent the whole thing to them for testing (not easy after it was fully installed). I had to pay for the repair - it was my fault after all - but it has worked well ever since. Their website shows the following link Heljan@Heljan.dk Good luck! The current performance is clearly unsatisfactory. Harold.

As far as I am aware, the fitting to N gauge points is the same as for 00 gauge - ie by poking four tabs through slots in the sleepers from underneath the point, and then twisting the tabs so that they cannot fall out. If that is so, the motor can be released from the point in case of need, by straightening the tabs and withdrawing the motor from underneath the baseboard - no need to remove the point. The main difficulty is getting the (large) hole in the right place so that the point, when fitted, aligns perfectly with the track. If the hole is made too big, support for sleepers may be lost. I used this method when making a fan of sidings on a baseboard of 12mm thick plywood. I thought it might be preferable to using the extended pin that would have been necessary in my case. Harold.

Thanks Nigel. I'll pursue the reblow possibilities. Harold.

Terry/David. Tried both suggestions - no effect. ie adjusting the values of CVs 121, 122 and 123 has no effect on any sound levels - all values are now set to 0. However, adjusting the value of CV63 affects not only the volume of F1 but also of all other sounds, so the reletive sound levels remains constant. I have now set CV63 to 15 which makes the horn kinder on the ears but it is still the most prominent sound - I guess that is the way thought processes were 9 years ago or so. I understand that Loksound v3.0 did not have the facility to set individual sounds levels but it seems strange that advantage was not taken of the additional facilities available with the introduction of v3.5. Anyway, thank you for your suggestions. Harold.

Worth trying - thanks Terry.

I am running a Bachmann Class 108 DMU fitted with a Loksound v3.5 decoder. In JMRI I have a shuttle arrangement as part of which the dual horn is activated just before the train leaves each station and i would like to reduce the volume of that sound. I can adjust the overall sound volume via CV63 but changing the value in CV121 has no effect. My supplier suggested trying CV122 (which is the bell, in case the two CVs had been switched) but that also had no effect onthe horn volume. At the moment both CVs are set to 0 and the horn still sounds when activated by my Power Cab. The sound files are Mr Soundguy if that makes a difference. I should be grateful if someone can tell me whether I am trying to achieve the impossible, or if there is something I am missing. Many thanks, Harold..

That's interesting Rob. The worst thing about Kadees is their propensity for shedding the little coil spring that lets the knuckle flex - so be very careful to handle them wothout touching it! I have cursed many a lost one or three but recently, having acquired a great set of fine tweezers, I have had much greater success in refitting them. First thing is to work over a plain white box with no joins or flaps in the base. Good luck. Harold.

Depends! There is a large range to choose from; the NEM ones (with fishtails) come in four shaft lengths but only one shaft position - ie low - so that the knuckle sits high relative to the shaft. If the NEM pocket is set at a suitable height, then it is dead easy to fit them - pull out the TLC and push in the Kadee - but you need to select the correct shaft length to get close-coupling without buffer lock. If there is no NEM socket on the rolling stock you have to remove the fixing for the TLCs and replace it with the box that comes with the chosen Kadee. Kadee has changed its numbering since I did mine but the old No 5 suits most situations, even if you have to use a bit of ingenuity - you may be able to fit with a screw or you may be able to use plastic cement. The non-NEM units come in three different shaft heights and there are different shaft lengths/fixings/ways of working. I don't know how familar your with the range but here is a link to the website https://kadee.com/ I hope this helps. Harold.

Cork under the track itself is a handy way of creating a ballast shoulder if you need one - depends on era and whether running lines or shed area. It can also be useful for burying things in eg wire-in-tube for points (thinking 00 gauge here). Hiding gaps under buildings (as you say) is another benefit provided you get the location of the buildings right at the planning stage. Depending on how thick your ply top is, you may find that cork overlay helps stop drumming. If the cork is not stuck down well, it can cause undulating track. My layout is on two levels. The top one was the one I cut my teeth on and I used cork under the track but not over the whole of the boards. When I decided to change the track plan (!) it was doubly difficult because of the need to move the cork as well as the track. Also, I have both running lines and a shed area so I there is a ballast shoulder in the ash in that area. I could of course have overlaid cork between the sidings in that area had I thought of it - I guess I still could . . . On the lower level I have a branch line to a private coal mine and another shed area. I omitted the cork altogether so there is no shoulder even on the branch line - can't say I notice its absence. Uses less ballast without! Just a few thoughts for your consideration. Harold.

If you do so, Rob, it is worth buying the height gauge even though I say the height is not that critical - it gives a standard to aim for . . .! Harold.

Rob, As I developed my layout, I changed from Hornby track to Peco flexi-track and, at the time I had tension lock couplings on all my rolling stock. I bought a number of the Peco uncouplers and found them completely unreliable even with Peco track. In my case, part of the resaon was that the coupler heights and sizes varied across my stock and, in the case of one of my diesel lcoos (bearing in mind they are all under ten years old) the droop of the coupling in its NEM socketand the low-slung motor bogie meant that both elements struck the ramps. I tried filing down the ribs but the outcome was not satisfactory so I abandonned the ramps. In the end I changed couplings to Kadees and have recently installed a number of their delayed action uncoupling magnets. I find this setup very good (if not 100% successful). And I have not found the coupler heights to be as critical as the measurements given by the manufacturer would imply - ie there is a bit of tolerance. Harold.

Is the pony truck in each case fixed in the same manner as on Hornby's L1 - ie a sloppy sort of arrangement that allows the axle to move forward and backwards as it pivots? When the L1 first came out it suffered a problem very like OP describes and the cure is to find some method of controlling the fore/aft movement. As I am unfamiliar with either the K1 or P2 models I can't suggest a remedy for them but perhaps this might be checked as a possible cause. In the case of my L1, the pony truck would stay turned (and canted) after negotiating a curve or point and then ride over the inside rail. I hope this is some help. Harold.

So does Isopropyl Alcohol rubbed on with a cloth. I have not intentionally tried it on loco bodies but, since i use it for wheel cleaning and track cleaning, I feel sure it must have come into contact with the bodies and I have not seen any ill effects. Unlike WD40, IPA evaporates very quickly . Harold.

Thank you gentlemen for your comments. I understand the ramifications of the different approaches a little better now. For ease of installation, I havae decided to go with the AC/DC regulator after finding this unit: http://onlinemodelsltd.co.uk/product/dcc16v-ac24v-dc-to-12v-dc-power-supply-perfect-for-powering-asp1-modules-via-dcc/ It's more expensive than some units but has the advantage of being sourced in the UK and having three, 12v DC outputs in case I find the current demands exceed 500ma. Should it not be satisfactory, the separate DC power supply will be plan B. Harold.

One of these perhaps? https://www.ebay.co.uk/b/Industrial-Switching-Mode-Power-Supplies-SMPS/181922/bn_16568915 - The 12v 2a version from the 2nd advertiser down looks to be more than adequate and is their cheapest. Harold.

I must confess Phil, that most of what you said went over my head - but thank you for your comments. Nick has given some of the answer I think. Nick, my IRDOTs are 2D so perhaps use a litle more power. I will consider my options overnight. Making gradual progress with wiring terminals 3 & 4 of the IRDOTs to the AIU - not happy working under a 3ft high baseboard, trying to put 7/0.2 wire into the terminals! Thanks, Harold.