Theakerr

I am not trying to be sarcastic but sometimes I work on the basis that 10% of something is better than 100% of nothing. I also have been getting rid of stuff for an estate and still have stuff that hasn't moved so i know what you are talking about. The times and the people they are a changin.

All my tender locos are rigidly close coupled so I suspect this may make it easier to have fall plates, tender doors and loco to tender covers. My minimum radius is 36" and as all my loco doors have a bend at the midway point to accommodate the radius effect. Even viewed straight on they dont look too bad. Regarding the A4 loco to tender cover, it took me nearly 5 years and many trails that ended up in the bin before I came up with this iteration. The breakthrough was the use of a piece of a black nitrile glove. It holds its shape round corners and slight undulations because it is 'slippery'. This winter I plan on version 2 where I eliminate the dip at the loco connection. Also I guess this winter I will be busy with the airbrush correcting the cab roof. I had never noticed it before but now I see it on the A4s and others every time I look at them.

You could potentially reduce the total sales volume by putting applicable items as packs, say 4 vans, 4 wagons. By offering a small discount you might even move things faster.

First, many thanks for the pictures of the 'Yards'. As another poster has said they are remarkably normal but normal doesn't tell the complete story of how they all feed into the layout from the different directions. Very nice. Watched the Little Bytham video last night, not bad at all! Comments were requested so here are a couple. Cab doors and loco to tender coverings. I would suggest that on any express loco doing 65 mph+ the doors between the loco and the tender would have been closed. Secondly there is the loco to tender cover, especially on the A4s but also on some of the other pacifics. The loco to tender covering is a feature seen an almost every picture I have seen of an A4. My research suggests that initially it was made from a specially cut piece of neoprene like material and was close to 1" thick. So I wonder if it was an component part of the streamlining. After the war the neoprene cover was replaced by a simple tarp but all the pictures I can find show it there, rain or shine. So why it is there? I have tried to find someone who can answer, but so far have hit a blank. My suspicion based on some of my working background is that the streamlining resulted in a venturi effect at the cab tender interface that sucked in hot cinders etc.

Regarding the photos Tony, I suggest both have their place. At times it is the modelling that is the focus and in which case it is appropriate to eliminate the bumf. As I see the modelling focuses on what has been achieved, it may be a locomotive, building or the complete diorama as shown in your edited pictures. At other times the model is the focus in which case it should be shown in its context, therefore the un-editied picture would be my preferred. This allows the an understanding of how everything fits together as a total package together with the structural organization. I believe this is a modelling skill in its own right. For this reason I like to see shots of the fiddle yard. As to which should be shown, I would suggest that unless specified for whatever reason, it is determined by the photographer. They are in the position to know their target audience and what their interests are. BTW, personally i would love to see the fiddle yards on Retford and how the feed into the layout

I have played around using a L298 and the output was of course a PWM signal. The problem is that at low RPM as in a small DC brushed or can loco motor coming to a stop, i.e going through the 4V to 0V range or any loco that require less than 4V and starting from a stop (if it will start) the motor literally screams and will if not careful (according to what I have read) can burn a motor out. I have read that changing the PWM frequency can potentially eliminate this problem and I understand that later Arduino have the ability to change the PWM frequecy. However, I have not found a sketch that does this and i don't have the skill to develop my own. Background to all this is that I wanted a station stop module but could not find one that met all my criterea of which the biggest was I did not want to make any track cuts. As a result I have built a station stop module that uses a servo motor directly connected , as in mechanically, to a controller. It works pretty well but I cannot help but feel there is a better way.

The Ken Patterson stuff was a while back - 3/4 years. It was in Model Railroad Hobbyist. I tried doing a search but nothing showed up.

Kenb Patterson on Whats Neat did some pretty good videos showing how he did two/three years ago. If I remember correctly he found it necessary to make a base for the motor that he then fixed into the foam

J, should have said RC Servo motor as Simond explained. The only benifit i can see to using a L298 to drive a servo is you can do other things at the same time and whilst i am not sure I think it would be difficult to drive two servo motors doing different things at the same time. Back to my challenge, I did do some looking on both the Pololu and HobbyTronics pages and if I am reading the data correctly none will do what I want. Specifically I want to bring a small DC motor to a programmed gentle stop and a programmed gentle start. All the units there appear to cut off at about 4 volts, so they will go from 4 to 0 directly.

I would if someone with a better memory than mine could provide me with the pages where the previous J6 build was discussed. I have completed a search but get nothing. I am in the process of ordering a J6 for my winter project.

First time I have seen this site and whilst there is nothing for me their is some amazing stuff here. Very impressed

Deleted found what I was looking for. BTW how do you delete a post?

Re 'loco sanitizing' the simple answer is to let it stand for two to three weeks. There are data showing how long the virus stays around on various surfaces and it is not very long.

As I understand it the Pololu DRV8825. is specifically for a stepper motor. The L298 on the other hand will drive a servo or, my special interest, a small DC motor. So is their a better unit than the dated L298? Thanks

For us un-initiated name one or two. Thks

Speaking of Cats and Model Railways. I don't know how many here can remember Felix the Cat, but one of the things Felix could do was shoot up vertically when surprised. Now he was a cartoon but one of our cats managed to get into the model railway room and was standing on the tracks when I saw her. I had one of those Relco high voltage track cleaners tied into the track and I was able to sneak in and fire it up with the cat still on the tracks. They really can go about 2/3 feet vertically.

Have just started my trial of Accurascale Instanta and Screw Link Couplings. I have installed one of each on a Van that runs in my 'high Speed Fitted Freight'. The coupling does not have a long draw bar, so it is not possible to fix it on the inboard side. I used 'Gorilla' super glue. A coupling in the 'high speed freight' will undergo probably the most brutal test any coupling could have. The train composes of about 20 Vans with a very abrupt jerk start as a result of my automated system. It goes from 0 to full running speed almost instanainioulsy. So far the test van has seen 5 stop/start cycles and all is good. I will continue to test and report back. However, based on this short test I feel I can say with some degree of confidence that in a more gentle start situation they will work.

Politicians

Atom, see above. It is a perfect drop in fit. Only issue is the new chassis is lighter than the old one and depending on your needs you may need to add extra weight.

It is the new DCC ready chassis. BC (Before Covid) by watching around i was able to pick up several B1s with then new chassis fairly cheaply, pounds 50 to 60. Several had had their body badly weathered and I suspect some came from individuals who had gone for the Hornby B1 which, I have to admit, is a better model. However, I had the Bachmann bodies and the new chassis was a lot cheaper than building one.

In 1969 after working for 5 years and night school I was accepted at York Teachers Training College to teach Chemistry and Maths as a secondary subject. It would have been a 15 month course if I remember correctly. I was also offered a place at the University of Surrey in a four year degree course. I really did want to be a teacher and my girlfriend at the time also favored that. However, I could see the writing on the wall for teaching, both politically and academically and with some reluctance I went for the degree. Did I ever make the correct choice? I look at teaching today and I have to despair. There is no way, especially as a male, I could have survived. However my degree in Metallurgy ended up giving me a pretty good and interesting working life (until Management became the MBA Management Style - bit like teaching?). Further, it has provided me with an adequate pension sufficient to carry out my various hobbies and buy a beer without having to wonder where the money will come from. One interesting aside, to me at least, is that here in Ontario the media did a bit of an 'expose' on Public and Private Schools (Remember in Canada a Public School is just what it says as is a Private School). One of the observations was that the highest percentage of Private School attendees was Children whose parents taught in the Public School System. On another note, Tony, you are absolutely correct about a servo motor and its torque. At the beginning when I was learning how to set servos up, I did manage to lift several signals right off their mounts. Fortunately I use magnets to place and hold the signal, so the damage was minimal although I did have to replace several activation wires.

I would also recommend the mega-points unit for servo signal operation. I have two units and am very happy with it. Since all my signals are made from Ratio plastic kits and are a little bit fragile I like the ability to control the speed thus minimizing the shock load and I can set the end points with some accuracy. However I have managed to break several weight arms and now use MSE metal ones. I do not use the bounce mechanism because I don't find it realistic. I suspect it is the old problem of scaling time. Since the operation is controlled by a simple on/off switch it should be possible to interlock with points.

Depends on what you want to do. For example all my signals (00) the mount point is at the setting closest to the horn. I only need minimal movement with good control. For one point motor I have used the hole furthest from the horn but in order to get sufficient linear movement I installed a L cam using it to magnify the linear movement.

Just for Comparison, Mayflower on 'New Waltham'. New Bachmann Chassis, Re numbered and detail such as the plaque added, cross head slide angle corrected, real coal

And just what do you do in your spare time?