Richard Johnson

*** Hello Steve The Gaugemaster distribution agreement covers the UK. Distribution outside the UK is a DCCconcepts issue... If you are intending to stock then you should also be looking across other parts of the range. Email me and I will discuss off line. Richard

***Yes, (Nice to hear from you BTW) but... Being fair to RMwebs rules, thats a little too blatantly commercial for "fair use of forum" .... call me :-) Richard

*** Hi (1) Last question first. Yes, there will be an insulated fishplate. I admit I resisted it for a while because it will necessarily be thicker than I'd like its look to be in order to retain durability, but in the end practicality ruled :-). (2) Re chair availability, We are looking at a range of brass chairs to complement the pre-etched/pre-cut copper-clad turnout frets we currently offer. They are a bit of a lower priority as we have so much on the go right now... but will be done in 2018. Why are we considering this? My current thought is that the wide variety of trackwork needed for realistic layouts means bespoke pointwork is still needed, and cottage industry chairs are way, way too expensive overall, so we will use high end high volume brass casting processes (that also means less clean-up for you and mis-casting waste for us) with a specific goal. That is, for example, a complete turnout fret + a set of brass turnout chairs = RTR Peco code 75 turnout price, but this is a target, not a promise. (3) NO we will not be making any form of transition fishplates. It is already very easy to do. Actually the final result wasn't as close to P75 height-wise as I had initially intended, but its still quite simple to join them for ANY modeller with average skills. File the 75 to leave a thin flat base and take a tiny bit off the lower part of the BH rail (which is scaled from drawings, not made to a modelling height in 'thou) and solder together. It's a 5 minute job with hand files and Iron. (Same for C100, with a little more packing) (4) Angled vs vertical rail. Its no big deal. It is remarkable how flexible SS BH rail is - it curves very easily and naturally so its actually far easier to lay well than any form of FB track. Re the angled rail vs vertical, the same applies and its very easy to make the transition. Just use our very strong BH rail fishplates - before you fix the last 2 or 3 chairs in your turnout (or re-sweat the last couple after joining) - the rails will naturally transition from angled to vertical on your point-work if held with them. You will probably not be able to see the transition. (5) Re "I will be using some Stainless Steel I already have to check solderability" - Its not really a valid test. Remember that there are MANY, many grades of SS... and not all solder as easily as ours does. (6) Tie Bars... Yes, I do understand this issue. This is the one turnout area we have still not finalised quite to my satisfaction. I want a realistic appearance AND durability, so a combination of realistic / cosmetic and strong is wanted - that means re-inventing the wheel at the moment and we are experimenting with many ideas right now. Its a real challenge. ALL positive suggestions for tie-bar structure are welcome - off forum if you prefer!. --------------------------------------- And... BTW - We are also releasing our above-board Cobalt-SS motor soon as an addition to our Cobalt range (It is small - and Stepper motor controlled ~ ready to go for both DC and DCC users). Keeping this addition in relation to THIS track-related thread - At the same time we are releasing two "trackwork-related" things you should hopefully like: (a) For those who prefer it, pre-made working point rodding/cranks etc. in brass/stainless steel.... so with the TINY Cobalt-SS motors you can have truly "Rod-worked" turnouts. (b) Nicely scaled models of Westinghouse EP motors as a cosmetic accessory. These were used for a VERY long time on UK's railways so All should/will be prior to Warley, hopefully earlier. Cobalt-SS and Westinghouse motors will be first, Rodding say 8 weeks later... Regards Richard

*** Hello Phil As always its up to the individual, but I'd not recommend pins in thin-sleepered track and my own preference is to glue - so If I am not doing the << "Pre-fit, lift, glue painted overall on track bed and then lay track and ballast at once" >> method,... I will then tend to use a (good quality) PVA bottle with a small nozzle, pre-cut and prepare the track ready, then run glue along the first 4 sleepers + every 4th sleeper or so. This takes only about 30 seconds per length so its quicker than most might think. With both methods I then weight evenly using weights made by using a house brick glued to bits of ply or MDF - with half a dozen or so 100mm x 300mm mdf + Brick "weights" I find that by the time I've used the last of them, I can usually lift #1 to keep going. When the track is finished, the weights can be disposed of as they cost virtually nothing - there is no shortage of bricks left for the taking and offcuts are free :-) :-) regards Richard

*** Patience is a virtue thats essential when dealing with Forums, some more than others. With genuine respect for the sane modellers out there - it sometimes seems similar to being a visitor at an old folks home and needing to introduce / explain things every single visit... Or training Goldfish LOL Please shoot me if I ever get that way.... Availability: I clearly stated in an earlier post that the BH track is complete and ready to ship but awaiting delivery instructions for the UK - any delays being created by the UK Financial year, not our production timing!. So... What GM's site says re stock is hardly relevant. As log as you do not want more than 40+ kilometres of it or so, its available in any quantity as soon as we can ship it. ---------------------------------------------------- I am not bothering with detailed point-work discussions because its in development. Its commerically confidential and that trumps forum discussion. Tooling is underway. Wait. I can only re-state yet again that we will do our best to make it broadly usable but will NOT overly compromise its visual and running quality to try to create an impossible "Universality". That would be silly. If it will run most reasonabe wheelsets nicely and look correct... and if you cannot SEE the difference the actual gauge will be irrelevant. It is anyway almost imevitable that it will actually have slight gauge variances throughout the turnout length anyway - certainly enough to horrify the vernier obsessives :-) :-). The ONLY important thing to me - it WILL most definitely run a wide variety of wheelsets well - including stock with current Bach or H wheels and be quite comfortable with most of the cottage industry offerings too. Bear in mind the fine-ness of our own wheel sets - perhaps the most consistent quality and happily usable with OO, EM and P4 - when we say that. Other questions: SS is not hard to solder (yet again). The no clean flux is NOT the same as the Carrs... it is a far more sophisticated product. Its in sotck in a few places and GM should not run out - and - there will be LOTS of it available in UK as soon as we arrive. Ditto for the Silver-bearing low temperature S179 solder we offer. Martin You said: <<< There has been a very long lead time on these and similar announced products, and could yet be a lot longer. Many layouts are held up waiting for these products. I don't think it is unreasonable for manufacturers to provide information when asked. Just saying it will be good, wait and see, isn't much help if you are trying to plan a layout or decide which track will be suitable for your existing models. If modellers go ahead and use something else for lack of information, manufacturers have only themselves to blame for loss of sales. >>> That is both quite wrong and not a little unfair - (1) Unreleased products are commerial in confidence. If data is withheld its because we are investing lots of money from OUR pockets, see no need to prewarn competitors of detail and there is no "Right to know" other than for investors. I do my best to give what I can but if its to simply give those with no stake a chance to play the usual games, then perhaps I should stop. As to timing - I'd like it quickly too - I am a also a modeller - have no more free time because we are busy and so will use these points in my own "next layout" and so I am no more or less waiting then you. They will run/look/work well and be as quick as we can do it sensibly. (2) I am anyway providing FAR more information than ANY other supplier does or probably ever will do. (3) Delivery has most certainly NOT been slow - Having previously indicated an interst in doing it - our official launch announcement of bullhead track in RTR format was made in March 2016. It is now July 2 2016. WHAT is "Long" about that delivery - I'd say it was an exceptionally short lead time as major manufacturing goes... I defy anyone to cut tools as complex as these faster in fact. (4) Pointwork will take a few months more because its far more complex than plain track - and as each tool will cost as much as an Audi A6 Quattro, I think you could fairly give us a little time to get it right. Richard

***Good grief... I am simply amazed at the faffing around about gauge. Nobody on this forum thread will have stock that will not run really nicely on it unless their stock is way out of spec is the real point, and yes, it is 16.5mm gauge. (Not that it its an issue anyway in reality - if I had made it to 16.2 <<and clearly nobody could decide one way or another when seeing the photographs>>, and your stock and locos still ran well, would it ACTUALLY matter at all??) The inclined rails make no difficulty in the bending. It lays flat if laid with sensible standard tracklaying methods. Personally I prefer just a little glue and thats what is recommended in the instruction with each length. Basically - It lays, runs and looks nice, and is easy to ballast well unlike thicker sleeper track - I can't offer any more useful comment than that. Availability: NOW really - its made and waiting, but its the end of the UK financial year so stock shipping into our distributors is delayed by their EOY processing time. Regards Richard

*** Our testing was in depth - you do not risk problems when the associated costs are so high. It is compatible woth almost everything produced in the last 30+ years. You will have to go back to wrenn/triand/dublo and a few odd anachrnoisms from the 25 years or more ago to find problems. Unbelievably we also tried current Marklin simply because of the pizza cutter wheels and it ran OK - you could just feel the chairs if you pressed down on the van but otherwise it was running fine. Richard

*** It is indeed :-). Richard

*** Yes, the rail is stainless steel. It looks like steel and does not oxidise or yellow like Nickel silver. No we have not literally scaled things - we have kept to what we feel is the best visual balance. It looks right according to those who have seen it. Every single length has a small instruction sheet with it discussing cutting, fixing, ballasting and soldering. It is NOT hard. For those who prefer, while its not my favourite approach, you can of course solder to the supplied phosphor bronze fishplates very easily and as they are of a material that will not react badly with the rail, good results will happen. No, its not hard to solder. No its not problemmatic. No its not above normal temperatures either - It is quite normal to solder SS at higher heat than Steel, Brass or NS. No - just like soldering to NS with "other brands", it will not melt the surrounds if you have even reasonable soldering ability. No the flux we recommend is not "Strong flux" - Unlike stronger SS fluxes sold elsewhere, it is very human safe and simply a carefully formulated no-clean flux that will not hurt copper wire. ANY modeller should be able to get a good result. Like all soldering jobs its about the right materials, heat energy delivery and cleanliness. As one who solders all of the time and teaches the subject too, I'd recommend 40+ watts for any soldering job.... whether it be small SMT parts or rail soldering. Fast delivery of the right heat energy will ensure you never melt anything. * Iron set to maximum heat if you have a soldering station.(You are always there anyway with most stick irons with no control!). * Use DCCconcepts no-clean flux. If you use another flux that works, fine, but make sure it does not hurt the copper in your wiring! This flux is also usable for all other hobby things and works really well - (we have never had feedback on it less than "this is the best we have ever used). * Use DCCconcepts 179 solder or equivalent. The solder you choose MUST contain silver. You will also find this solder exceptional for NS or brass by the way. ------------------------------------------- As indicated in the previous posts, pointowrk is moving ahead quite quickly and will be to the standards that a caring modeller will appreciate :-) Regards Richard

*** First, thanks for the kind words... I'd not normally comment on a thread like this but there are several good/fair questions among the comments. Settle is not open yet - We are doing a huge renovation (think "old axe, new head and new handle too" level) so its a total gut and replace for whats there.... basically everything except exterior walls and roof!. It takes time. we hope for August late, but I am a realist and think that no matter how hard staff work on it... September is probable. Re replacements: If we realise the probable issue and have reconfirmed its not user issues, we hate waste so do not ask for return.... its quicker and easier to send new straight away. (The real secret is nice customers and good communicators get top service... grumpy one take just a little longer :-). Re the sticking units, we know the problem isn't your fault - or ours: It was a poorly managed injecton mould process that created an ever so slightly uneven shrinkage in case plastic - B#(*^$ annoying as they tested perfect on manufacture, work well when installed by the user then start sticking later. To make it worse the gentlest of taps frees them! It affected only part of one batch but really inconvenienced all of us from start to finish - I am sorry. (The plastic manufacturer / moulding company was fired BTW) There is actually a very easy fix for those with good hands.... but we do of course replace rather than make customers rework. If anyone has these I can happily send you the easy rework instructions as well as new ones... so you have a few freebies in the spares box that work well! YES - if we replaced now we'd do it with current models. Omega for original analog, Digital for original digital. Kind regards Richard DCCconcepts

*** Yes indeed... I am delighted that this project is on time and really does meet our quality promise. (1) Legacy models is a brand name we have created for our 'Scale model" items and will grow quite quickly in range. Re the Bullhead track range: We visited our manufacturer to review the final packaging / assembly quality of the flex track, and we approved full production less than two weeks ago. It was all as expected and was given the go ahead immediately. It is in packs of 12 and each length is individually packed in its own plastic sleeve within the box (So it can also be sold singly). There are 25 really high quality bullhead fishplates in each 12 pack as a bonus for buying a box. The track itself is lovely - sleepers have differing very fine woodgrain which differs sleeper-to-sleeper and the rails are properly angled as per the prototype. Rail-head height of the finished track is a perfect match for Peco code 75 too. There will be an initial delivery by air to DCCconcepts UK / Gaugemaster our UK distributors and DCCconcepts Australia within a week or so... So it will be available very soon from your local retailer. (2) All rail including blades is solid rail. The points/blades are milled solid rail too. I am sure you would agree that nothing else would look right! kind regards Richard PS: Initial point-work development is well and truly underway and progressing well too

*** Flexible BH track is super close now. Literally being assembled reeady for my final sign off at our Mfr now. Points as you may imagine need a little more time... so not just yet as they are a complex subject that must be absolutely right. Hopefully we will be able to show you something more soon though. Richard

*** Yes, when we are ready to show them, I will add an image or two. Whether they are pilot models or full off-tool images is the question as progress is quite good at this point in time. Richard

*** In relation to Gauge, the objective is best possible running for RTR with the best visual appeal overall, especially at the common crossing. As I have said elsewhere there are limits to what I wish to discuss as yet as it is a commercial issue, but good common sense can draw fair conclusions. It will look and run well. As to using it outside... The material is at least as stable as those who claim it is OK - but it simply makes no sense to me to use finescale track in a hostile environment. I'd suspect local forna and accident will be more the issue in most places than light.... however NO brand is stable long term outside as I have proven with tests over many years - UV is certainly less of an issue than where I did the tests but its still an issue nevertheless... as one reply above seems to reconfirm.. A discount? I have no idea, you will need to ask your local shop. No, I will not consider making a scissors crossing.... Sorry. Regards Richard DCCconcepts

*** Thank you Martin - really useful pragmatic advice.... and helpful photos too. Richard

*** Its interesting to see the comments. Thank you. If we leave out the "inside or outside" issue and consider (my own) modelling preferences - To me a single slip is an excellent choice as most station related point-work minimised facing points on running lines - and long Back-in sidings were common / main line passing loops were comparatively rare pre WW2 as far as I am concerned as an MR/LMS Modeller - this continued most places for a very large part of the steam era. Therefore to me points + slip rather than diamond is the logical sequence. Inside or outside is just a decision issue related to it but I do like the look of an outside slip :-). We could possibly do both of course? I DO know how hard slips can be in OO... The K crossing gaps in shallower slips become seriously tight in OO if you are not careful - I have a couple I built not long ago and they ended up at 0.8mm at the K because there was simply NO room for more the way I built them. Impossible for Hornby and Bachmann RTR as their ex factory BTB often varies by more than that! ----------------------------- Re the track centres, its a good question. The modeller in me says "just cut to suit" but I know I have to think deeper than that. We are not creating a lego or set-track type relationship so I can think of it as simply a decision and a small drawing change. My own though process says keep it close to prototype, but that will mean transitions + expanded centres on curves. What do YOU think or want? Richard

*** Yes, Average modeller has quite a depth of precedence and there was no intention to hijack - it's just a word really and doesn't really suit our intention that well anyway. How to better qualify it? I'll find the right simple words one day :-). For now, we are trying quite hard to make it as well as possible for the modeller who cares but doesn't have the confidence or perhaps time to build. I'd like to hope we'll succeed in making it hard to see the difference so that trackwork is a truly positive part of the model scene... without breaking the bank cost-wise at the same time. Some answers: * The plain track is looking really nice and we'll be packing it a little differently too. You will see that AND its market price quite soon, with delivery close behind. * Pointwork - The info below is trying to answer most of the above questions without saying too much, or of course making committments or promises I cannot keep: Delivery: When - Plain track is imminent, first pointwork is planned for delivery this year - that is still is my fervent hope but it'll be tight. After the first ones the rest will be easier as we will have solved some interesting issues. Price: Reasonable. it will not be as cheap as a peco code 75 nor as dear as some common currently used kits and definitely WAY below any other chaired RTR price. Challenges: Many including who to please most :-). Big ones include realistic approaches to tie-bars so a modeller will see something nice that is also robust. That is an interesting challenge. Several different materials will be needed other than the main base material. Sequence: We have to accept that space will always be an issue for most customers so we are taking a middle position that we hope satisfies most too. We feel that the "mid" choices are first - so appx equivalent to B7 or similar in points, followed by outside slip and catch point (1 blade). Then probably a #5 equivalent pair and diamonds for the #7 and # 5's. The rest, including larger points and outside slip to follow if my sanity holds up :-). 3-way and double slips will be a challenge, but are fortunately rare enough on a realistic model to be much later and anyway... also less of an issue. Specific questions above: THIS range will not have kits - but we do intend to do some as time allows... Mainly to make our pre-cut frets into a full kit at a reasonable price - kits wil have all brass chairs and premade common crossing... They will actually be dearer than the RTR points but at a reasonable price compared to other offerings from the trade. Its NOT a high priority for us though, and EM and P4 may unfortunately still miss out on the frets themselves as required quantities to cut them economically are actually quite high. EM and P4 i general: You have my respect BUT it's simply not viable in ready to run as quantities are just not there. I really am sorry... it is not that I would not love to do it but there is NO way to make it commercialy positive for us as an option. I will probably create reasonable price common crossings though and top quality brass chairs will become VERY cheap when we do them. I am looking at that as part of the overall production issue to see if its practical. Other: DCCconcepts moving: We are expanding logically / growing rather than moving. We are definitely coming to UK as UK and Europe are critical to our future and I will take up residence there reasonably soon... but Australia will retain some exellent people and will stay a very important part of everything we do. A question from me: I must confess to being quite surprised to see so little comment related to the fact that we have worked hard to adjust costs and steer our distributors to significantly lower ALL of our pricing as one of the positive effects of this move though... Especially when increasing prices always results in screams of pain from many! I thought the market needed a positive price story after so many tales of woe from others in relation to costs. Future questions from you: I will answer semi regularly (weekly or so) so please do ask them. I need to keep you informed and will do so if I can, but there may be the odd vague answer as I need to communicate without also helping others along the same road :-) Kind regards Richard DCCconcepts

Unfortunately no, not unless EM increases exponentially in its hobby participation level - This applies equally to both EM and P4 which are simply not economically sensible for this sort of project. Richard

*** The top of the bullhead rail exactly matches the top of the code 75 peco if both are laid on the same surface or trackbed. This can only be achieved with thinner sleepers. Richard

*** Hi Martin, Fair comment and of course as usual quite correct, and I am aware of the timing of introduction of REA standards in general terms, but I needed some sort of "near equivalent description" to give a context that the greater masses will perhaps register with in relation to its overall size and usefulness, so chose that. No confusion in my mind at all though :-) *** Hi Nick, NO, "Holiday snap" wasn't a cheap shot any more than a P4 modeller referring to his train-set as many do. - it was just an attempt to be light hearted. As to the the major issue - any such assumption is goind to lead to 1+1 = 3.675 type errors. Ascribing our efforts to Slaters drawings was a huge leap of your own imagination rather than a minor error.... as is assuming we used one drawing and that the one we chose might coincidentally include "an error by the Midland railway" at that. We have on hand literally hundreds of original drawings, no mean feat as the core of original track archives often seemed better hidden than Atlantis during our search. Remember too that: (1) The target is the 99%, not "we who model in finer details" - and I DO include myself in that last 1% for much of my modelling - so I also agonising over the little things. But - overall, the 1% (including me) are totally irrelevant to the project. (2) We have a long railway history to choose from, things varied ...and what we choose may well not suit everyone :-). It WILL be based on "our reality" though. (3) The "real world need" to accommodate RTR imperfections will most definitely give need for minor tweaks that may offend some. Now I need to move on to deciding the more important things, like whether to do a matching geometry outside slip or appropriate matching diamonds as the next step in creating a progressively useful range, and when to add the catch point to the range, early or late (That one has reversed modeller and prototype priorities).... much more important than details that few will even give a moments thought to. How about making the thread useful, and defining the RMweb ideal "order of release" for a complete range! No promises but it help - and it will be interesting to read it. Kind regards Richard

***Re the posting surprised it isn't on our website, It is simply because we are re-building the back end of it totally to cope with multi-currency and other things and will not greatly change content until that project is finsihed. The significant change isn't something I welcomed as it means a seriously time and money cost in the re-building and will leave many important things not online for a while but that's life. It will eventuall get there... within a useful period before final availability. Richard

*** Have fun with the discussion guys.... but please don't try to make an analysis of the meaning of life from a couple of press "holiday snaps". (1) The samples you saw used T1 tooling for the base of the turnout (Yes, we have actually cut metal / have some initial trial plastic for the B7 turnouit bases) and were put together in a few days by hand for the meeting. They most certainlywere not perfect but were "Much more perfect" than any RTR turnout using bullhead rail that has ever existed so far. We were quite clear about that in the meeting that saw them presented but this sort of thing never hits the press properly. (2) The final turnouts will be done to prototype drawings ONLY. ALL major details like check rails will match those drawings. You wil be free to criticise as I know some will, but the simple fact is that they WILL be pretty well right. It just may not be to your preference. We accept that. (3) They will be created with the minimum compromise required for smooth running of out-of-the-box RTR with minimum adjustment. This will require some tweaks unique to hobby use but we cannot help that. We think that looking right matters a LOT and that looking right + running quality = happy customers = trumps one-upmanship every time. So.... Please just let us get on with it for the good of the 4mm scale-OO part of the hobby and the average modeller that just wants something that much nicer to run their trains on. We have enough to do without the distractions :-) :-) Kind regards Richard DCCconcepts.

*** True, but there is also a balance of pragmatism and logic in the choice.... just as selecting one of the common chair styles will eventually/soon be. With commercial reality at the fore, choices are needed as covering variants is not always possible. It was just my choice... a little like choosing a warm glow for gas lamps was because faulty modeller memory assigns that attribute to them, perhaps thanks to movies etc... when to be realistic they should have been a harsh greenish-white. * Yes, 4 bolt was more common but 6 bolts do exist - more commonly on point-work - which is where I think that they will be noticed far more... As much as we can argue over them, few really see the details in plain track. * Reality says that the vast majority of buyers of this item may well be laying bullhead track but their real life experience is almost wholly in the FB era and all they know is 6 bolt plates... so to most they will be as they expect... and to most observers of their efforts, they will either not even be noticed or will be seen as "right" too :-). * the use of 3 bolt allowed me to prove the possibility and allows me to re-use that part of the tooling for the FB versions that will also come... as I think existing mass market FB fishplates are less than good - another pragmatic reason... (That is important when an item already has high creative costs and its also worth remembering that this is a much finer item than others in material and in reality there are NO other practical fishplates with bolt detail) Richard

*** Just to respond to the comments so far. (EVen the test run was 10,000 metres of rail to prove the tools... do you really think we'd invest so much without making sure its all good in every way??/) * You will not notice the difference in conductivity. * The stainess steel is 3-series and of high quality. It isn't possible to use lower quality as work hardening would prevent it being roleld properly. * It solders well with our No-clean flux and any solder containing a little silver. All you need do is use a 50W Iron or more and turn the soldering station up to max heat. A micro torch also works well, as does silver solder. NO NEED for the aggressive Carrs Brown... you could also use plain old powerflow if the Iron is man enough. * The much on Nickel silver rail is copper oxide - or more than 95% of it is. We had it analysed by a University lab. NS oxide = copper oxide, a core material in the making of resistors! * NO it isn't magnetic - the magnetic grades of SS corrode/rust unfortunately SS looks like steel but does not rust... and does not corrode or "Yellow". It is a pain to roll (needing double the rollers that NS does but we feel it was wirth the expense and difficulty because it solves THREE problems of NS rail all at once. * Oxidisation / pickup loss. * It isnt sliopery so locos pull more * It looks like Steel and NS doesn't ALSO - it custs with normal rail cutters and is really as easy to work and solder as other rail. ---------------------------- *** How do you like the Phosphor Bronze fishplates?? I am pleased with them :-) http://www.dccconcepts.com/track-trackmaking-parts/dccconcepts-track-and-trackmaking-parts/rail-joiners-bullhead-4mm-scale-phosphor-bronze-25-pack regards Richard