The Fatadder

In preparation for the extension I am getting on with fitting working CDL lights to the passenger stock. I had a delivery today with 1.5mm orange LEDs, so a pair were soldered to some wire and glued inside the 153 body after carving off the moulded light and drilling the hole. Of course Hornby wire everything the wrong way, so it took a bit of a look struggling to find the common positive before I remembered it’s the wrong way round. Testing the unit there are a couple of issues, it suffers from what is becoming a frequent issue on my old Lenz chips with F1 outputting voltage even when the function is off. Eventually a replacement decoder is going to be needed (with this chip ending up in a steam loco where the lighting won’t be an issue.). In the mean time I will try a factory reset to check it’s not a cv issue. I also want to reduce the brightness of the LEDs

I have an alternative supply, I cant decide which I prefer..... 3d printed in translucent red resin, then painted with a Vallejo translucent orange paint. I had lost my pack of Hurst parts so drew up and printed my own for my mk2s.

I did wonder what the reason for the bay platform was, makes sense that it originally had another platform that has been removed (though it was gone by 1930 when the below was taken) https://www.britainfromabove.org.uk/en/image/EPW033139 my main reason for being drawn to this is simply down to it helping to justify the slightly odd curve of the branch which just didn’t look right when it was straight (given the similar curve on original board) but if it had originally looked like this I don’t think it’s quite so implausible

A little more research over lunch today shows that Luxulyan was originally a single bay platform (accessed as far as I can see by walking across the track). Which pretty much settles it from a design point of view, although by the late 90s the second track on the lower side of the platform is long gone. The main area of potential refinement to the plan will be on the right hand side, ideally I'd like to keep it at 4 ft as it will make transport (and storage) a lot easier. which leaves a question as to whether there will be enough room to end the headshunt on scene or if it will have to continue off board. Ideally if ending on scene it will need some bushes or something to help brake up the joint between baseboard and backscene. The next step will be printing off a full Templot plan to do some mock ups with buildings / rolling stock and get a better idea how its looking. At this rate I am seriously thinking about getting the baseboard ordered and getting started (though I probably ought to get a bit more done on Brent first)... A question to exhibition managers, Would the extension to the layout make any difference to the desirability for bookings having 8ft scenic + 8ft of fiddleyards vs the current situation of 4ft scenic + 8ft of fiddleyard? While the layout was well received at its two shows last year, and I was given something like 4 verbal invites for 24/25 nothing has materialised, which has me wondering if the relative scenic - storage ratio is counting against it. (With the thought that extending the layout so it is 50:50 scenic to fiddleyard might make it more appealing).

I still cant decide over the potential extension for the layout, on one hand I think it will add a lot more interest when operating, on the other its current length makes exhibiting it very easy, and I just cant get to a track plan I am entirely happy with. The problem comes from the curve of the branchline, if I had been building it as an 8ft layout from the outset Id have continued that curve along the whole layout. However with the 4ft length I wanted to keep the track exits parallel to simplify the fiddleyard. The first iteration of the extension plan really didnt look right with all the track running parallel with the baseboard edges. So instead I have been working this evening on a potential alternative, adding a similar curve the other side or the bridge narrowing the gap between the branch and the yard. My thinking is that it would originally have been a bay platform that has been downgraded. I have also tried to design the extension so it could be operated as a standalone layout. The rear could make use of the other building that was left over from Blackcomb, or a simpler arrangement of trees etc. Buildings / trees would be used to obscure the right hand fiddleyard exit. The board could be 4ft or 5ft, the extra ft on the right hand side would give the buffers at the end of the headshunt and the rest of the platform. If I do go through with this I think I would also need to add a 12 inch extension to the left hand fiddleyard so that both are the same length, as with the extra space on the branch it would be good to add a couple of extra wagons to a through train.

Did this ever hit the market? I seem to recall it was one of those kits that sat in perpetual development, but all that materialised was the runner wagon. Once the Oxford model finally appears I am going to have to build the runner (all be it my current thinking is erring toward 3d printing rather than the kit (assuming its even still available). Will no doubt end up taking that route for the crane's cab assuming the Oxford version doesnt have it.

That was pretty much my intention originally, all be it that I was planning to keep it running on the cheaper decoder while a couple of other locos that were further ahead in the list got sound. Now I am planning to get the sound upgrade kit once it comes out to get the loco running. Of course if I do somewhat regret not just buying a sound loco in the first place given that would no doubt have been a cheaper way to have done it, but by the time I ordered there were none left of the loco I needed with sound. Will learn from my mistake with the 60!

Not to mention there is still the possibility once it has finished its time in Japan the loco will be repatriated back to the UK in (cosmetically at least) a decent condition, whereas if it had stayed here it would likely have completely rusted away by then.

Next step on the 37 looks like a case of dismantle everything (for a third time) and try lubrication (worm bearing and drive draft ends being the key areas I think). For now I will live with it, probably until the run up to its next show. this evening instead I’ve moved into my 158. Which has sat awaiting wiring for far too long. This unit was previously rebuilt with wipac clusters behind the window as per the prototype rather than Bachmanns twin led. But they’ve never been wired up (not helped by a lack of fine wire.) the plan is to use the Bachmann 2 pin connectors between the coaches to give a wire for the headlight/marker (day), rail lights and cdl lights. I can’t recall if the cdl lights on both sides light up on a 158 on the prototype, but from a model perspective I think it’s useful to have both sides lit at once as the public will only see the live side and I can see the other side to show I’ve got them on!) For the CDL lights I’ve used the Hurst lenses glued over a hole drilled in the side. I have no idea as to the source of the small LED (they are from a 20 year old loco lighting kit I’ve never used), soldered to a resistor and wires. now to repeat the process on the other coach before wiring it all up! Initially it will get one of my old Lenz golds, although in time it needs something with 6 functions in order to give independent control of tail lights in the event that working couplings are fitted. It won’t be a regular performer on the layout. given the success of this trial, I will now need to source more of the small LED and perform the same upgrade on my 150/153. Annoyingly I don’t think Bachmann included a spare pin on the electric coupling so will need to find a way of getting power across to the second coach on the 150.

An off the shelf decoder will give you head light, marker lights and roof fans (with a 6 fct chip), with the chips I have to hand I’ve not managed to get more than this to work. i haven’t got a lokpilot so not sure what you get if you use a lokpilot without the Cavalex settings, hopefully someone can advise. because of the extra functionality Cavalex have incorporated, presumably in part by outsourcing the electronics design to ESU it requires a bespoke set up to get the full functionality (in the same way Accurascale locos do)

More testing this evening and after 5 or 6 runs back and forth running silently the noise has already returned Wish I knew what the actual cause was almost as much as I regret not sending the damed thing back to Bachmann to fix!

Yesterday I was shuttling 37668 up and down the layout for a final test and the squeaking from the motor had returned. Previously (before starting the respray) I had dismantled the chassis and tracked the noise down to pressure on the motor from a poorly made chassis block / keeper plate resulting in the keeper plate not fitting correctly (and instead putting pressure on the motor when the chassis frame is fitted. I thought I had fixed it removing the flash and reassembling, but upon testing the noise had returned. Remembering the chassis was a pain in the backside to work on thanks to the bogie chains, I initially tried to loosen the keeper plate from underneath the loco after removing the fuel tanks. (these needed refitting with a better alignment anyway.) This didn't solve it, so again the model was dismantled (keeping the bogies in situ), the keeper was removed and the location lugs on the damaged side removed completely. after screwing back onto the chassis the noise had gone, however once the bogies were refitted the noise came back slightly quieter than before. So this time it was completely taken apart with the bogies fully removed (including removing the chains), before stripping them down and reassembling one at a time. This time the noise has fully gone, I think the second noise was originating from a cardan shaft that had been fitted the wrong way round in the factory. Which would explain why bench testing of the motor with no bogies attached the noise was gone, only to reappear the second it went onto the layout. The loco now needs to be reassembled (including the fuel tank modifications outlined here and the loco will finally be done. (At least until I do something about the sound quality). A few repairs are needed after all of this handling, (a bit of lifted reflective stripe transfer and a missing nose aerial) plus regluing those dammed brake chains!) While the fuel tanks are off the model I am going to have a quick look I am going to have a quick look over the mouldings in comparison with my 3d pint to see if there are any worth while improvements before I print new tanks for 710 and 065 which I think are the only 37s I have left that dont have the upgraded underframe Finally a new arrival, with a reasonably priced Bachmann Polybulk arriving from ebay this morning. This needs to be updated with CAIB logos and channel tunnel branding before weathering along with the grey CAIB wagon once I have some data panels for the latter.

A useful photo for me, seeing as my two remaining 60s have full end detail and the complete lower part (and I dont have the original kinematics / slotted part). Modified like that I can get them all listed on ebay over the next few months in preparation for the arrival of the Cavalex replacements (and not loose out massively due to having them fitted with scale couplings)

Is that the final body tooling of 66001? I thought it was going to have the almost flush horn grill?

There were of course a number of 56 (and 60s) which ran without any sector branding in service for a prolonged period post privatisation, so there is something of a halfway house available. the question is whether it would sell as many as a ‘normal’ release with xyz branding. That said having finished my 56 as an unbranded loco it really wasn’t too difficult to do, if a 60 appeared in unbranded grey it would be my first choice, but again I’m more likely to buy one of the sector ones and rebrand to loadhaul triple grey

Fixed salary cap, take all the academies into RFU control and an annual entry draft based in reverse order teams finished the league (with no bloody draft lottery!) would be my way forward. Alongside a minimum of say 10 out of 15 in a starting 15 must be English qualified. maybe with a fixed period I’d say 3 seasons in which a quota of overseas based players can be selected while the new system beds in

A couple of weeks ago I watched the England U20s play the Welsh, the stand out player on the day for me was Junior Kpoku who is learning his trade in Paris At its introduction I was a big fan of the salary cap concept, the problem comes when the cap is different in different leagues. Giving a rival league an inherent advantage. Other than raising the cap (which is just not going to be feasible in the current financial climet). it’s hard to see how the RFU can overcome this development issue, without allowing overseas selection at least in the short term. Significantly increasing the requirement for home grown players in the starting 15 for premiership sides would be the logical way to go (isn’t that how the French solved the similar problem in the top14). With England you can see the potential is there, undermined by the continuous handling errors. In today’s game it felt for so long England was dominating play only to make a stupid mistake. Scotland took their chances and put them to bed. Scotland also showed what’s needed from an international fly half, it’s been far too long since we’ve had someone kicking for England who can be relied on to consistently slot the kicks. Failing to get the conversion put more pressure on England toward the end when chasing two scores

I lied when I said I was done with Class 37s for now. I spotted earlier that both EWS locos were missing their nose aerials, so both were drilled and fitted with nickel silver wire painted black. While I was at it the missing lamp irons on one end of 668 were also fitted (using some Vitrains parts I had to hand). with that done I also noticed there were no jumper cables on 025. I picked up a pack of West Hill Wagon Works printed end details at Showcase, so the multi working sockets have been painted and fitted. Not confident about their strength, but if the wire brakes I will try drilling out and replacing with wire (which gives me an idea for a bit of cad work). Visually they are an improvement over the crude original Bachman parts, but not quite up there with the latest model

Another wagon that is complete awaiting transfers is this EWS liveried Rudd (with Grampus sides). looks a little odd with the livery painted the wrong way round. I think the lower strip is a little narrow in the Parkside tooling vs the prototype.

Mine is 3335 (or at least it will be once the number plates arrive, seeing as it would have often been passing through Brent it would be rude not to!

While it has yet to be fitted with number plates, and until I can buy some handrail knobs I cant fit the boiler handrails, I am really pleased with it after a coat of paint. I have reused the buffer heads and smokebox bits off the Dukedog body. Tender is also not properly attached while I wait on the boiler handrails. Highly recomended!

an update on the Bulldog, the cab handrails have all been painted, buffers / smokebox details all fitted (all scavenged from the Dukedog body). I’m lacking handrail knobs so I can’t add the boiler handrails until I get some (which won’t be until Ally Pally).

Is that green or black under the muck?

I’ve been contemplating putting together a railtour set of mk1s (98/99) as the set used on the Falmouth Packet tour (with a King) mostly as a justification for my Cavalex 56. Will have a look through those links, hopefully it will have more info than the small number of photos I’ve found so far

I am assuming gold members can post directly in here while the main classifieds board is down? I have for sale a pair of Bachmann Class 150/1 bodies in central trains livery. good condition (unboxed) looking for £40 including postage