Dagworth

There is no difference in setting in decoders between 28 and 128 speed steps, only between 14 and 28/128.

If the decoder is set to 14 speed steps and the controller to 28/128 or vice versa then you will get odd behaviours of lighting on the loco.

Andi

My three that have decoders all have the sapphire and all run as smooth as I could wish for. I've changed nothing on the decoders except the address and nothing in the locos.

Andi

SING!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZHW9VSY1EQ

If it is still touring it would be very welcome to visit either Dagworth or Ravensclyffe.

I'm intrigued by how you've done the bogies.

Andi

I bought 4 of these before I knew how they worked - They are either waiting for a substitute MERG cirucit board or having the inner workings stripped out and just used with a solenoid. The latter being the prefered safe way to operate my layout which uses RR&Co.

 

The signals are a welcome move but their control needs a brave Dapol to stand up and say we got it wrong so the MK II will be welcomed by all.

 

By the way I come from a control & Instrumentation background so am not a novice here.

See my comment no 338 here http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/53096-Dapol-working-signals-review/page__st__325&do=findComment&comment=725126 where I've listed a very simple alteration that makes them perfectly usable.

Andi

Thanks gent's will get the chequebook out any bargains out there?

best price I know of currently is Cheltenham at (appropriately) £85.

Andi

Shortening the wire pulls the head back. The arm would be the correct length to push the head back if the mounting was below the pivot point.

 

IMO the shortening method works with what Bachmann have provided us. Any other method deviates to far from the prototype for my liking/ means extra work.

 

In any case, I'll opt for 'looks right' over 'is right'.

 

Regards

 

Matt

See my post much earlier in the thread. http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/40432-class-85/page__st__475&do=findComment&comment=699416 The problem is that, as supplied, when you push the pan down the head tips forward instead of staying level. This is because the top end of the upper control rod is fixed in the wrong place, nothing to do with how long it is.

BartB's photo shows that the problem still exists in this batch too.

Andi

A Peco passing contact switch only pulses once per throw, unlike the Hornby one which does as mentioned.

Ah cheers, I didn't know that, I've never used one. (Or taken one to pieces...)

Andi

For an identification on an analogue control panel of the way the signal is set a point lever or similar monentary switch could be used with both outputs wired together such as those sold by Hornby or Peco for point motor operation.

Potentially that would make the problem even worse, by linking both outputs you would be sending a double pulse and risk the signal reading them as change - change (go back to where you were*) in one movement of the lever...

*wherever that was in the first place

Andi

Simply using a 9V battery has already voided your warranty, I suspect.

Will the mod work with the recommended (insisted?) supply of 16V AC?

I don't know, I don't have AC round the layout, so I'll be running the signal from one of the DC supplies, probably 5v, once I install it, so I haven't tried it on AC.

When I first tried the signal on the battery I got no life in it at all with the supply leads connected with black to positive and red to negative, but it works fine with the two wires connected as one would expect for DC wiring, red positive and black negative. I'm sure that an earlier posting said that the unit contained a full wave rectifier but evidently not.

Andi

Dave, the layout does require semaphores out of the NCB.

Interlock off the repeaters then ??

 

Any repeaters can't guarantee that they accurately repeat what the signal is displaying, the signal can be in either state.

However, I'm pleased to say that I have FOUND THE SOLUTION!

(photo borrowed from further up the thread)

Solder a very fine wire to the pad marked with the red arrow. This wire will go negative when the signal is 'Off' relative to the red supply wire (I'm running mine on the test bench off a 9v battery) sufficient to light an LED connected with a 1k series resistor between the additional wire and the positive terminal of the battery. I therefore have the repeater that I need that is always linked to what the signal is actually showing.

YOU WILL VOID ANY WARRANTEE by carrying out this mod, proceed at your own risk.

Andi

The problem with all this talk of repeaters etc. is that it completely misses the point. I can build repeaters till the cows come home, but my signalling is interlocked. That means that the points can only be changed when the signals protecting them are at danger. My drivers drive to signals, not to some control panel. They KNOW that if the signal is off then the points are set and the line is clear for them to proceed. Telling me to look at the signal doesn't help, the signals are worked by computer. Without some means of either feedback to tell the computer the state of the signal - or a control system that I can set up such that electronic state 'A' has the effect of putting the signal to danger (or point to normal) while electronic state 'B' puts the signal to clear (point to reverse) - then the computer has no way of knowing what 'aspect' the signal is showing

With a system as designed into the Dapol signals I have no state 'B', I only have the option of contact open (stay as it is) or contact pulse closed (change position). Worse than that, sometimes the first pulse after powering up the signal will try to drive it to danger (when it's already at danger) and sometimes will drive it to clear. I have a very real possibility of the signal showing clear when it should be at danger. My drivers will take the signal as clear meaning the route is clear, the track circuits are vacant, the points are set and locked. I have a WRONG SIDE FAILURE. Any railwayman will know that this is the worst type of failure you can possibly have in signalling.

If you don't understand why this is a problem then come and see how my layout is operated at Members day next weekend

Ironically it would be vaguely correct as a method of working hand points, where pulling the lever (pressing the button) puts the switches to one side, releasing the lever puts the lever ready to be pulled again to move the switches to the other position. Signals DON'T work like that. You pull the lever to move the signal from On to Off, and put the lever back to put the signal back to On. (Yes I know about expansion causing mis-shown signals, hence the need the repeaters shown up the thread - and the 'wrong' position in the middle - but for our purposes that can be ignored.)

Andi

I bought one of the LMS signals today, and as a result have finally gotten round to reading this thread.

OK, I know the control subject was done to death earlier up the thread, but I hope that I may be allowed to say that I am another who would have preferred a control system that knew the position of the arm. Can you imagine points with push to change motors? Which route shall we go today folks??? Modellers wouldn't stand for it.

If we are not permitted to say what we would have preferred then the makers will never know that there are voices that aren't 100% happy with their product. If that is the case then lets go back to Lima and pancake motors...

Andi

Originally I painted a loco black and Ralph Jackson made me a set of plates named 'Crewe'. When I learned that BR was to name 56133 'Crewe Locomotive Works' after it was built I and 'Rail' put in an effort to persuade BR to paint the loco LNWR lined black.....to no avail unfortunately.

 

The next move was to simplify the Roundel Group's three-tone grey livery to light grey and charcoal black with a touch of red lining, but again the idea fell on stony ground. Ah well...

Not sure who got there first with the black 56, this was done in the late 80s

I still have the loco

Andi

A little announcement that I can finally make...

Ravensclyffe will be coming to Members Day 2012!

Again coming as a work in progress, though significant progress has been made since its last outing and I'm looking forward to showing its current condition.

Expect a new batch of photos in the next couple of weeks.

Andi

Question - Why bother about all the nitty gritty details on a loco (eg fitting the supplied screw link couplings, air pipes, size of cab numbers, etc.) when, looking at the photos of various layouts and model AC electrics there is no catenary?

Plenty of knitting on Ravensclyffe, as you can see in my layout thread http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/3288-ravensclyffe/ and also will be able to see in person at Members Day... (it's not finished yet and will be coming again as a work in progress, though quite a lot of progress since it was last seen)

Andi

Jim,

Any chance of a couple of photos of the roof of your Class 81 to help me finish 2 Trix/Liliput detailing jobs I have on the go at present (81014 and 81021)?

As soon as they are finished I'm half expecting Bachmann to make a well-timed Class 81 announcement.......

Cheers

Adrian

More likely on past record that it will be the moment I do anything to the three I have here, one of which is in near mint condition...

Andi

In a fit of post Showcase Mojo returning I finally got round to fitting the replacement chassis to my Clayton today, it had been sat on the shelf for best part of two years.

A total rewire of the circuit board to remove all the suppression components, and cut two tracks to gain independant control of tail lights means I now have a working class 17 fitted with a Lenz silver. Only real issue is the headcode lights, as others have said, they really are awful aren't they? Has anyone come up with a satisfactory way of making the light more even across the whole headcode?

Andi

I've been playing with my 85 today and had a go at tweaking the pan so that the head tilts in the right direction. Looking at photos of the real thing the head should have a rod that comes down from the central tube to the stay arm. This should be in the centre of the tube from left to right, the tube being fixed to the head and unable to rotate without it. The tube on Bachmann's pan rotates with the pan arm rather than with the head so cannot be to fix a downrod. As far as I can see Bachmann need to mod the head so that the current short downrod from the pan head (that ends above the centre tube) is made longer with a central hole for the tube, and then continues down below the tube to a pivot for the stay arm.

What I've done is to cheat.

As Cav said, it is possible to move the stay arm from its incorrect position above the tube which causes the head to tilt the wrong way and reattach it to the downrod at the side of the pan that is meant to clip to the small nipple on the pan base to lock the pan down. This results in the stay arm running to one side of the pan head rather than the centre but does make the head stay level as the pan rises and falls. Also with the pan as supplied it will not go fully down without bending the lower stay arm, once modded the pan will go pretty much fully down.

The easiest way I found to change it was to push the centre pin out of the elbow joint. This is quite a loose push fit and will press out easily to the side with a thin length of brass wire. Once the pin is pushed out the whole pan will collapse and unfold in your hands. Now it is quite easy to use a pair of pointed pliers to open up the bend at the lower end of the upper stay arm and release it from its hole in the lower support arm. Having done that it should quite easily unhook from under the pan head.

NOW TURN THAT WIRE (the upper stay arm) OVER, it will be refitted the other way up.

As the reattachment point is lower than the original the wire is too long. The simple solution to this is to bend the top end of the wire at 90 degrees so that where it clips into the new location (that little down rod that comes below the tube and has a tiny hole in its end) it initially comes down vertically for 1 millimetre before bending towards the elbow joint. Once this is done then hook the wire into the pan head, and into the lower support arm. Bend the lower end of the stay arm back to retain it in the lower support arm again and reinsert the pin into the elbow joint. You should now have a pan with a head that stays level, and a pan the will freely go down almost all the way to the stowed position. One drawback of this mod is the loss of ability to clip the pan in the stowed position but personally I'd rather the pan was able to go up than to go down.

Hopefully Bachmann will soon alter the pan so this mod becomes unneeded...

Andi

I got the first of my Bachy 85s today (£85 from Cheltenham Model Centre). Very pleased with it, definitely one of the best RTR locos we've ever had. I'm also very pleased with how close the body shell matches my own scratchbuilt one.

The pan is very nice, with suitably weak springing, so much so that it passes my pencil test and will be permitted to run under my OHLE. My test is that the springing has to be weak enough that the weight of a pencil will push the pan down. The pipework in the roof well is good, I haven't had the chance to compare it with the roof pics I have on the laptop yet but I'll get to that later this evening.

There's a vey definite mould line down the corners of the nose that could benefit from some attention with a file but would then require the nose being touched up.

I haven't been able to run it yet either, I'll need to find the brake release first anyway - the brakes are moulded in the on position a consequence of laser scanning a parked loco I guess... Other thoughts on the bogies:- they seem a little 2d, the brake cylinders are very low relief and the angle looks wrong (possibly because they are moulded 'on'?)

On the whole though for first impressions I'll give it 9&3/4 out of 10...

Andi

That's a great shot for the lights argument... Light clearly visible in daylight. (Oh and mind the pigeon!)

Andi

Nice pics Kevin (Rivercider) that very clearly show the difference in the drivers window if compared to the later life pics further up the thread.

As for the ETH restriction, wasn't it more that certain coaching stock was not meant to be hauled by electric locos as the air con equipment on the coaches couldn't cope with the regular supply interruptions caused by neutral sections?

Andi

I suspect that it is in fact the circuit breaker rather than an insulator as such, so its probably about right.

It is the roof capacitor, and yes it should be that large.

Andi

It is hard to tell, the difference is subtle, but it looks as if there is more frame under the drivers window than the secondmans, particularly on the third photo that Michael has posted. Also in the first photo it is clear that the bottom of the drivers window is higher than that of the centre window. As built the bottom of all three should match.

I hope I'm wrong...

Is it me or has the early version in the pics ^^^ got the reinforced drivers windscreen? This was a later addition and while I'm pleased that Bachmann have got it right for the later versions this version shouldn't have it.

Andi