34theletterbetweenB&D

Although relatively recently Bachmann have managed a pair of 0-4-4T (MR 1P, NER G5) in just this format, and thanks to a better construction layout, (lots of metal forward, light weight construction rear of the coupled axles) they balance within the coupled wheelbase resulting in stable traction. This effectively makes all previous RTR OO 0-4-4T obsolete...

My fixation was all on the N2 and N7 0-6-2T's working KX inner suburban as a child. That there had previously been Stirling's 0-4-4T for the GNR on the same suburban and branch services wouldn't dawn on me for about a further decade.

Could be G7 or G8, the two classes being very closely related, but the G7 is the one that will have survived long enough for the full LNER livery and number to be applied. (I had no idea that the G8 was the first 0-4-4T class to operate in the UK; possibly thanks to the T-H M7 this wheel arrangement has always been a 'Southern Fancy' in my mind. Them's Daleks. Only answer they supply is EXTERMINATE! Charming people. 😅

Had a quick look at the Bachmann site for the 812 spares: https://Bachmann-spares.co.uk/category/2-branchline-steam-parts/caledonian-812/body-parts Presumably what you seek is something related to the E3528 parts in this listing? There may be equivalents in the other spares lists, but no clues to the material used.

...power supplies not intended for use with model railway equipment... That's rather broad brush. The very useful PP9 battery (for those of us that have 4mm) for example. My expectation is that in a RTR OO product the motor and wiring will be able to cope with any 'reasonable' DC supply up to 12V. That's for the system designer to decide. A fore and aft non-indexing roller (or simulation thereof) is in my opinion way more consistent: push forward to go forwards from rest, move backwards to slow down, potentially stop and then reverse, bigger and/or faster movements have greater effect. The system retains the current direction and speed setting for any given address in memory and when subsequently that address is selected the interface makes the entered changes from what is in memory.

With any coupler system to be installed in NEM pockets, may I suggest that the best way is to acquire and keep to hand a test set covering the size range. This is because no one else knows what minimum curve radius and loco and stock combinations you will be operating, so there's no 'one size fits all' answer, if looking for best appearance. (Obviously enough you could opt for the longest coupler available, and have everything spaced off like 1950's Triang...)

Tempting though it is to have them near white, for those working up and down the ECML the several tunnels in proximity to KX alone would rapidly lead to a sooty deposit.

I had a look at the Dapol class 67 mechanism diagram attached, hopefully this will correspond to what you have seen on the mechanism of the models you own. https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0644/3971/4015/files/Class_67_Combo-compressed.pdf?v=1697702116 As the bogies are a 'push fit' to engage the worm with the bogie gear tower, and Dapol's instructions include: "The bogies are a ‘pull out ’ & ‘push in ’ fitting method. When refitting, ensure that the gear on top of the bogie tower meshes with the worm." this is where I would start looking. The bracket which sits above the worm must engage the clips on the sides of the gear tower to hold the worm in mesh with the bogie gear. If there is any damage to the bracket such that it doesn't fully engage one or both of the clips on the bogie, the worm will lift itself off the gear when running under load, leading to the problem you describe. This is likely to need a replacement bracket if it is the cause. My suggestion is that since you have a model with a failed motor, currently a dummy, you could take a bracket out of this and use it as the replacement. (Please bear in mind that never having looked inside a Dapol N gauge model I have no idea how tricky this may be: the general principle of using a model as a 'breaker' for spares works well for me in RTR OO of similar mechanism layout.)

The constructional standard of the baseboard, track laying, point motor fitting and wiring is entirely in your own hands; as also is the choice of stock and its set-up, and how you operate the trains. A trial of what your own work standard and stock choices deliver in satisfying your expectation of 'reliability' is advisable. (Personally by a process of trialling I have qualified Peco medium and large radius points in code 100 or 75 FB as unconditionally reliable in combination with minimum 36" radius plain track, but my reliability standard includes the ability to propel any train of up to 60 SWB wagons or 15 bogie carriages through any point arrangement, which is fairly demanding. I am assessing some of the Peco code 83 track pieces at present with a view to future use in off-scene locations, results to date very good.)

We have to adapt! Fortunately, among those 'buyers of multiples of new models' are those with a 'short little span of attention' (thanks Paul Simon). Buying their 'so yesterday' acquisitions and then breaking them up for the desired components and selling off the remains is facilitated by the oft remarked on lack of spares available from the RTR brands. I have pottered away at this over twenty-some years since the influx of the new and better from China commenced, and in combination with kits, new and salvaged, it has built up into almost everything required for the KX inner sub area operation. (Something I really like about this hobby is the way a modest expenditure over time yields such a satisfactory result.)

This same 'fault line' was visible on the J15, which was my first encounter with Hornby's diecast loco body technique. It's possible the cure I applied to that model will work on this one. Took the body off and it was clear that the body casting sat on two 'landings' on the chassis block. I carefully scribed on horizontal guide lines on the side of these 'landings' and filed them down, with test fittings until the 'fault line' disappeared. (Haven't seen this problem on my subsequent diecast body purchases - D16/3, B12/3, J36 - so was rather hoping Hornby had improved technique in this respect.)

It makes the Lima interpretation of the same-ish vehicle look like a decent model. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/164656257128 The screw attached wire has to be a misunderstanding of how to make a hook (one end) and loop {t'other end) magnetically actuated coupling from bent wire. Perhaps.

Surely on a site rich in Dr What fans it is clear that this is the Dean-Brown flux capacitor, enabling flights of the imagination into the past?

The loss of their sister shop at Kings Cross was a far greater loss to me than Hattons - much as I enjoyed looting treasures from their s/h - is now. A proper model railway specialist shop where you could obtain 'everything' from a single visit, and enjoy conversations with the like minded. Still miss it every time I pass through KX.

In my experience of Cornwall Camborne is a long way from everywhere except Redruth. But the shop staff were very friendly on my first visit last year, once I had found my way to it from the Tesco carpark. Hopefully this model might be in stock when we go down West this year, and I can visualise it in LNER green and cream with a name like 'Bang Up' or 'Tally Ho!' on the sides

The most valuable information will be what read out (and its meaning) you obtained when tested on your DCC system's programme track. It could be as simple as 'no decoder detected', usually a dry joint or possibly a wire break between the loco pick up and the red or black decoder terminal.

The only time I have had significant noise from a Bachmann model with the body mounted motor and shaft drive to bogie mechanism, is when the gear tower in the bogie was 'tight' on the gear wheel bosses. That also resulted in the model raunning more slowly than expected. There will be some disassembly involved in checking out whether this might be the cause. Hopefully you have the assembly diagram, but if not a download is available from Bachmann and is worth having as a long term reference. I would first want to uncouple the motor from the rest of the mechanism by removing the shaft between the motor and the worm, in order to test it independent of the rest of the mechanism. If the motor is then quiet running when off load, it's strip down the gear tower time. First step, release the worm from the top of the gear train and inspect, just in case it has a poorly turned profile (most unlikely). Next push the bogie along the rails without applying any weight: if the gears don't turn there's your trouble, the wheels should drive the spur gear train. Now, this could be because it is all jammed up qwith grease that has solidifed. Feed in a little light oil and see if it frees up when turned over by pushing it along a length of track. (Can be messy if there's a whole lot of hardened grease in there.) If that doesn't sort it, then pushing out the gear shafts to release the gears - systematically arranged on a piece of paper and labelled - will be the next step. If one or more gears is tight in the gear tower, reduce the width of the boss slightly until an easy slide in fit. Clean up, reassemble and test whether the bogie now rolls freely. Finally the axles: unlikely, but if everything else turns smoothly and freely, they will have to come out and the lack of free rotation be identifed and corrected... Once satisfied and light application of a plastic compatible grease should keep it running for years. HTH, and do report.

The simplest solution, in combination with the programme track of the DCC system. Anyone with more than a few locos should be able to identify the models with easy access to the range of sockets required. There are some very simple choices in RTR OO, two current steam models with bodies tooled in a previous millenium, one easily accessed screw and the very robust body is off: 8 pin, Hornby N2, Next 18, Bachmann V1 or V3. And for 21 pin, Dapol class 21/29. No screws at all, the body simply slides off when required, my current benchmark in the 'body removal, how it should be' stakes. There are surely others, outside my BR KX area focus.

I use two RTR autocouplers which uncouple reliably on the same track magnets, fitted on straight track only: Kadee, mounted either at standard height or at near scale height for 4mm (and they still work on the standard Kadee magnets!); they are not mixed however, a conversion programme to 'all at near scale height' is underway. Bachmann's miniature tension locks with the Brian Kirby modification for magnetic uncoupling. Nowhere near as sophisticated as Kadee, but they do replicate the UK's loose coupled freight action very well, mounted with the bumper bar face in the same plane as the buffer faces, usually by shortening both the coupler pocket and the 'swallow tail' on the coupler. Couplers mounted at this spacing allow stock to buffer up when pushed, and pull out to 2mm between buffers when pulled, and there is complete protection against buffer locking. For 4W wagons of up to 12' wb this works down to 24" minimum radius. All autocoupling for both couplers is on straight or nearly so track. I would say these are pragmatic practical solutions. The Kadee is superior in looking decently like the knuckle coupler standard on the gangwayed coach stock for the location I model. The miniature tension lock looks all wrong, but works. The first thing I learned when trying the miniature tension locks over 20 years past was that the Bachmann and Hornby patterns were incompatible if reliability was required. Since the way greater majority were Bachmann's that was what I chose: and this was fortunate as they have a non-ferromagnetic hook which made the Brain Kirby mod possible.

[Tangent.] Oh yes, a one time colleague had a grand collection and ran them at 'open day' events. Absolutely zero pick up problems.[/Tangent.]

One DCC system will run both and all rails can be live, no manual switching required.

Of the two mechanisms, Bachmann and Hornby, I'll take the Bachmann every time for operation. (Once covered in typical filth there's nowt to choose between them for appearance.) My Bachmann specimens are early and the wipers have been lightly reformed to bear on the flange tops , which is effectively self cleaning and requires no attention. And then there is the killer advantage, the centre wheelset is sprung by a saddle acting on the axle. For reasons known only to Bachmann the spring action is often not strong enough, and the downward travel permitted the axle very limited: but this is a ten minute job to rectify. Undo underside screws to remove keeper plate. If the centre wheelset rises freely of its own accord, the spring action is fine. If not lift out wheelsets, lift out saddle, if it is glued by solid grease clean up and reassess, if that is of no benefit stretch spring slightly so the centre wheelset rises about 1mm compared to the unsprung axles. (Non-precision job.) Then take the keeper plate and file a 0.5mm deep notch under the centre axle position, using a round swiss file, which will permit a little more downward travel. (Non-precision job.) Clean up and reassemble. Done. I have a Hornby 08 (a worm shaft bearing screamer which will be a fond memory for some here) got cheap s/h. It's a fine model for appearance, especailly as it is unweathered because it lives in the 'occasional freight train vehicle stock' siding, and goes out being delivered new in a freight once in a while. That way if it momentarily loses pick up the mighty loco up front solves the problem (the decoder in the 08 is set for no time delay before restart in event of power loss) just the poor guard gets a sudden rug..

As you have realised, Jidenco were a typical 'bad old days' kit maker, producing 'scratch aid' etches: ready to provide scope for your ingenuity to supply the means of making a working model for whatever track gauge and minimum radius combination was desired. If game for it, you might look at adapting a BoBo centre motor mechanism from such as a small Heljan diesel. You'ld potentially obtain a 'Q-loco' by this means: looks feeble, capable of shifting an improbable load...

And then there are photos of the new mk1s in service from the early fifties, with the roofs in shiny pale grey paint 'just released into traffic' condition and photographed in bright sunshine, and the roofs are smooth throughout. (Sadly all such in copyright of those with good photographic kit at that time...)

Use of a RTR mechanism is going to be classic 'horses for courses'. OO will typically have too large a motor, unless there's a suitable 'industrial' or similar size mechnaism that's suitable, TT:120 likely to be the simpler option. Have fun!