34theletterbetweenB&D

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!

I only found out about the dorking disaster by non-arrival of a Christmas card from an old mucker. His opinion - and trust me, he has a few - is that the staff won't bail the management out, because pay and conditions are so far off the pace in that locality, that those that remain are mainly working until fairly imminent retirement.

Indeed they do, but still way more subtle than the huge representations Bachmann originally provided; and if the date on the pic is correct that's a 50+ y.o. specimen. (I suspect most of 'wear' making the welds apparent is from flexing of the roof panels during operation, the welds slightly stiffer than the panel material; I have never seen an engineering analysis.)

My suggestion was of an available authentic railway title. Hornby should only grab 'The Premier Line' for their superior models while it is not taken.

Closer to home, Dorking Royal Mail collections and deliveries. No joke at all for those living in that district, where the service ceased normal functioning over 6 months ago and appears to be beyond repair.

The large disparity of opinion on exhibition here is exactly what I would expect for a business with such a broad product range that is poorly differentiated. Previous marketing manager thought this was no problem when challenged on this, but personally I feel it damages their reputation. Some clear and sustained segmentation of the range would begin to fix this. I only buy what I consider Hornby's good stuff, and it's up there with anything currently available in RTR OO. I was very pleased at the effort put into the B12/3, which is easily the best 4-6-0 currently available; only amazed that they had chosen to offer this instead of the Black 5 which would surely have sold better. And there we go, that's about to be tested when the Black 5 becomes the reigning best RTR OO 4-6-0. And it won't be anywhere near as good as the Bugatti streamlined form W1 and P2, simply 'because'.

But the collectoriser mind set dismisses that as irrelevant: even if it is a much superior model, it isn't what came out of the factory, and therefore of greatly diminished value in their view. Which is grand, a cheaply obtained RTR origin model that has been skillfully worked on is just the ticket for those with a different mind set.

Well there's handy, I thought this listing had gone forever when Bachmann adopted their present website style, and had stopped looking,

And the question then, is whether all of that 'something' which Hornby does in their best interests? For the market segment I fit into (adult, scale protoype oriented modeller) I would say no. They lag well behind their main competitor in this segment, which is Bachmann, which has systematically produced other than express traction, building a range of the vital every day traction, MU's, carriages and wagons. That said what Hornby now overall offer for this segment is very good, and currently clearly outranks every brand except Bachmann. What catches my eye is that no other brand is seriously challenging Hornby at the starter product end of the range. Bachmann did initially but pretty much gave up fairly quickly is my perception. Is it truly essential now?

I reckon so, the site is clearly current and trading, after a brief shutdown at time of Hattons purchase.

Alternative suggestion, the long established plastic modelling technique of 'dragging' a new scalpel blade over the raised item. With a little practice with a curved blade it is possible to 'disappear' the raised rib flush with the roof, leaving the paint almost untouched. The blade is positioned with the cutting edge perpendicular to the rib, and then dragged along it, this is very quick, needs about three passes to remove a rib. I find that a blade about does a coach roof for best results. (The blades go into the 'B grade' box for regular cutting purposes. (I need a good light for optimum results and do this task in summer sunshine.)

Further areas worth looking at: Replacing the buffers with the specific design Swindon used (Bach's buffers are generic on most of their models) fitting a replacement drawhook with a screw link coupling, and adding the brake pipe (and steam heat pipe if modelling winter) will much improve the bufferbeams. Removing the tension lock couplers, and ideally the mountings too, if not planning to use the loco to haul trains. If you do this, also thin down the frame ends if possible - the practically of this is dependent on the model construction.

Ooh if you dare do that it's basically scrap. But you could plug the hole in the drilled out chimney with some black tack, position a Polo in the packaging, and there you go: Mint in Box...😎

Further to this: the incorrect* roof rib representations on the Mk1gangwayed carriages applies to all the original tranche of 9 introductions: SK, SO, BSK, CK, FK, BG, BCK, RFO/RU, Super BG. All were subsequently upgraded to flush roofs. I have no idea which suffix letter indicates the first upgraded version for all these (keep in mind that each vehicle will have carried multiple liveries and each vehicle type and livery combination is catalogued under a unique number. IMO it is best left to visual examination in the case of s/h purchases: vehicle in incorrect box is a commonplace... The later mk1 releases: RMB, GUV, mk1 based Pullman cars, Sleepers, Post Office vehicles, were introduced with flush roofs. *BR's mk1 had welds between the 4' wide steel roof panels, which welds were made on a precision jig, such that no further finishing was required following welding, to ensure that the seams were not visible once painted.

This begs the question, what would be the models at the core of a potential set? I saw the end of steam and Triang was disappointing because there wasn't a heavy goods like the 8F 2-8-0 in the hideously expensive H-D range. Now that item obviously won't cut it today , but what are the likely current equivalents to attract someone young interested in the railway? Ten - perhaps twelve years ago, Hornby knocked out the Javelin, and that was just what the 8 year old of my acquaintance wanted. He's midway through an engineering apprenticeship now. Then again, the 7 y.o. daughter of a friend has an N2 and N7 and dribbles at my B12/3. Her grandparents live a little West of Sheringham so she knows the NNR...

Cheapskate. Should have gone for a laser or optical turntable - or both, each has its own performance benefits dependent on the polymer, pressing technique and condition of the recording - which does no damage to the record. And of course unless on solid bedrock, you may need a large concrete mount for optimal stability on which to locate the turntables. Beyond this point it becomes seriously expensive... The exchange of opinions is the major side entertainment, Even the most abrasive model railway fan's utterances would be regarded as exquisitely polite in audiophile circles.

Never seen the prototype.let alone the kit you have. First question I would ask is the minimum radius you expect it to run on. My inclination would be to treat the 4-2 piece as a rigid chassis, because the front carrying wheels will foul those cylinders and frames, if conventionally bogie mounted. The rear bogie with its smaller wheels and less obstruction can be allowed some sideways travel in addition to the usual pivotting for the purpose of getting around curves.

Actually what matters is prompt delivery in the present situation, where it's a shower of drivers in vans turning up some time or other, some possibly not quite able to read the street name or count house numbers beyond finger assistance. So reliable indication of when to be at home is 'helpful' and this applies to all vendor's deliveries.