34theletterbetweenB&D

But in 'confuse the customer mode' identified incorrectly as an O1, instead of (what is instantly recognisable to a GNR or LNER afficianado as) an O2.

It's a simple solution, handy to have in the 'toolbox' for those occasions when there is a electrical continuity fault, once a model is out of warranty. Come to me low price s/h non-runners...

You can check if something is awry on chimney top height very easily. It should be 13x3.5mm = 45.5mm above rail top. (The chimney does look a little tall considered alone, but then we get into the whole stack of components that assemble to place the chimney top wherever it may be...) Chop away the superfluous bit of green? The boiler underside is a smoothly curved surface at this location, tapering of course... It looks like there is room enough to add a proper drawbar by DIY, perhaps the tender dragbox aperture has been represented to give you the right height as a starting point? (In RTR OO Bachmann have been the long term champions at getting this detail right, and it markedly improves appearance. With rare exceptions I have to go hacking away at the various bodges from other brand's tender locos.) Matrix is a set track brand as you acknowledge. If your own layout's minimum radius (with its fine appearance hand ballasted track) is 750mm or greater, you might assess the possibility of a DIY fixed truck frame and independent truck within for the wheelset.

The thang be that English not ours but everyones. Across the North Sea, I have been one of the most 'relaxter' of UK nationals these last forty years. Elsewhere far away I was much amused to hear of suspected felons departing on 'fleet foots'; and while in yet another location, happily remember the taxi tout that asked me 'If I wanted a driving where too?'. I suspect that while grammarians might not approve, it did the job and he magicked me a taxi very swiftly, when there hadn't been a vehicle in sight during the previous quarter hour.

Now you have this HO Fleischmann, you can seek out a 1970 Hornby Silver Seal 47 or 9F, and you will see where the motor design in these came from, with all wheels driven...

I wouldn't say no to this model and the Pepp A2 getting the superior scale Cartazzi truck arrangement that Bachmann have employed on the new V2. Just so long as they stick to their conventional drawbar with an adjustable slide under the tender, which enables setting the loco to tender spacing as required for the owner's layout minimum radius requirement. (Away with the camming device seen on the V2 which simply doesn't work.)

So, the question is, have Hornby made the Kylchap exhaust appertures the same diameter?

Another consideration for the production of a tractively competent 0-4-2T is what Bachmann have successfully demonstrated on their 0-4-4T by use of a superior constructional plan. In broad outline the bodywork over the coupled wheelbase is diecast, body work to the rear of this is moulded in plastic; the gear box is on the trailing coupled axle and a lightweight and compact motor is in the firebox end of the boiler. Lightweight tackle such as the decoder scoket location is to the rear of the coupled wheelbase. End result, the centre of balance of the complete model is within the coupled wheelbase, and stable traction results, with no need for traction tyres. I would suggest that a better result is available by dropping the previous RTR models and starting afresh.

Thought 1. The engine shed looks vastly better than typical at end of steam. If it is retained - and useful buildings often had second lives - wreck it somewhat. Thought 2. If the yard is in a useful position in a cramped inner city area with plenty of container traffic from long established industry all that green stuff just has to go for a good road access and manoeuvering space. Thought 3. Awkward layouts were a railway speciality, so it's perfectly OK to have it looking unplanned. ( It will be given a revised more efficient layout next year, just as the new containers are about to make the trad ones redundant.

Ah, the fine art of installing wired decoders, so familiar to those of us that started out in DCC with mechanisms constructed before thoughts of decoders. Top tip: see all those wires that aren't red, orange, grey and black? Snip them off, makes life much easier. Also it can be helpful to create a decoder 'compartment', nothing more than a cemented in piece of plasticard will do, so the decoder cannot 'wander about' once the body is back in position.

There's no available objective evidence for this action. You are the only one who knows how many rivets should be present, so are self certifying.

There is a fair amount of discussion concerning getting the Dapol 'D' class 4-4-0 (Rails of Sheffield commission) apart, which may supply some hints. Randomly dropped into the thread at p45 where there was some likely looking information, but no time to survey it all at present.

I have a slightly different take on this. Most of the electrical trouble I have seen on RTR OO hasn't been on the decoder socket but rather on the quality of the wiring connections and wire paths from pick ups to the socket and from socket to motor, causing continuity failures. As such where there is an electrical continuity problem, my usual approach is to remove the existing wiring and socket and to solder on the decoder wires to pick up wipers and motor terminals, arranging the wiring so it will not be trapped between body and mechanism. As for body removal, models are assembled kits and will surely come apart, but I have zero experience of current Dapol steam loco construction, and hope someone can enlighten us.

We did better than that! Construction of Stevenage new town commenced 72 years ago with a properly segregated cycle path installation. https://www.stevenage.gov.uk/documents/cycling/stevenage-cycle-map.pdf According to an urban layout architect known to my parents named Harri Snoeks, this wondrous concept was the basis on which The Netherlands systematically applied the fietspad system so apparent there and elsewhere. Unfortunately subsequently pretty much abandoned in the UK.

Hardly, my Ma and Pa brought a pair of Dutch design fiets to the UK in the same decade as did a neighbouring couple who had transitted as refugees through The Netherlands post WWII. My late parents' machines are now in Norfolk, much more practical there than their retirement location in West Yorkshire!

This is a deeply small 'c' conservative hobby. Bachmann only lost this label when the likes of Dapol and ViTrains kicked off in RTR OO!

There we see what the brands are up against, the customer base has no quality standard! The capability of whatever is being used as a power supply, the connections and wiring to the rails, the state of those rails, the design and construction of the layout, any rolling stock used in testing, how much running the loco has had, and 'attitude' all factor in the assessment. I went to see a nearby correspondent on ye olde MRE mag edited by Pat Hammond around 2006, whose complaint was that a particular model had very poor traction and was a reluctant starter, yet mine and others did all that was expected. Took my own example of this model and DCC system. The layout was a 12' end to end on average 1 in 75 gradient, the stock would not roll down gradient, and the power supply was an ancient Triang controller. His loco performed exactly as reported. Mine got away more briskly (it had hours of running under its belt) but achieved nothing like speed. Substituted my DCC system, and my loco performed as expected, albeit still hampered by the 'no roll' train on the gradient. Measured what the Triang controller could deliver and it was very down on current, dropped to about 8V when asked for 150mA; clapped out rectifier most likely. Attitude: wouldn't think of replacing the controller, it was 'adequate for his purposes', was happy to true up the layout construction to achieve net level (he had been surprised to find such a gradient) didn't see much value in having his stock free rolling. None of this is by any means exclusive to model railways. For many years I went about the world as required, troubleshooting for my employer when major clients (usually with well qualified staff) had complaints that the local service agents could not rectify; and finding very simple underlying problems, which were readily fixed (albeit often involving quite a lot of cash). Some acted on the information gladly and all was well, others very reluctant to act on the suggestions.

It took me quite a while to learn that what I am truly interested in is 'the traffic' : operation on a credible track layout, with representative trains for my area of interest running to a service timetable. 'Scenic treatment' is limited to a little ballasting and track filth, and if 'others' are prepared to run the loco, carriage and wagon works that's great: now we routinely have decent quality RTR OO available that runs reliably, I am in traffic modelling heaven. So I am a way, way below average railway modeller, but aiming at the loftiest pinnacle of railway traffic modelling.

When model railways were (temporarily) displaced by an interest in gurls, quite by chance I ended up regularly in the company of a flatful of nurses in training and subsequently qualified at one of London's principal teaching hospitals; all during that time having passed through 'Casualty' as it was then known, as an element of their training. The stories were positively eye-watering. This has never been covered in C4's '24 hours in A&E' to the best of my knowledge. Possibly not to give chaps with little imagination 'unhelpful' ideas?

Some very definitely attempt to do it properly. It was a pleasant experience to find that Bachmann's Blue Riband range was equipped with motor and gear train combos that delivered a circa 15% excess over scale maximum speed, resulting in good slow speed control. There have been a couple of misjudgements, the 40:1 reduction in the BR Std 5MT and 2012 V2 resulted in them being slugs unable to make top speed, but these were very much the exception. Happily most RTR OO brands seem to be 'on it' in this respect now; reports of any that are not? (When Bach. launched in 1991/92 their Peak was very much 'old school'. It would comfortably reach a scale 400mph.and might have managed yet more, but came off on the curves before this could be proven, so I never established if it was faster then the Lima EE type 1, once freed of its pick up 'shackles': the rubber adhesion of this item enhanced acceleration and enabled scale for 430 mph to be attained before derailment on the curve intervened...)

I can honestly state that the starting point of my (non-exceptional) DIY capability began with making a working model railway, meccano, and helping Pa first with his electronics projects, and then keeping a Triumph Herald running. Just repaired the arfiticial (as it is known) Crimblix tree bought in the John Lewis sale in Jan 1999, no way I am wasting any more cash on such uselesss junk, unless SWMBO really insists. It's dark green, it's upright, and it doesn't smell of 'pine fresh' branded products, how could one improve on that?

It's a classic look for 'Get on with it, we've got a real job to do, and soonest done, soonest we get to have a cuppa and a smoke in the cabin.'. I think the younger one may be A Hilter during his period of residence in Liverpool.

A near spherical job. Fixed one of those for my landlady while a student, it had totally eaten its motor brushes, and was screaming its complaint. Very big motor for a vacuum cleaner too, and it would hover on a deep pile carpet which was impressive. Another student in the same digs thought it might avail for hover football, and had to go to casualty with a dislocated big toe. How I laughed.

All this modern fragile tech. As the happy inheritor of two 1950's Electroluxii still capable of lifting themselves off the deck by their own suction I scorn this new-fangled junk.

Excellent. That demonstrates beautifully how small UK steam locos were on the world scale; for those who haven't (yet ) crawled all over North American steam superpower. Doncaster's designers did a fine job of 'scaling down' the well regarded Pennsy K4 pacific, which was the inspiration for making a pacific locomotive workable within the GNR's moving gauge envelope; a little further detail 'trimming' proved necessary for the LNER's gallimaufrey of main lines...