34theletterbetweenB&D

More likely to see a flying fish today! Not that the rain is unwelcome after a very dry winter and spring in the SE.

Worth running the loco first (about an hour with some alternations of direction, especially if new or a long time in storage) before making CV adjustments, as many mechanisms become noticably more free running as the grease lube is dispersed properly around the drive train by mechanical action. Begin with CV2, start voltage: adjust value until the loco will only just start into motion in both directions If desired, use CV5 (max speed) to trim top speed. If this is done, I would suggest a value of about a third of the CV5 setting should be entered in CV6 (mid speed); as ever if your taste is for something different then go for it! Then give the loco plenty of CV3 and CV4 (I would suggest at least 60). Most DCC users fail to employ this excellent feature, which provides simulation of the inertia of rail traction. Now it is necessary to drive correctly: not very fast in confined spaces, and to brake early once any speed is achieved!

If it has the speedo connection to the driver's side rear driver, there are six screws to remove. From memory: the crankpin screw to release the speedo drive. one forward under pony truck, two at rear under the bunker, two small ones high up under the front of the tanks on the motion brackets as mentioned above by Butler Henderson. And then ease free avoiding snagging the pipework mouldings. If the speedo drive representation is present, expect to have some work getting it relocated 'just right' for a smooth running result. (Bachmann dropped this feature after the BR Std 4MTT and 5MT, because it was so much trouble in this respect.) The later Fairburn 4MT model is much simpler, rather suspect the fruit of this first time around experience...

You would need some local trade directory information from that date to understand what consignments might have moved in vans. It could have been largely inward consignments: the Cambrian vans dispatched empty to collect. This was a normal practise before the 'force majeure' of WWI initiated the general adoption of the common user principle, a process which took decades to complete.

Whatever, with my purely 'business' hat on, the play made using that brandname 'Hornby' has been pretty spectacular. I have over the past dozen years felt on several occasions that surely they had gone too far this time in offering very dated / inferior product: significant dilution of the brand value imminent. This activity going on alongside some 'good and better' model releases which rank among the best available RTR OO products. I would offer a balancing view, from the perspective of someone who was very happy to find Bachmann introducing RTR OO scale models of overall 'competent kit/scratch builder' quality just under 20 years ago, reasonably priced compared to both OO kits and HO RTR. And the choice of subjects majoring on common items just iced the cake. At last, some worthwhile OO RTR product following on from where the brief Mainline/Airfix flurry had left off. For me at least, Hornby's catch-up to parity properly began with the BR std 7MT. One horrible but rectifiable train set curve compromise excepted, a very worthy piece. They have missed the boat in wagons: early on while the going was good and cheap in China they surely could have tooled a couple of dozen common subjects as accurate models which would now be good cash cows. But in coaches - other than the gangwayed Gresleys - they have done pretty well. Recent activity now. While I'll just as happily as ever buy suitable offerings for my interest from Bachmann's range (where's that all-new V2 then?) or that by any other maker; what I have mostly been able to buy RTR over the past few years have been models in Red boxes. The QoS all steel Pullmans, non-gangwayed Thompson stock, J50 and K1 my 'stand outs'. They can make all the tts fitted Smokey Joe class products they like if it is profitable and good luck with it; this doesn't detract from the models they also offer.

For an end to end - and thus most likely slow speed operation - layout I'd say don't mess around with the Hornby points. Sell the Hornby track for what you can get, and use Peco flexitrack and live crossing points instead.

As one who likes the Victorian 0-6-0 as a species I can suggest a solution if it is too far adrift: convert it to an example of a Cambrian Railways Jones 0-6-0. That's never going to get a RTR model, and practically no-one will know how it should look anyway. (This following the Rev Peter Denny's example: his choice of GCR over GWR guided by the fact that 'no-one' knew anything about the GCR, therefore no endless dispute over details.)

I have twice been able to be on footplates including some firing and adjusting the reverser to maintain speed as the upgrades were encountered (neither of them in the UK) the last in my early thirties when I was still decently fit. Great experience but I was very glad on the latter occasion that the experienced firemen were there to take over when the power demand really went up. Wouldn't really feel inclined to pay for being put to work, beyond the fare for being on the train in the first place; but there you are, I am a tightwad down to the bone...

Perhaps watchmakers were more privileged? My small pin vice (of unknown provenance) was given me as a boy; and came from one such who was retiring from his trade, and has a well polished spinning domed head at the top end.

...ran in the easy winner, except for those awkward types who finished ahead of him... Long enough to have made it into printed dictionaries around 1990; as abovestated originating in the IT industry for promises of future functionality which fail to appear promptly, definitely in circulation in the late eighties for announcements of both software and hardware functionality that hadn't materialised. (The term 'vapourer' and thus 'vapouring', used in much same contexts as accusations of spouting hot air, is centuries old usage.) Sadly the term 'vacuumware' for stuff that hadn't appeared and it was now confirmed never would (or even could) appear, seems to have failed to obtain a grasp on permanency.

I'd suspect the rather large value in start voltage (CV2). Turn that down to minimum as an experiment and see if the non-stop effect is eliminated. If it is, then you will have to hunt for the highest value in CV2 that enables the loco to stop on speed step zero.

What CV's are you trying to programme? When the TTS product was fairly new I looked at the Hornby pdf file, and the decoder offers no access to essential CV's like CV's 2, 5 and 6 : which ended my interest, so didn't read any further...

Been to take a look at the Bunnings on Hatfield Road near St Albans. It's a DIY shed, like what we are amply supplied with already; but aiming a little more upmarket than B&Q (not difficult!). Strongest point, wire fence products, got the kind of range you usually only see in farmer's hardware specialists in the UK. The plant selection is simultaneously a limited selection and way over-ambitious in terms of exotica. Hope they have someone with plant nursery experience to look after the stock, or it will quickly look a sorry mess.

Instead of a terminus I would suggest a through station on one long side. Eliminate the two dead end sidings on each long side outside the oval, and instead use the width to create two loops off the through lines so that the two platforms can have running lines on both faces. That clears space inside the circuit for more carriage sidings/goods yard roads, possibly off the return loop. Let's face it, you will rapidly acquire more and more stock...

Interesting idea, my thoughts would be: It is quite possible that the chassis block alters in detail within the super-detailed model variants so far produced, that's one aspect to be cautious of. Even with the cab ends fallen off (never seen those!) the castings are pretty elaborate. Something far simpler would suffice to mount the drive components, little more than a U channel as a basis, with appropriate holes and cut outs; rather than replicating the casting in every detail.

When I began studying for my A levels and thinking proper beardly engineering thoughts about a career path, there was the opportunity to attend various summer school lecture courses hosted by universities. One such was memorable for the contrast drawn between the behaviour of those test flying rockets and aircraft. Prototype rocket flew, hysterical applause and self congratulation amongst the team. Prototype aircraft flew, the assembled team watching from the apron quietly satisfied, a few handshakes and they trooped back into the office to resume work. The latter it was explained to us was the mark of engineering competence: quietly confident because the work had been done thoroughly and well. There should be no drama... which doesn't suit general TV programming at all.

I don't believe a claim on what is legally a toy, would be accepted at this distance in time from manufacture. It may be helpful to summarise. The contamination which causes 'mazak rot' or 'zinc pest' is usually lead having got into the alloy melt from which the item was cast, and will be present throughout ay casting showing evidence of the problem, and can be expected to affect the entire batch of castings made from that melt. Failure progresses and is not rectifiable, but avoidance of damp and low temperatures do slow its progress. Practical: liking the Hornby drive in this model, but not the bodyshape I have purchased three 'rotters' cheaply for the mechanisms, and installed them in earlier body shells. The chassis had all lost the thin sections at the ends under the cabs, but the central blocks with all the drive line components on it were fine. And they are still all fine as far as drive functionality is concerned: one is now showing crazing of the paint in the thin sections in the middle where the motor is clamped in place.

No mention so far of what sort of track the A3 model is intended to run on. This is a kit from the 1960s, and was for 'the modeller'. if the frames are assembled on the spacers provided and the driving wheels are all flanged it will most likely be limited to a minimum 36" radius, which 'the modeller' would have known. Dependent on how small a curve radius you might want to use, the frames can be positioned narrower to allow more sideplay. (Ready to run pacifics, all flanged, go round 18" radius, and the current RTR wheels are much as the Romfords you have. The solid cast chassis block no more than 12mm wide to allow sufficient sideplay to take up such small radius curves.)

Worth considering other basic options too. The similarly featured Roco Multimaus or Bachmann EZ-command DCC starter units can often be got new very competitively priced, by retailers splitting them from train sets. (Just in case you are unaware: DCC works to a common standard, you don't need to match the locos with the same maker's DCC kit, neither controller or decoders.) Something to think about: if there is any likelihood of a sound equipped loco appearing on your son's layout, then really a DCC system that offers a full range of adjustments to the decoder is pretty vital. (The analogy would be that the DCC starter system is like a hotel TV with very restricted fixed tuning: only a few channels available, and that's all the choice you ever get. And this limitation means inability to fully access the features on sound decoders.)

The buying a car analogy I would use is the stuff you have to do with any vehicle to make it 'fit for purpose' specific to your requirements. Adjust any or all of seat, headrest, mirrors, steering wheel, pedals, seat belt, positions to provide optimum driving position, check for blind spots caused by hard structure, fool around with the onboard electronics for sat nav and other content that may be provided, blue toothery for your other devices, organise storage space in the boot and elsewhere. All very much down to individual requirements. I know what I expect of movement of a model loco - and have yet to find a DCC fitted model that gets close as received - but they have all 'worked'; as in reliably goes forward and backward at command over a reasonable speed range. And judged by what I see elsewhere, for most customers that is probably good enough. Not long ago I demonstrated altering decoder settings on a loco for a really smooth transition in and out of movement, and the owner no like. He wanted that instant 'jerk away' on speed step 1 that the loco came set up with: tastes vary, so it was restored to original set -up.

Long ago lost the letter he wrote me in reply to a query (I got it to him via a regular cameraman on the studio crew who was a family friend to get it past the 'official channel'). It was handwritten, frank and very funny - and of course I lost it long ago which is a shame - kind of him to do that for some random curious teenager. RIP.

There were small radius four way points in the Kings Cross station throat, with practically nothing but passenger traffic moving (slowly) through all day and every day, so I don't see an objection to the species as such. Such things were expensive in maintenance in reality, and thus only used where no alternative was possible: you might want to 'write yourself' some constraint that applied to your location justifying the three way, if it matters to you?

Far more significant was the corrosion to which the bottoms of so many doors were vulnerable! Great in summer, bit of extra ventilation for the overcrowded compartment if the Ped managed any speed. Awful in winter, as so often a stream of cold air with liquid or icy augment came in, even stopped at platforms...

That was very clear, the high aero effect made more severe I suspect because of the containment by all the surrounding structure. (There were small pieces of trash still bouncing along the track in the faster sections well after groups of cars had passed.) All the aggressively racy drivers that attempted closing in to striking distance for an overtake, ceased to make progress in the 0.5 - 0.8 seconds separation zone. When that's uniform for all of Vettel, Verstappen, Ricciardo and Hammy - none of whom are shy in such matters - I feel that's a pretty good indicator of 'not really feasible'. I suspect little mechanical grip off the 'scrubbed' racing line, and since there's no aero effect at the hairpin, you have to go round queued one at a time; so the only possible overtake is if the driver ahead makes enough of a mistake and goes completely off line; and.... Didn't Hammy comment that the cars were too easy to drive now? So not nearly so many mistakes, thus very few overtake opportunities.

It should not be forgotten that small groups of N7s were allocated to the ex-GN sheds at KX and Hatfield by the LNER, with condensors fitted to the KX allocated locos specifically for the operation on the Metropolitan lines to Moorgate hauling Quadarts. The N7s were very effective 'down the drain', but lacked speed for the longer inner sub turns, and were in time wholly displaced by N2s at KX. This work earned them the soubriquet 'Swedey Met' (the N1 was a 'Met tank', the N2 a 'Big Met'.) The Hatfield shed allocation continued under BR (34C). The N2s there were intended for the main line work, the N7s (no condensors) for the three branches that Hatfield shed served. There are however pictures of these N7s in the KX approaches, so they did on occasion wander onto the main line. (For a few months in summer 1959, an ex-GCR N5 was allocated to Hatfield shed too, for three varieties of 0-6-2T at the one location; it appears to have worked on the same branch turns as the N7s).