34theletterbetweenB&D

Very little movement on the sprung driven axle as supplied, on the models I have handled less then 0.5mm upward from the rail, 0 downwards. That's been pretty much the case on every Bach steam model with sprung driven axles, it is often difficult to tell which axle (if any) has a spring on it. When posting about this, I have steered clear of advising people to deepen the chassis' axle recess to increase upward travel; those that know what they are about will take care of that should a little more upward travel be desireable.

I would guess at a layout of oval speaker standing vertically behind the radiator grille, decoder lying on top of motor, with whatever small chassis alterations are required to fit these components. There is a lot more room in both RTR 08s than first meets the eye. By slightly modifying the interior of the body mouldings my Bach 08s (which are packed with as much lead as possible for tractive purposes) have Lenz golds lying flat immediately under the bonnet tops. The Hornby 08 (which has not had to be weighted as it runs in a freight being delivered) easily accomodates a Lenz silver decoder behind the radiator, using the two posts that take the body securing screws to trap it in position, one of the easiest installs of any model I have tackled. The chassis casting may need to be slightly reshaped to give enough depth, but I can see this location being very suitable for the speaker.

We chewed this one over on an earlier incarnation of RMweb, with several contributors reviewing the available photographic evidence. What emerged as I recall it was practically an 'anything goes' conclusion. There are good photographs with the platform in focus in the foreground showing where a white platform edge stripe has been applied, in every condition from pretty fresh to very dirty and worn. And there are equally good photographs where there is no discernable white platform edge stripe: whether worn or washed off, obscured by dirt, or never applied, who can say? Grahame's point about 'not too neat' is good one; fairly regular with dribbles down the platform face would be my attempt at a description.

Unless they have changed the design of the chassis, the sprung axle should be present. But on every Bach steamer with this feature, the travel permitted is negligible. I adjust them all, slightly deepening the chassis recess or filing a bevel on the plunger shoulder if required, and filing recesses in the keeper plate to allow the axle and plunger 0.5mm or thereabouts downward travel. Then stretch the spring or install a beefier one, (depending on how much weight the loco is getting, the A1s get made up to 550g) reassemble with grease lubricant and you are done.

The simple answer to differences in performance between locomotives built to the same design, is quite straightforward in principle: there is variance in every aspect of the constructional technique of any physical product, even one made using precision machine tools or vacuum deposition of dopants; and on steam locomotives which were largely hand crafted the variation can be significant. A few areas which have been proven to be highly sensitive to small differences in construction: firebox airflow through dampers, ashpans and grates, steam flow through the multiple joints in the steam circuit, airtightness of the smokebox and blast pipe and petticoat arrangement, timing and precision of valve gear setting. Much of this was done by hand work with little in the way of precision tools. A loco that happened to get a heavy dose of 'less effective' differences would end up sluggish or shy for steam compared with the norm for the class. It would be expected that the mixing of components by general overhauls would in time spread out the 'bad news' among the class; and I have seen references to locos coming back from general overhaul with not quite the 'sparkle' expected, based on their performance prior.

Please people, you mustn't be posting all this green gorgeousness, or I will end up buying one for my dear wife's birthday... Should you decide to adjust it, you don't want it resting on the tender step, as then it will then lift the back of the loco, particularly on curves, with a consequent loss of traction. The fall plate representation is a separate piece of brass, and can be removed entire, and replaced by a piece of sheet 'whatever' on a cloth hinge blu-tacked to the cab floor for a genuine fall plate which will not affect traction, (nor irreversibly change the model, should that be a concern).

NRM say this model is 'exclusive' to them. There will be an agreement between the NRM and Bachmann as to what is encompassed by that term, but the basic meaning is that NRM own and control use of the tooling. There is probably some provision guaranteeing production slot availability. I should imagine the agreement also precludes Bachmann from making their own tooling for the same class, for at least some period of time. A difference between this model, and the earlier DP1 'exclusive', is that CoT has not been announced (as far as I can see) as a limited volume model; which strikes me as a good move on a number of fronts. For a start the NRM can continue to issue this model (in current and potentially other liveries) in whatever numbers are required to fulfill demand, both as CoT, and as other class members if there appears to be demand for that. With an unlimited volume of CoT potentially available, provided supplies are maintained, second hand prices should be contained at or below the new price; this means the NRM should get all the resulting sales revenue from all but those addicted to the auction experience to the extent of paying more for s/h than new. It will be interesting to see how the NRM chooses to proceed...

Rob, If you can bear to take a file to the intermediate buffers on the tender front, it can be got round 3rd radius on the closer loco-tender spacing, with essentially no detriment to external appearance. What you do is, as viewed and working from above, is obliquely cut back the faces of the intermediate buffers, so that they are angled, with the shorter length on the outside edges, Then when the loco and tender assume an angle to each other to take a curve, the intermediate buffers don't come into contact so soon, eanbling a sharper curve to be negotiated. Because these buffers are only visible in side view and usually only in silhouette, by retaining most of the orignal length on the inside of each buffer, the appearance of the complete loco and tender does not suffer.

The cab, footplate and boiler are screwed together, which makes adjustment easy. Just release the representation of a conduit which hooks onto the fireman's side expansion link hanger, before parting body from chassis. If you want it to pull well, cutting down the carrying wheel springs, and ensuring that neither the drawbar nor the fall plate are actually supporting the rear of the loco on the tender, (and thus taking weight off the coupled wheels) may all need attention. (It may be Bachmann have dealt with some or all of these points since I last bought one of these beauties.)

The J26 came up well. Somehow the model makes very clear the continuity of the line of 0-6-0 development, that would finish with the later LNER standard J38 and J39 classes.

Mr Leigh, That sounds promising. Is it traction tyre free?

Au contraire; he's probably about to pitch a Railroad version. No advertising required if they can move quickly...

Either 5905 or 5909, ( these were the only two in service beyond 1969) would be the likely candidates. Cannot think offhand of a photo showing both Kestrel and a baby deltic, but their paths 'must' have crossed somewhere on the KX - outer suburban route.

Looks better with the straight back edge to the black than I expected, and there is just something about that green; could it be the link to the very early liveries when brighter colours were more common? One small thought, detach and hurl away the horrible Hornby loco to tender link, and substitute a shorter sheet metal linkage to get scale distance between loco and tender. Closing the gap would just 'ice the cake' nicely...

There was a railcar in service on the French railway system which had this Bugatti nose well in advance of the A4's receiving it: HNG had travelled in this and was impressed at the effect on airflow. He was generally interested in automotive and aero engineering (basically anything that went fast) a friend of WO Bentley, (a sometime Doncaster apprentice) and his house in south Herts maintains the connection with de Haviland nicely, now in use as the Mosquito museum.

I would be an enthusiastic purchaser of a disc headcode version, but given the time elapsed from the launch of Heljan's 26 to present, and still no sign of a 26/0, perhaps there is little enthusiasm in Denmark for pilot versions? May need to graft a Lima or Joueff 40 disc headcode nose on...

Well if you say so, obviously not. But if you care to read what commuters using the KX suburban service had to say in their local papers, a rather different perception emerges. Post rebuild, they didn't stand a chance, a poor reputation is hard to mend, and as a small non-standard group they were pretty much doomed...

All this conflab is based on one report of an advert in a (yet to be published?) show brochure. It ran on the GN main line, and has the name 'Deltic' in its usual description. There are no more felicitous terms in the world of railways. If I recall correctly, it was the top ranking 'wanted' diesel loco in a certain survey. Few built because problems were so obvious at pilot build, never really got anywhere because of its' unreliability: clearly it was a greater disaster than other candidates such as the 21/29 and 28, so perhaps they are knocking them off in 'worst first' order?

Head on it looks a little reminiscent of an ERF cab, side oblique a little more like a Leyland DAF van cab. I have seen many uglier lumps in the past, although that was always after the accident...

The original drive line for the class 17 finds a new home! Or perhaps one installs a decoder with a random breakdown generator on it?. But more seriously a very welcome announcement. I am a little surprised that this has been chosen ahead of the more numerous class 22, in the 'mop-up' of the remaining not available RTR possibilities

Three very persuasive reasons. Not nearly as pretty as DP1. Can't be run with steam. All modelling wonga for the last six months allocated to the Presflos/O4/class 105/A2/class 15 fund. Got to be very disciplined ahead of the monumental splurge.

Given that it has a chassis identical with Hornby's Brit it should be able to do about 20 at the run, and restart 15 on a 1 in 100 gradient. The weight lift on the Brit I have tested is about 45g before significant wheelslip starts. A satisfactory mechanism, and a decent weight for tractive purposes as supplied.

This one had me gasping for air recently (perhaps I am easily amused). Fellow gets a strange sensation while sitting on the lavatory about his number 2's. Unable to see what is going on, he asks his wife to inspect the area, and she tells him that he has leaves growing out of his rear end, which look mightily like lettuce. So she phones to make him an appointment with his Doctor, (only women have the patience to do this, let's face it) and off he goes at the appointed time. Tells the Doctor that he has lettuce leaves or something of the sort growing from his posterior. Very well says the doctor, behind the screen, trousers and underwear down, and I will take a look. Following the inspection the fellow asks the Doctor, is it true, am I growing a lettuce down there? The Doctor steeples his fingers, looks thoughtful and says; yes, but that is just the tip of the iceberg...

There's watering, turning, sand and brake blocking provision, and standing space to think about too: the latter to permit both attention by fitters, labourers, cleaners, to engines in low steam, and finally crew preparation for next turn; and somewhere for out of steam locos, where washouts and inspections would occur, also dead storage and firelighting and steam raising. The major things that had to occur as the loco came on shed were ash pit for fire dropping and clearing ashpan and smokebox, watering, coaling, turning (tender locos only, and ideally by-passed so that any engines not requiring this didn't go on the table,) which operations usually went under the title 'disposal', followed by placing so that the loco was right for the next booked turn (any loco in front of it booked to go out earlier). The order the disposal operations occurred in was often site dependent, but the desirable pattern was ashpit first, and a flow through water, coal and turning as best suited the site.

It is probably the way the blue livery suppresses the curvature of the ends, but the first impression that gives is of a class 50.