Ron Ron Ron

Be careful about trying to re-write history. At the time when the IEP had specified its requirements and then ran the competition for the new IC train; the initial target routes that the train was to be deployed on (ECML & GWML) were one or two franchises away in the future. The incumbent TOC's at the time had little interest, as they knew in all probability, they might not be running those franchises. The only murmurings came later on, when contracts had been let and the build programme had already got underway. .

I wonder which High St. Hornby still has a presence in? The brand has largely gone from from there. Toy shops have largely disappeared from the traditional High St. Even most model shops, if they stock the toy oriented items, are much rarer in prominent High St. locations. Those that are left that is. Some have moved, or have been established in industrial type units, where adequate floor space can be leased at more affordable rents. Usually these are well out of sight from casual shoppers. Those Toy outlets that still survive, are dominated by the big chains. Toys-R-Us stock hardly anything of the Hornby train variety and are often out of stock of the few items what they do carry (...and how long will they be around?). Other large chains, Smythes and the Entertainer don't stock this type of toy. Hornby pulled out of most of its retail concessions too. Argos have a few train-sets in their catalogue, but look at their web site. The drop down menus and search lists don't mention toy trains at all and you can't see the Hornby brand name anywhere, unless you use the Search function and actually type "Hornby" in. So it does leave one wondering what relevance this so called "iconic brand" really has in the modern day toy market? Only Hornby will have the data on how well they are doing in that particular market sector. .

I listen a lot to Radio Paradise. Over the years I've listened frequently to several internet music stations, some of which have now disappeared (e.g. RadioIO). Radio Paradise is probably the best one so far, especially as there are no commercials and it plays almost non-stop music, with the absolute minimum of DJ/presenter intervention. I do find the mood and style of music does vary with the time of day, which is obviously out of sync with UK time. Do make sure you use their 320kbps service though, for better sound quality. I've just discovered Hooked on Radio, which has several channels, including an Alternative channel. It's available through the Tune In portal, so accessible through internet radios and streamers. There is advertising though. . .

Sorry, no, that isn't the proposal. The Link as planned, involves trains running between Heathrow T5 (not the Central area T2 & 3) and Reading. NR have aired the possibility of trains continuing on and running to the west of Reading (e.g. Oxford and/or Basingstoke), partly as a means of addressing platform occupancy capacity at Reading. There has also been some speculation regarding through trains to Paddington, but there a a whole load of issues involved in such a proposal. The operators between Heathrow and Paddington will be TfL (The Elizabeth Line - formerly Crossrail) ....and up to 2023, HEX. After 2023, it is unknown if HEX will continue to operate this service. It has not yet been determined who will operate between Heathrow T5 and Reading, or what type of service will be provided. The Western rail link already has its own discrete platforms at T5. They were put in when the terminal (and its railway station) was constructed. . .

As designed, on electric the IET (IEP is not the train) will be a lot faster to 125 mph than the HST and will stay ahead all the way. If, or when it becomes possible, it will continue on to 140 mph. The HST can't (in normal service). On diesel power, although quicker off the mark, the IET will be caught up and overtaken by the HST after a few miles ....and, as reports are telling us, will struggle to reach and maintain 125 mph; but then that hasn't really been necessary since the spec. was changed to underfloor engines. The GW Electrification programme effectively removed that requirement. If the electrification programme isn't eventually completed, as originally planned, then the failing is entirely on NR and the DafT's knee-jerk reaction to the unfolding events. The trains are fine. .

There's a bar... You can get your nails done... ..and there are lessons in bending balloons....... ...and there's a bar.

Bachman have just announced the first retools of 2018. From their latest TrainMail email newsletter, sent today.... .

IIRC correctly, isn't the obvious one the coupling arrangements? I seem to remember that the first two were not fitted with the swing Buckeyes. .

On the contrary. 1st generation DMU's were very much a feature of the "modern image" period...i.e. the 1960's. Post privatised railway? That came some 25 to 30 years later, didn't it? There's nowt so queer as folk. Well said Clive. Cease and desist immediately! Continuing to spout such nonsense will result in public shaming and ridicule. You have been warned. Absolutely John. If we are modelling particular periods in history, then surely a suitable reference should include the timescale involved? Not some arbitrary label, based on a particular persons* contemporary observations of a time long long ago. ( * The esteemed Mr Refrigerator, or whatever his name was.) Ooh Larry, you wag. That's soooo laaast century. In fact.... it was last century. Post Brunel of course. Its obvious, innit! .

The boards are just like decoders. They will either be pre-fitted to locos, or will need to be installed by the user. As with DCC, in both cases there will be a cost involved. The control system is a no cost item. Indeed, you are correct. As I said in my previous post, the system will have to be developed to include additional features and functionality, which would include such things as accessory decoders etc. They are using a more recent version of Bluetooth. BT 4.0 LE. I believe the theoretical range is >330ft (>100 Metres). BlueRail Trains have tested the system to be perfectly useable up to 100 - 150ft (unimpeded by walls etc). I would have thought this will be more than sufficient for most layouts? That's a straw man argument. No you don't need to purchase such a device, as potential users will already have one...i.e. the majority of the population. Increasing numbers of households have multiples of such devices lying around. If you don't have such a device, you will have to look elsewhere, or get hold of one. Unless using an ancient device, all of them can handle the Bluetooth traffic. Sorry, that's absolute rubbish. Just like DCC, it requires a fully live layout, except it can be either DC or DCC powered. There's also the option to use Dead Rail. Agreed. See above. Accessory control is one of the additional features that need to be added. Automation is one of the potential developments. It needs somebody to develop and write the apps and an appropriate mechanism for detection, reporting and feedback. At the present time, for just driving trains, it will work on any layout, large small, simple or complex. There are many DCC users who still retain analogue control of their layouts (points, routes, signals etc,) and just use DCC for driving trains. Also, recently we have seen the emergence of several commercially available, stand alone digital layout control systems, that operate alongside, or separately from the control of trains. Even DC analogue layouts can have separate DCC control of points, routes and signals, to simplify and reduce the amount and complexity of analogue wiring. At the moment, it is mostly just potential, despite a first generation having been deployed commercially. At the very least, it demonstrates that boxes of physical electronics (i.e. a DCC system) can be rendered redundant and replaced with a software solution. In terms of cost, the entry point to digital control and the numerous advantages that brings, is much reduced. No DCC system to purchase. The interface hardware (controllers in old speak) is plentiful, readily available and for most people a no extra cost item. As an enthusiastic user and advocate of DCC, I can accept that although there's plenty of mileage left in DCC, the technology is very dated and has its limitations. Many of the commercially available DCC systems are quite old, with terribly antiquated and cumbersome user interfaces, particularly for programming and adjusting decoder settings. At least a few manufacturers are using newer technology to improve matters, but that usually comes at a high price.. Any worthwhile advance over DCC will have to involve modern day, high speed, two way data comms. This Bluetooth based system is just one example of how that can be done. Ring RailPro is another, but requires the purchase of control hardware. The rest is down to software and UI design. .

Hi I don't know where you've got idea or information from? As far as I know, looking across a broad spectrum of potential information sources, I cannot see any details have been released about what form "DCC compatibility" will take. That's without assuming BlueRail Trains have yet defined what "DCC compatibility' involves, for themselves. However, I think it highly unlikely it would amount to that sort of half-a**ed arrangement, as there would be no purpose to it. Yes, I think you are missing something vital. A DCC system is a physical piece of kit, whether it's a budget set-up, or a top of the range system costing 500, 600 or even more than 1000 £££'s. The BlueRail Trains Bluetooth system requires no other control system than a free software app. Pick up your phone or tablet and simply download the free app and you instantly have a wireless digital control system. Bluetooth is just the communication medium. The control system is purely free software. All you need to add is a power supply for the track, which could be your existing DC controller (set at full power), or an existing DCC track power supply. Alternatively, for those who want it, a battery powered dead rail option may be used instead. Loco Decoders will still be needed of course (BlueRail Trains calls them "boards") Unfortunately, the early iteration of the BlueRail Trains board was rather pricey, so hopefully costs will come down over time and with volume production. Also, there will need to be far greater development and maturity of the system, to achieve the broader level of features and functionality of a decent DCC set-up. As you say, DCC has had some 20+ years of development behind it, but there is much potential in what is on offer here. .

The ECoS Manual is here.... Download .

Hi Nile Unfortunately, I think you've missed the point, from my last post. Yes, but that's running the Bluetooth trains independently from the DCC trains (on the same layout) and not operating the Bluetooth trains under control of the DCC system, either on DCC throttles or under software control. You first have to tempt the DCC user to try using Bluetooth control, before they can experience the simpler, more user friendly programming interface. It takes a leap of faith, to buy one board and risk ending up with a redundant piece of kit, if you don't get on with it? Conversely, a DCC compatible Bluetooth board could still be used on DCC, if you decide not to continue with Bluetooth control, or if this control method doesn't take off, or is superceded. Sound or no sound is very much a personal matter. It's pretty obvious that it's becoming more and more popular, if the growing commercial activity around DCC sound and the number of sound fitted locos at exhibitions, are any indication. The only thing holding back wider adoption at the moment, is the current high cost. BlueRail Trains must be aware that they need to address this growing market, as they've included on-board sound in this new 2nd generation system. Again, that requires a huge leap of faith for the committed DCC user to simply abandon all of their DCC kit. Not everybody...probably most people...would make such a drastic step, all in one go. I'm sure that DCC compatibility and interoperability will be seen as a lower risk route to adopting Bluetooth, for many DCC users. We will now have to wait, to see what's going to happen with the new 2nd Generation system and find out who they are working with. I hope that BlueRail Trains can get a more suitable, higher profile commercial tie up with a well known RTR manufacturer, rather than the Jingle Bells, kiddies toy, tacky novelty approach that Bachmann have adopted for promotion of the technology. . .

Adding extra boosters to the ECoS can be done in 2 ways. There's actually a third option, but that's for the Marklin digital protocol, so not relevant here. The primary method is to use ESU's own ECoSBoost boosters, which are very expensive. These are connected via the ECoSLink data bus and include feedback (e.g. for the RailCom features, system feedback etc). Alternatively, you can use a third party booster connected via the ECoS's regular NMRA standard booster output (known as the Power Station Interface, or Control Bus output). This booster output is often labelled "C,D,E" on some systems, but is labelled "Data", 'Ground" and "ShDCC" respectively on the ECoS. Using this method will mean no RailCom or system feedback from the booster(s). See page 13 in the ECoS manual. .

Don't forget, a large number of these trains will be 9-car units. GWR are getting 35 x 9-car sets as opposed to 58 x 5-car sets, which will be mostly coupled in pairs. VTEC or whoever replaces them, will be getting twice as many 9-cars than 5-car trains. 43 x 9-car as opposed to 22 x 5-car, which again will be mostly coupled in pairs on the core sections of the ECML. Note also, that these trains are designed from the start to be extended up to 12-car in length. .

The Hayabusa HST was a demonstrator, designed to showcase the diesel/battery hybrid power pack technology, which Hitachi proposed to install in the all-diesel and bi-mode versions of their winning design in the IEP bidding competition. Previously named Super Express Train (SET), it's now more commonly referred to as the Class 800 series, or IET.. The SET was selected by the Govt//DafT for the IEP in that form.....with the diesel/battery hybrid power cars at each end of an all-diesel train ....and at one end of a bi-mode train (with an electric power car at the other end).. The HST Hayabusa demonstrator couldn't fit everything into the Class 43 loco body, so much of the extra equipment and the batteries banks were placed in the attached Mk3 mentioned above. The production train would have had the diesel generator and the battery packs, all contained within the driving vehicle. With the decision to electrify the GWML, it killed off the all-diesel version and subsequently the DafT made the decision to switch to smaller underfloor engines for the bi-mode trains. That ended the plan to use hybrid diesel/battery power. This is what the diesel end of a Class 800 series diesel, or bi-mode, was originally going to look like....

Paddington Crossrail station street level entrance (Eastbourne Terrace).

There is quite a lot of R&D going on in this field (reusing time expired car batteries in a domestic power application).

As was expected, according to the schedule of service introductions mentioned earlier in this thread. Bath Spa's platforms are currently being extended. I don't go down that way very often, but IIRC, they are adding an extra 80 metres on the up platform, while the down platform has been temporarily shortened, to allow one end to be demolished and rebuilt to a longer length. That announcement you are hearing at Chippenham, will relate to the the shortened down platform. I seem to recall the work was due to be completed by the end of the year. .

Not quite. The original Dynamis did have the capability to write (adjust) CV's, .....but it had no programming track output, so it could not read back CV's. The "booster pack" you mention was in fact the add-on Pro Box. Among the various features this added, was the inclusion of a programming track output and the ability to read back CV's. The current model, the Dynamis Ultima, incorporates all the features of the Pro Box into the main system box and adds a few more, such as a computer interface and RailComPlus. It can read and write CV's. .

http://www.Bachmann.co.uk/pdfs/decoder_settings.pdf http://www.Bachmann.co.uk/pdfs/3-function_decoder.pdf. (applies to both 36-553 and 36-554) .

How dust proof are these display cabinets? I'd like something with no gaps around the doors, if possible. .

The original intention was that we would see less, or indeed no further use of the 21 pin connector in new RTR models. However, certain RTR manufacturers have continued to deploy it, particularly here in the UK, where as others (in mainland Europe) have now disregarded it in favour of the newer arrangements. The Next18 connector is becoming more common in new European N and TT models, alongside the widespread adoption of the PluX connector in H0. Indeed. The alternative arrangement would be use of the newer PluX12 or Next18. .

A side topic from the main conversation here, ......but as you asked. Your assumption is correct. Essentially, the number of pins reflects the number of function outputs that can be supported. 6 & 8 pin are legacy NMRA connectors. They were expected to be discarded for use on new design RTR models, but with continued support for existing models. Some RTR manufacturers have been slow, or reticent to follow this intended path. The 21 pin was introduced as an early European attempt to facilitate an increased number of function outputs, pending agreement and adoption of a new standard design NMRA & NEM multi-pin connector. Originally the 21 pin was unofficial, in NMRA terms, but later on was retrospectively adopted under the NMRA/NEM standards, for legacy purposes. 22 pin is the larger of the PLuX family of NMRA/NEM standard connectors. These were intended to replace the earlier legacy connectors, to address various shortcomings of the earlier types and to provide a universal, interchangeable system for DCC decoders. PLuX covers 8, 12, 16 & 22 pin decoder options, that can all fit in the respective same size, or a larger size socket. Another addition is the Next18 connector. Adopted by the European MOROP (NEM) as an alternative to the smallest PLuX size, for use in N, TT and smaller sized H0/00 locos. .

The Audreys - Oh Honey