Steven B

Neil Harvey has some great Sprinter shots from the Calder Valley and Settle/Carlisle routes including this one of a three car class 156 near Gargrave:

Three-Car Class 156 Near Gargrave. by Neil Harvey 156, on Flickr

And a similar unit at Hebden Bridge:

Three-Car 156 At Hebden Bridge. by Neil Harvey 156, on Flickr

Several units were combined to make three car sets - a two car unit wasn't big enough for passenger levels on the S/C route but some platforms weren't long enough for a four car set. These three car units were the result.

Steven B

Nice ideas!

Be careful when powering the track from the HM7000. As the wires would normally be connected directly to the motor I'd be surprised if there much protection against short circuits

Steven B

Here's my attempt at a 2x153 -> 155 conversion. Far from perfect but I'm still proud of it:

(click image for the Gallery)

The biggest issue today is finding dummy class 153 to form half the conversion.

I'd hope if Dapol did release a class 155 (or refresh as per the class 56) that they'd improve the issues around the lower body sides (no turn under) and the height of the windows (which are a little shallow, but not to the same extent at the class 142!).

Steven B.

18 hours ago, montyburns56 said:

I wasn't familiar with this station and searched Flickr for more pictures of it and I can't think of another station whose atmosphere has been ruined so much by its "preservation".

At least there are still trains running through it. It could have been turned into a housing estate...

Steven B

I've used the Peco re-railer with Peco's bogie coaches - it works but the more gentle slope of the Kato equivalent (24-000) might be better.

Steven B

39 minutes ago, Accurascale Fran said:

If we were to make your dream unit tomorrow, at the price you have in mind, how many units would you buy?

It depends... 

For a unit that was relatively rare in my area/time-frame probably just the one. For something more likely to be seen then half a dozen. Both could be a dream unit, but I try to keep my models in proportion with what was running in my region/period of interest. Overlapping liveries could provide additional sales. 

It's probably worth noting that the right unit could spawn a completely new layout. For my main interests I'd happy have one or two class 304 along with two or three  of class 110s. However, make a class 504 and the temptation to model Bury Interchange could be over powering resulting in sales of half a dozen in a mix of liveries.

I'll be interesting to see the comments that follow and if shorter MU's are likely to sell in larger numbers than their longer shed-mates. Similarly, are units that commonly ran in trains of two or three sets likely to sell more?

Steven B

Order placed on Friday with DPD Mon-Fri delivery arrived safely this morning.

Rails' email marketing can be a little OTT at times - it would be nice if they could implement a system where you could opt out based on scale. As an N Gauge modeller I've little interest in OO Gauge new models & promotions but still receive them.

Steven B

Pricing for a n-car multiple unit? 

Take price of loco, add (n-1) coaches and you're in the right ball park in my opinion. (e.g. four car unit = 1x loco + 3x coaches)

Not convinced how at least one of your competitors can justify n x price of loco...

Steven B

An ammeter in series with the power supply to the ECoS would show any increases without having to worry about measuring the DCC output.

Steven B

I've yet to see anyone model the rusty hulks being dragged from South Wales to a hopefully better life.

This is 1974 - en route to Birmingham Railway Museum 5637 needed attention following a hot axle box at Gloucester Horton Road:

Fast forward a few years, 5637 is still alive and well:

46 026 seen in the top picture was scrapped in 1985, whilst the depot building is just about still standing...

Steven B.

I wish I had a crystal ball - I'd rather have the "Express" branded version of Regional Railways but have no idea if it'll appear this year (or at all)! I don't recall seeing the version Farish have released. AFAIK the version Farish are making didn't appear until 1991 (construction started in 1989).

Asking Railtec to re-make their sheet (https://railtec-models.com/showitem.php?id=1783) with the text on a white background might work...

Steven B.

Simply gluing the track down and cutting through the rails will work but you'll need to be extra careful when handling the boards. It'll be all too easy to snag a rail and rip it from the fine plastic web that holds it in place.

Using a soldered solution (brass screw, PCB sleepers etc) make for a more robust solution.

Steven B.

Compared to the new Farish class 158 those prices are already outstanding (RRP £259.95 & £369.95 for DC & DCC sound fitted versions respectfully for two-car unit).

If only Kato made something for modellers of earlier periods! (or if only Farish could sell larger batches to reduce the price!)

Looking forward to seeing a set at YAG later in the year!

Steven B

Whenever I see a Digitrax DT602 I'm reminded of Liz Hurley and a collection of safety pins...

Steven B.

Could the next quirky poll feature prototypes from the Isle of Man? 

Plenty to choose from from just the ones that remain open:

Steam Railway 

Mountain Railway

Electric Railway

Groudle Glen

Horse Tram

Laxey Mines railway (perfect for Radius 0 train-set curves!)

Add in the closed likes like Douglas' Southern Tramway and cable tramway there's plenty to go at! 

Steve B

I generally don't mix different era's of production within the same train (I model in N), but it comes down to personal preference. A 1980s era model running next to a model to current standard can stand out, particularly if they're of the same wagon type. Running past each other in different trains is less of an issue to my eyes.

Of your examples, I'd avoid the 1970s tooled Hornby TEA. The Bachmann, Cavalex and Revolution versions should look OK next to each other, but they are models of different prototypes that may not have run together prototypically (another can of worms!).

I'd avoid the 1980 Hornby HAA, the 2003 may look OK mixed in with Cavalex and Accurascale versions, but again it's personal preference.

More relevant, you may find in running models from multiple manufacturers produced across 40+ years might not be as compatible as you'd like - couplings have been refined over the years and so you might discover that some combinations don't couple (or stay coupled) as well as others.

Steven B 

Click the picture and you'll be taken to the Flickr page where all is revealed:

Quote

43113 Durham 2nd July 1984

Rare.

 

Rear power car 43112 had been detached and moved into the down siding (Aykley Heads siding ) at Durham station because of a locked axle. Please see other images taken that day in this set.

 

The train continued forward as empty coaching stock with just the leading power car.

 

Note the oil tail lamp!

How is it powered? I've usually seen similar behaviour when it doesn't have enough power.

Steven B 

Plenty of mixed up trains can be found:

RFT114-17 by Robert Catterson, on Flickr

91001 & 43195 at Leeds in April 1997 by DB ., on Flickr

HST Longrock, Penzance 1996. Intercity - Great Western by radclifferaz, on Flickr

It's also easy to find power cars from one TOC on a rake branded for another.

Steven B

Not my layouts but this shows Peco code 55 track, medium and long radius points, crossings and light weight 3d printed stock can work together quite happily:

The Yorkshire Area Group of the NGS run stock from Farish, Dapol, Peco,  Rapido UK, Revolution, Fleischmann, Kato, Atlas, Tomix, Minitrix and others with few issues on Kato or Peco track. Most derailment are usually due to incorrectly set turn-outs or parts of the model catching on uneven rails at baseboard ends. 

Steven B

There's always batch two...

I was disappointed that the WYPTE class 321 didn't make the cut in N. I've still got the plain white one waiting for some paint having been out of the box twice. Clearly no actually that important for my modelling!

Steven B 

How much too wide is the existing model?

Steven B

Sellafield placed the order for the CBD-80s in 2020. Based on photos, they were on site by mid 2021. A CB-40 followed the initial two locos.

Steven B.

11 hours ago, Dr Al said:

Not because they are coreless, no. But the implication here is that the gearing hasn't changed in the revised design; but the top speed has, which is down to the motor RPM. This is why the 47 is interesting case to see the difference.

----8<-------

The 90 has space for an 8mm motor, and I've replaced them with 18500rpm 8mm motors (which fit so perfectly you could believe the designer intended it), to stretch the legs. Fortunately these can be got fairly cheaply (if it was the 22 quid for a Farish spare it'd be sore). 

Thanks for the clarification - your post sounded like you were putting the blame of the slow class 90s on the fact it has a coreless motor.

Have you got a link to the motor you used to replace the factory fitted one in the class 90?

Steven B

BNFL #4, 5 & 6 are Hunslets:

(Ray Forster on Flickr)

(Ray Forster on Flickr)

http://bescotplus.co.uk/trains/BNFL6_NortonLakeside0329