BoD

10 hours ago, beast66606 said:

The "plan" (which will no doubt change as things move along) is that the unit on the track will move under it's own power, the derailed and badly damaged unit may be lifted off

I don’t want to speculate or start speculation but it seems strange to me that the lead unit looks severely derailed but that the second unit has passed over and remained on the track. If I’m reading the location of the hole correctly from that video.

I guess I will just have to wait for the report to find out the ins and outs of it.

The only saving grace, if you can call it that, was that it happened at 1.30 a.m.

A very small crumb of comfort - but sadly not for those affected.

20 minutes ago, RFS said:

I think we need a ‘scratches head’ button.

2 hours ago, melmerby said:

The line is closed north of Workington, bustitution in operation, It's due to a faulty bridge.

Currently the Cumbrian Coast line only has a shuttle from Workington to Barrow & back.

According to National Rail website that work is scheduled to finish tomorrow.  Whether it does or not …

4 minutes ago, arran said:

I don't think anyone's going to get Sucked out a MK1 by Explosive Depressurisation .!!!

… unless you are sitting on the toilet.

12 minutes ago, Stevebr said:

It’s too late for this season but the WCRC contract expires on the 31st of October 2024 after 4.5 years. It is probably time to open the route to tender so that next year can happen. Needless to say CDL should be specifically defined. Whether WCRC should be invited is another discussion.

Forgive my ignorance, but what contract is that?  With Network Rail?

Given that the Jacobite has been running since Nineteen Eighty Dot I’m guessing the renewal must have happened automatically - unlike their ORR exemption - which they presumed would be automatic.

A car park for the heritage line with a bit more undergrowth and bushes on the lower part of the embankment? 

29 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

And cynical to then use Harry Potter to get themselves into the news and portray the ORR as the bad guys.

Nowhere in their statement do they mention Harry Potter.  In fact their entire blurb on the website is about the line and scenery itself. They do briefly mention that the Glenfinnan viaduct was used as a setting for Harry Potter but only in a wider description of the viaduct itself. 

As you and others have said this will probably be down  to licensing but It would appear that it is others and particular the press that are making the Jacobite into the Harry Potter train and not WCRC. Not officially anyway and not that they would have discouraged it in any way.

20 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

que next the hardluck business stories from FW.

We can all justifiably criticise WCRC’s actions before now and how they have gone about this recently , but let’s not forget there will be a knock on effect and some genuine ‘hard luck’ stories.  Whether that be disappointed punters, WCRC staff, or businesses (in the whole region and not just FW) they don’t deserve this but do deserve sympathy.

Brinksmanship?

A sort of emotional blackmail?

Manipulation of the press?

I can’t see the ORR being swayed by any of that.

4 minutes ago, fezza said:

My eyes are getting old!

Mine too - and some of the ‘closer’ to scale couplings and smaller hooks are ‘flippin’ hard if not impossible to use.  If you can use the second link without causing derailments then it is down to you to decide if the hanging third link is something worth putting up with to facilitate closer coupling.  
 

As an aside, I have started to move to using 3 links mostly in fixed rakes - but that is down mostly to age and eyesight rather than personal choice. 

Remember that everything in 00 modelling - even fine scale - is a compromise.  Smiths couplings are, if I understand it correctly, deliberately overscale to accommodate this.  You could try some other makes or reducing the size of the links. Whether or not these would work on your railway would depend on lots of factors including your minimum radii, actual fidelity of the rolling stock buffers and buffer beams, and how you have attached the couplings. That wouldn’t deal with the overscale hooks though - another can of worms.  

Yes, the coupling distance is greater than prototypical when using many 3 links, not just Smith’s, but is often necessary to accommodate the compressions/compromises of railway modelling in anything but the strictest of standards.

Have they come to some sort of compromise arrangement with ORR?  
Do they believe that they can fulfil the previous conditions set for the exemption  and ORR will accept that?

Are they taking the pee?

47 minutes ago, thegreenhowards said:

Those curved tops look challenging. Any suggestions as to how to proceed?

Plastruct semicircular tubecut down the middle and a lot of bodging onto the sides.  
Plastruct/Evergreen quarter circle rod if you don’t mind the underside being solid rather than hollow. As above bodged onto the sides.  
Brass sides with the top turned over as happens to coach sides etc.

Not particularly easy - but do-able. 
Im sure others will have suggestions too.

17 hours ago, Pacific231G said:

At Ally Pally a few years ago there were three Minories, in 4mm/3mm and 2mm scale respectively. They all used CJF's track plan and they were all different.

My brain fog may well be kicking in but, at one time,  wasn’t there a competition organised for ‘Minories layouts’.

Nothing here for me.

Well somebody had to. 🤡

1 hour ago, jamieb said:

Not Ashburton ,but I did once make a start on a model of Hemlock until I saw 2 other versions in the modelling magazines within the space of a few months

Then the metaphorical Model Railway Police knocked on the door and forced me to change my plans,so I switched to the LBSC! 

Why?   
 

Im not trying to be facetious, just wondering why it would put you off.  
Unless all three of you are looking to exhibit the layouts, but that again would depend on relative location.

If I wanted to  build a model of a particular location it wouldn’t bother me how many other models of that location there are.  It’s my interpretation and my creation of something I obviously like and want to model.

19 hours ago, fezza said:

I have seen a model of a concentration camp at a Holocaust museum, complete with railway and wagons delivering "passengers".

 

 

I seem to remember that in the very early days of RMweb a topic about a model of the railway at Auschwitz based on ‘that’ photograph.  The model was actually started and progress was being recorded.  It was, if I remember correctly, a commission for a museum type display.  Again, if I remember correctly, it did provoke similar angst and controversy.

22 hours ago, woodenhead said:

Tunnel and a junction, no problem - Huddersfield, the junction is to Penistone.

… and with another tunnel just a short distance away at this end (underneath where the photographer is standing?) what more could you ask for in scenic breaks.

4 hours ago, Southernman46 said:

Now let's wait for the carnage later this evening ..........................  10 - 40 ?? 

… and with special thanks to the chief rugby writer at ‘Exchange and Mart’.  😉

Rugby - bloody hell.

On 04/03/2024 at 17:37, NotofthiscenturyTim said:

Recently there's been a lot of commentary about how unaffordable model railways have become and often the finger is pointed at how expensive DCC is. 

So I thought it would be fun to see how cheap a OO DCC system can be. 

Here's what I use: 

DCC-EX Command Station 

1x Arduino Mega+Wifi board £10 (Aliexpress) 

1x motor shield £3 (Aliexpress) 

Power supplies £15 (eBay UK, or free if you've got a couple of old phone or laptop chargers)

Running free DCC-EX software 

Train control is via the free Engine Driver smartphone app

Total £28 delivered 

New LaisDCC loco decoders are £15 off ebay UK. Or used Bachmann/Hornby for £10.

What ideas do you have for budget DCC? 

Not for anyone who wants a ‘plug and play’ system though*
In fact quite the opposite - but ok if you know what you are doing with this gear.

* is dcc ever plug and play?

32 minutes ago, jamie92208 said:

with a small shanty town

How very apposite a turn of phrase

I don’t think that it will ever be possible to produce a definitive list as you suggest - even though it would be useful.

Each sound project is different and the choice of sounds included  varies from developer to developer and even from loco to loco.  Yes there are some functions that are common f0 and f1 always seem to do the same but thereafter I have some that f2 sounds the horn/whistle and on another it operates the brake - all defined by the individual who put the sound project together.  They will often try to standardise within their own projects and some will try to use the same functions for similar sounds to others but there is no published ‘standard function allocation’. 
 

if you think about it, it makes sense.  How could you stipulate that f7 say would be firebox opening and shovelling on a project for a diesel or electric loco?  Or that f4 should always be the warning buzzer and doors closing as it is on some class 156 dmu projects.  Flange squeal, to pick another example, is present in some projects but totally absent in others.  This applies to decoders whether produced by the same decoder manufacturer, loco manufacturer or sound project developer.  To produce a spreadsheet covering all the bases would be a huge task. 

I have done one for each of the locos/sound projects I have for my own reference but that would be of little use to anyone else - especially as I have moved some functions around on some locos to achieve some, limited, standardisation. 
 

Edit:  posted at the same time as Phil above and I thing we are saying basically the same thing.