Waverley West

On 31/10/2021 at 12:50, GWRPhil said:

Great set of photos. Lovely job on the 26’s. They were getting awfully close to the hst in the platform. 

Thanks!

They are actually in the process of swinging to the left over a point and heading past and behind the HST, so there was no risk of collision. It's not very clear from the photo though, so I can see why you thought they were heading straight for it!

I just meant 26002 and 26008 go everywhere together on the layout. But no, 26008 wasn't fitted with slow-speed control. Having to have 26002 at the front of the train at all times would be time-consuming as regards colliery/discharge point marshalling.

I have heard that drivers didn't actually like using the slow-speed equipment much, as it was quite jerky. Some of them at least preferred manual control for a smoother journey through loading/discharge bays.

On 10/10/2021 at 18:30, The Johnster said:

The new Baccy 47 looks the part to me, though I have no need of one on my layout. I noted, though, that in the promotion photo of the green syp version both tail lamps were lit simultaneously, which is not correct, though it seems a common error on green and plain blue era RTR locos and multiple units.  Locos showed one red tail lamp to the rear when running light, and no lamp to the rear when coupled to a train or ahead of another locomotive.  
 

A very common mistake on exhibition layouts is to see locos or multiple units liveried for these eras showing two red tail marker lamps, even on locos coupled to trains. 

I believe even SLW (surprisingly I would say) opted to illuminate both tail lights on their 24 just because they expected so many frustrated customers contacting them about only one of the tail lights being illuminated. I don't know whether the same can be said for other manufacturers, but it's certainly possible.

Good news about the imminent arrival of the new 47s though.

On 19/10/2021 at 18:47, AJCT said:

I've always suspected that the MU jumper-cable sockets at the sides of the bogies on Bachmann's 40s were a bit overscale - rather visible from the end-on view.  Published pics also suggest that several of the original ScR allocation lost their MU jumpers at some stage, but I don't know if that included 40159 as at your time-period.

 

Alasdair

Hi Alasdair,

Now that you point it out, yes, 40159 had had its MU jumpers removed by the time of the main photo I used when weathering the loco (1980). 

I have seen a photo of them fitted to the loco while it had domino headcodes though, so I think I'll leave them in place, mainly because they add a bit of colour and interest to the bogie frames.

Cheers 

Dave

2 minutes ago, Bloodnok said:

 

0.22F isn't 220uF, it's 220mF. That's 220 times the capacity of Hornby's chosen 1000uF electrolytic.
 

Yes, of course! ...and a fraction of the size of Hornby's too.

I used to use 1000uF capacitors just like Hornby's. Never failed to hide them in the vestibule/toilet area though.

2 minutes ago, JSpencer said:

The lighting units are for me a bonus considering they were initially announced without them.

As for getting the coaches apart, someone, sooner or later will do a user guide.

Yes, agreed, the lighting units are a bonus, as I would have wanted to fit some anyway. It's just the thought of having to try and move the existing capacitor or fit a new one in each of the coaches, all for the sake of a bit more care and attention from Hornby.

And yes, I'm sure someone will come up with a user guide sooner or later, but experiences so far seem to suggest it isn't easy, meaning that damage could be a possibility.

Although I initially used to use large capacitors (like the ones Hornby are using) placed in the toilet/vestibule of stock, I now tend to use ESU's power packs:

https://www.coastaldcc.co.uk/products/esu/led-lighting-strip-powerpack

They are 0.22F (220uf) and I've never seen any flicker with them whatsoever, even with dirty coach wheels, So, yes, that would suggest Hornby's 1000uF is over the top.

Capacitors like the ones Hornby is using will cost a few pence, while the ESU power packs are a few quid each (when not bought commercially anyway). Like I say, a ha'penny-worth of tar on a train costing hundreds of pounds.

I find it hard to believe even the large capacitors that Hornby are using can't be concealed in the vestibule or toilet area though.

5 minutes ago, RyanN91 said:

I've looked at my 4 coach packs ( for the 7 car set) and I think they all look stunning.

 

I might be in a minority here yes the capacitors are noticeable but in the flesh I don't think they look as bad as they do on the photos etc. I'm very pleased with them. 

Glad to hear you're pleased with them. I must admit I have been completely underwhelmed by the photos of the capacitors and light bleed (and I say that having fitted many of my coaches with both capacitors and light bars without any visual intrusion). I can't believe Hornby had no option but to sign off that design with an enormous and highly visible capacitor blocking one window. They had the same slap-dash "it'll do" approach to the under-length lights they fitted to their Mk 3s. They just do not seem to devote the same level of care and attention to "modern" stock that they give to steam era locos and coaches.

I was getting to the point where I was considering (still am to some extent) cancelling my order for what, for me, is a marginal and expensive luxury purchase. The thought of not easily being able to open them up to rectify the issue and fit passengers doesn't help either.

Still having one of the original Hornby APTs from the 70s though, I really do not want to cancel my order, as I never thought I would see one built to modern standards and I remember seeing the prototype in action, albeit only briefly.

My overall impression from what I have seen of it so far is that it's an impressive model spoilt for the proverbial ha'penny-worth of tar. 

11 hours ago, Dogmatix said:

 

Indeed, so much thought has gone into this new version.... and yet:

 

 

... so no close-coupling mechanisms. Hornby have this feature on a number of their diesels and electrics, SLW and Accurascale on theirs, and it is commonplace on continental HO, but Bachmann could not get their act together, and have spoiled the model for a ha'porth of plastic.

Or, an alternative viewpoint:

Great, no CCMs! Having just spent a considerable amount of time on two Hornby Class 60s filing the close-coupling mechanisms down to get them to work reliably, it's good to know I won't have to do the same on the new Bachmann 47s.

Unless and until manufacturers can come up with a truly reliable CCM on locos, I'm quite happy to carry on with couplings on bogies which virtually always work flawlessly. In my experience, Hornby's CCMs are a real pain and a country mile off being reliable on my freight rakes (50s, 56s, 60s and even 31s). SLW's version seems to work pretty well, but I don't really use my SLW 24s to pull the long rakes that my Hornby and other locos are used on. 

3 minutes ago, pheaton said:

I might be wrong but i think 711 is the original tooling.....it was announced a while back...and i suspect it will be the incorrect headlight (for the livery)  All the Bachmann shots i have seen show it with the high intensity headlight....rather than the lucas rally special....

I've been informed by Mike Parsons of C&M Models that 47711 (along with all other as yet unreleased 47s) will be the latest tooling. I've not heard anything about the headlight situation, but I'd be surprised if Bachmann slapped a standard high intensity headlight on it, after all the effort they've gone to with their latest version.

22 hours ago, The 158 Man said:

I never understood why Bachmann released the RFB in INTERCITY Swallow livery alongside the InterCity Executive TSO, TFO and BSO anyway? Surely by the time the RFBs were introduced the vast majority of accompanying Mk2Fs would been updated with INTERCITY branding. That's certainly what I've found after doing copious amounts of research into train formations of that period. Granted there is an exception to every rule and I'm sure there was probably the odd one or two still in InterCity (plenty with no branding whatsoever as well) but there certainly wouldn't have been a train full.

 

See the cross-country service arriving from around 6.30 mins in this video:

It appears to show a very grubby InterCity Swallow RFB at the head of a rake of InterCity a/c Mk 2s (admittedly mostly/all Mk 2d's I think) all with either original I/C branding or no branding at all. This suggests the RFBs were some of the first coaches to receive the Swallow branding, hence also the lack of door locking lights?

More fascinating photos, Dave. Dreadful weathering of that power car in C8179 though. Ridiculously overdone and just smeared on/off. As they say on e-bay - L@@K PRO-WEATHERED.

2 minutes ago, RBE said:

 

I agree to a certain degree and we are, as I said, designing all stock based on R2. However Cavalex Models as a company are dedicated to the most accurate models on the market and as such we will do our best to make that a reality. Whether its a correct assumption or not R2 is a very tight radius at 438mm (personally, and again this is my preference as a modeller, I would never design any part of my layout with less than 3ft radius as even that looks incredibly tight). The schematic that I posted above shows that the 56 is ok at R2 in theory and at say 500mm radius would be 100% fine in practice. This would be fine for a vast majority of the market I would think.

 

In a worse case scenario that the loco has any issues as R2, the detail in the battery box area would be a lot easier to remove than to add from a bag we feel and have seen many complaints before from customers who have to apply details from detail packs. The ViTrains 47 etc being prime examples. I personally loved them as separate as I could paint up and detail the models etc prior to fitting parts such as handrails etc but the model railway community is indeed filled with customers from all angles of the hobby.

 

As a modeller myself from many different genres (I do railway, military, sci-fi, aviation and wargaming) I can see the uniqueness of the model railway world and the diversity of the people in it with regards to whether they are modellers, collectors, model train drivers or any combination of the above. The modern railway modeller as a whole appears to now expect a museum level piece straight from the box and that is what we are trying to deliver to allow everyone in the hobby in order to obtain the levels that only the elite modellers could enjoy a few years ago.

 

Anyway, we welcome all feedback and take no comments lightly, its only with the voices of the customer base can products be improved and tailored to suit peoples wants and needs.

Thanks for the explanations, RBE, much appreciated. I wouldn't mind removing the odd pipe or other detail part to get a loco round a 2nd radius curve and have done so on occasions. My concerns were more based around the possibility of having to make major modifications (to bogie pivots, for example), but that doesn't seem to be applicable here. That's good to hear.

18 minutes ago, Legend said:

 

Think that rules it out for me . I've got lots of setrack points .   Id really advise that it does negotiate 2nd radius as I think they are a lot of people like me that do have 2nd radius somewhere on the layout . The competing Hornby product does go round second radius , so I really think you are going to restrict the market by not making sure its compatible . 

I have to agree. I think it would apply to a lot of other modellers too, myself included. There isn't a circuit on my layout which doesn't include 2nd radius curves and I  wouldn't want to have to severely restrict where a loco can go on my layout even if there was.

I would strongly advise making sure it can go round 2nd radius curves comfortably. It would certainly count me out if it can't, which would be a great shame. I like my Hornby 56s (aside from those terrible close-couplings), so any competing product is going to have to be good.

2 hours ago, westernviscount said:

 

Your results are superb Dave. Just to confirm, you have not used an airbrush here? I havent got one and am always looking for examples of non-airbrush work. 

 

Excellent stuff. 

Thanks! Nope, no airbrush was troubled for that job. Much of my weathering is done without an airbrush.

On 08/09/2021 at 21:48, Ramblin Rich said:

Oh good grief! That is outstanding. I don't know whether to be inspired or just accept I'll never get anywhere near that good

That's very kind, Rich, but please be inspired, rather than dismayed. That was my intention.

The weathering of the wagon really wasn't difficult or complicated. It mainly consisted of spraying the wagon with Railmatch enamel aerosols - Sleeper Grime, Frame Dirt, Roof Dirt and Weathered Black. This was then mostly wiped off with kitchen roll, leaving dirt in crevices and wherever it was supposed to be. Always make sure you wipe vertically to mimic the vertical streaking of weathering.

This normally produces a good weathering finish in itself, but for this wagon, I wanted to replicate the white staining left by the china clay these wagons carry. To do this, all I did was leave the wagon to properly dry for a day or two and then apply a thin enamel wash of white over the wagon. Leave to dry and, if dissatisfied, simply wipe it off with thinners or wet it with more wash and repeat until you are satisfied.

The beauty of enamels is that you get plenty of time to work the paint and it can just be wiped off to start again if you're not happy with the finish. With white washes in particular, it's best to wait until the wash is dry before declaring yourself happy with the finish, as the final appearance is often very different once the wash is dry (much lighter normally).

The only potential pitfall is that enamels can dissolve certain tampo printing on models, particularly Bachmann's more recent models. The worst thing that can happen then though is that you have to buy transfers to replace what was there before. 

My golden rule is that, as long as you protect the glazing of locos and coaching stock either with masking tape or by removing it, there isn't a lot that can't be undone and simply done again, so give it a try! Pick a cheap item of rolling stock to start with and experiment.

Hope that helps!

Cheers

Dave

15 hours ago, cheesysmith said:

Please can we have the buffer shanks silver ?

Having just added silver buffer shanks to my HAA rake and various other rakes, I think this makes a big difference to their appearance, as it's a very prominent feature of many wagons.

It's not a difficult job to add them yourself though of course.