Bloodnok

19 hours ago, jamie92208 said:

They used to do tours of the power station. It might be worth looking up.

This hasn't been a thing for a long, long time...

13 hours ago, StuAllen said:

Aren’t these in the prop shaft bag (X7745), the drive unit (X7742) already has these 2 attached. I’m assuming the piece on the metal shaft is the same size as the hole in the flywheel. 

My set of bits has arrived now. The two large flywheels are attached to the motor, but the end of the U-joint is not included in this pack.

If you get the fully assembled bogies plus the propshafts, there are four worms with that end of the U joint fitted. In theory, dismantling two of them would give enough U joint ends.

However, you then need to mount this end into the centre of the flywheel, and there's no obvious way to do this as the motor shaft is not long enough, it ends inside the flywheel.

I'm going to take my factory motor and unpowered car apart this weekend and see if I can work out what's missing here. Perhaps it's as simple as gluing it in carefully?

On 18/01/2023 at 13:00, E100 said:

So I appear to have everything but expect the parts that connect the shaft to the motor than appear to be part of the motor spares pack. I have emailed Hornby as it wasn't in the motor pack.

 

Did you get an answer to this? Was it a packing error? Did you need to order something else? Or can you not get this specific key part?

Tracklaying continues:

This brings the curves around the corner to where the double junction crossover will be. It also marks the full extent of the four blocks across the bridge, enabling them to be properly wired.

21 hours ago, Ducking Giraffe said:

Going on New Modellers Shop this is what I found so far: 

bogie x 7742 2 x 6.95

motor x 7743 x1  £15.95

cradle x 7751 x1  £3.50

drive shaft x 7745 x2 at £3.50

I think that makes a total of £40.35, if so a bit of a snip to get another working power car - with a bit of wiring necessary. 

You'll also need the wiring harness at least (or make your own with fine wire and a 3rd party DCC socket).

I made a video about the construction of the bridge:
 

BTW, is there a known source of the tiny springs that Bachmann used in Mk1 coaches? I ... need a few spares. Some of the coaches I purchased second hand don't have them.

I had some coaches out today, sorting couplers out and planning rakes.

(Ignore the station building in the back - that's been put there temporarily until I can get it to the layout it's actually intended for).

The front four of these rakes are fully close coupled now. I was hoping to do a full conversion to Keen Systems replacement resin drawbars and Roco couplings, but I'm disappointed that the pocket on the Keen Systems resin drawbars ... isn't a pocket at all, because it doesn't have a bottom. The couplings keep dropping out unless I bite the bullet and glue them in. So I've mostly stuck with the factory pocket and the Bachmann fixed bar pipe coupler, only using the Keen Systems stuff where it was necessary (generally to jump between vehicles with different pocket heights).

7 hours ago, Nova Scotian said:

Big Jim's hint seems to be a Hitachi IET? Or a 395 I suppose.

Not a 395, the bottom of the wipers would be in the image if it was. Definitely IET.

That was ... a challenge. Four days on and off going over and back over many of the same chairs with MEK did eventually get them all to stick. I did lose a few in the process, but 99% of them are still there and still holding the rail in place.

This is the state of play when the day job started back up again:

Track is cut, bridge lifts out again. I need to finish two bits of remedial work, and then I can continue with wiring and tracklaying. The line following the trackbed in the top right of the third picture will be the next bit to go in. The plan is to have this up to where the first visible junction goes in soon™.

Then I have to figure out how to join flat bottom rail to bullhead rail, and mount my first visible points...

17 hours ago, great northern said:

The Up Northumbrian is next, and has Top Shed A4 Quicksilver. It will not stop here, but we follow its slow progress.

What's the second coach back? Looks interesting...

2 hours ago, Bloodnok said:

Tried this --  I painted a short section with MEK, then applied at least four times as much as I was using previously to each baseplate, going all the way round. That section is now clamped between a couple of bits of wood.

I'll give it 10 to 15 minutes and see if anything has stuck.

That ... worked. Not sure if the key was using about six times as much MEK as I did previously, using a clamp rather than a weight, the length of time it was on, or possibly the speed of getting the clamp on (I wasn't paying attention to positional accuracy this time, just seeing if they would stick). But it does appear to be working.

1 hour ago, Dagworth said:

You may find that it's the baulks wicking the MEK away too quickly for it to have any effect on the pandrol baseplates, try using more solvent?

1 hour ago, ISW said:

Or 'painting' the baulks with MEK initially and allowing that to dry before attempting to glue the plastic baseplates down, again with MEK.

Tried this --  I painted a short section with MEK, then applied at least four times as much as I was using previously to each baseplate, going all the way round. That section is now clamped between a couple of bits of wood.

I'll give it 10 to 15 minutes and see if anything has stuck.

1 hour ago, 5BarVT said:

Is it the wrong type of plastic?

My simplistic test would be:

Wet baseplate as before, press finger on it.  If you get a fingerprint in softened plastic it’s doing its job and should work. If it stays smooth with no imprint it’s not dissolving the plastic and so won’t ever work.

Does not stay smooth. Wouldn't call what's on the underside a clear fingerprint, but it's a 5mm by 3mm piece of plastic with a 2mm square hole in the middle, kinda difficult to draw much conclusion of exactly what's on it. Definitely not smooth any more though and certainly felt tacky.

The MEK has unexpectedly arrived much earlier than scheduled, so naturally I'm trying it out today.

Learning how to apply it isn't going anything like I thought it would. I've read many descriptions of using this across the web, which all go something like:

* Position chair on sleeper at appropriate place using track gauge tool.
* Apply Butanone/MEK to edge of chair with fine brush, which will wick underneath the chair.
* Apply gentle pressure for a few seconds to fix chair in place.
* Move on to next chair.

I've got Pandrol baseplates rather than chairs, because this is flat-bottom not bullhead. And the sleeper strip is 90 degrees out from expectation because I'm laying baulks. But that shouldn't change things too much ... right?

I made sure to rough up the surface of the baulks with sandpaper before laying the track so they wouldn't be too smooth.

Nevertheless, this is not even trying to hold. I did a batch of about 12 (six on either rail), left it for 15 minutes with a heavy weight pressing it down, and when I lifted the weight off, the baseplates just slid around. Not even a hint of wanting to stay put, let alone being stuck well enough to hold the rail in place.

I've also tried lifting the rail and brushing directly onto the bottom of the baseplate before putting it down. Same thing.

What am I doing wrong?

Two approach tracks glued, two gluing:

All lines across the bridge:
 

Thanks for the recommendation for MEK Andy, I've now ordered some. It might take a while to get here though.
 

Four tracks on the north side now too:

Next up, catching the wiring up with the new track.

5 hours ago, Dagworth said:

When I've done stuff like this I've used MEK, seems solid to me and cleaner than CA.

Is that Methyl Ethyl Keytone (also known as Butanone), or Slaters Mek-Pak (which doesn't actually contain any Methyl Ethyl Keytone, but instead uses something else)?

First thing this morning: Fix this track (there was a kink in it).

The outer one isn't particularly smooth where that converter track is either, but I know if I pull that up, it's going to fall apart, and I haven't got another one. I've pushed some coaches over it, and it appears fine at the moment. I may revisit this later with a new converter track.

There's now two tracks on the north side:

And five of eight track sections are on the bridge:

... Still not glued. Not sure which glue would be best here, thinking CA is probably the best bet (plastic chair to wood baulk). CA glue is something to do carefully, once, and not mess up. I'll sit down to that when I'm not going to be fielding quite so many interruptions as today.

More progress. Two lines have approached the bridge. Track under here is Exactoscale FastTrack Concrete Sleeper with Code 83 rail to represent post-1960 mainline practice.

Over the bridge itself I'm laying baulk road with Peco individulay pandrol clips. This hasn't been glued yet -- that's a tomorrow job, with different glue than I've been using so far.

And one line has reached the north side of the room, too:

Three lengths down, five more to go.

This was the progress on the 23rd.

I got up on the morning of the 24th, all eager to continue ... only to find I was fresh out of Code 75 insulating rail joiners. Out of all the four options, that was the only one I had none spare of. After calling every model shop in my county who were open on Christmas Eve, and finding no-one had any in stock ... things screeched to a dramatic halt.

Yesterday evening, I was invited to a not-quite-local model railway club ... and someone gave me some. So I haven't had to rush around today to different model shops (that weren't open on Christmas Eve) who ... might ... or might not ... have had some.

Instead, we have the last of the FB C75 gluing, under all this stuff:

And I'm prepping for tracklaying on the removable bridge, too. Copperclad sleepers are being glued either side of the join both sides for every track.

This was after a little bit of remedial work making sure it all sat right and didn't bind on anything, as it's been out for at least 6 months.

As far as I am aware, all Mk1 coaches plus the first set of Mk2s (those later classified Mk2z) were originally delivered with Vacuum brakes. Air brakes started with the Mk2a, and everything after that was delivered air only.

A lot of trains ran with a Mk1 buffet and full brake, despite the rest of the train being air braked. These vehicles must have been converted.

But how common were dual brake or air-only brake conversions?

Did it become routine at some point, or were there still passenger trains running on Vac brakes until replaced by 2nd gen DMUs?

28 minutes ago, BMacdermott said:

But how would we know if something was 'not being stocked' etc without spending hours contacting the makers? And would they tell us? And how would we know how 'available' it is without speaking to shops etc.

Yes, it's a hard problem.

Hattons are having a go with their model database. This lists when tooling became available, what revisions were made to it over time, and which products were made from each tooling. I assume they are doing this for commercial reasons (it must be an important asset for their second-hand business), but it's also made available on the web for everyone else too, and it's quite a handy tool. Even so, it's easy to find omissions, mistakes, and whole categories of stuff they just haven't got round to cataloguing yet.

However, a bit of my post you've cropped out did say:
 

1 hour ago, Bloodnok said:

You've picked the initial release date of the tooling as your metric to go on. On the plus side, that's an objective data point which has a "right answer", and I totally understand why you've done it that way.

The poll is using a simple, objective measurement that can't be disputed. You've made the right decision in doing so.

But that's not going to stop people wanting a bad model retooled faster than a 17 year lag, nor wanting a model which hasn't had a recent production run re-run either :)

22 hours ago, BMacdermott said:

Someone might like to correct us here, but we think Hornby released their Mk2e in 2014 or thereabouts. Our cut-off date is 2005.

Yes, that arrived in shops at the end of 2014.

22 hours ago, BMacdermott said:

We know that some people feel that some models made over the last 15 years or so 'don't cut the mustard'.

Yes, that's exactly it. You've picked the initial release date of the tooling as your metric to go on. On the plus side, that's an objective data point which has a "right answer", and I totally understand why you've done it that way.

On the other hand, no-one in the real world cares how old the tooling is -- they care how good it is and how available it is. Sometimes models are just bad at initial release, and other times manufacturers just don't re-order any and you can't buy them any more.

The Hornby Mk2E is one of those cases. It shipped with several obvious and hard to correct defects in both specification and execution. Things like the incorrect visible chassis, the lack of a close-coupling mechanism, and bad livery applications all need correcting. With the amount of work they need to fix this, honestly they are best seen as kits that need taking apart first.

Comparing it to the Airfix Mk2D from four decades before and Bachmann's Mk2F from four years later, Hornby's Mk2E is closer to the Airfix model than the Bachmann model.

I did try to 'fix' one - I have a 2E BSO on my workbench with a close coupling cam fitted to one end, but a source of spare bogies to fit the chassis was not found. Given a Bachmann Blue/Grey 2F BSO exists as a substitute, this project it is likely stuck in workbench-purgatory at this point.

1 hour ago, Legend said:

Like yourself I was tempted to tick all the boxes on AC Emus . In the end I restricted myself to the 303/311 in the Scottish section (and my favourite 126 dmu) both of which I'd bite your right hand off for 

Hmmm, that's one of the few I *didn't* pick. I have two main areas of interest -- stuff that would appear in roughly the middle of the WCML, and stuff I saw as a kid travelling around the SR (central division). The 303 was always a bit far north to get into either of those.

1 hour ago, Legend said:

and the 313/314/315 and 317/318  categories in emu . What I'm hoping for is that the poll will show increasing interest in AC emus and that manufacturers will take this on board instead of yet more duplication of big diesels !

304s, 310/0s, 317/1s and 321s are key to the AC scene I want to portray. 305s, 309s, 312/2s and 319s also appeared, so I'd definitely pick one up if they were made. And I wouldn't turn down a 313/1 or a 323 either, while they don't quite get to the area (313/1) or time-period (323) I model, they are pressed right up against the edges and I've got no appropriate EMUs at all so far. Close is better than nothing.

For the southern scene I want to portray on a future layout, I'd need SR EPBs, CIGs, refurbished CEPs, 455s, 456s, 319s, 375s, 377s, plus 3H 205s, 207s and 171s.

Actually, given the only thing on my list for the SR scene list that *does* exist already is the VEP (upcoming from Hornby) and the only overlap with the WCML scene is the 319, I could be persuaded to build my future SR layout(s) in a different scale should there be better availability of SR EMUs in that scale...
 

Interesting. I did a lot of scrolling before I did much clicking.
I thought I was getting much more selective. But ... then I got to the EMU section, and wow do I apparently want *everything*. Fingers crossed manufacturers don't announce them all at once, because my pockets aren't that deep, but prior experience with EMUs says that's highly unlikely.